Is Calling Romney Satanic Religious Or Political?

Heinz Pulls Gay-Kiss Ad

Today's Quick Takes

12 Comments

• ENL said:

  Bill Keller is obviously an ingorant and bitter man.

  June 24, 2008 2:03 PM

• Chop Chop said:

  >> Religious leaders are not allowed to specifically endorse candidates from the pulpit -- well, actually, they may do so but their churches would lose their federal tax exemption. <<

  Supposing that the above statement is actually true David, can you give me a specific example of when exactly - throughout the entire history of this country - that any church has lost their tax examption for "endorsing candidates from the pulpit?"

  June 24, 2008 5:30 PM

• Johanan said:

  I wonder how many followers Bill Keller will lose over this.  Most Evangelicals are content with their own faith, but they are not blatant bigots  as this man seems to be.  If all evangelical/Baptist preachers are like Mr. Keller, it's obvious why the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is drawing in so many people while evangelical/Baptist congregations are losing them.  Compare Mr. Keller to the Mormon leaders:

  lds.org/.../0,5239,23-1-851,00.html

  June 24, 2008 7:18 PM

• Ken said:

  That's hilarious!  That's what you get when you piss against the wind (ha ha haaaa).  

  June 25, 2008 10:55 AM

• Nehor said:

  GETTING PAID FOR PREACHING = PRIESTCRAFT.  It is one of the oldest, and perhaps most lucrative, professions in the world.  Religion and political compaigns/government are a bad combination.  You think that we'd learn from our European ancestors about the effects of implementing various strains of Biblical interpretation into the government policy--it almost always leads to unfair treatment of a minority religious group.  Our Founding Fathers understood that basic concept, I wish that religious pundits would do the same.  The real criteria for "values voters" should be just that--values--not religious dogmas.  If we look at the fruit of Romney's life vis-a-vis Keller's, it is easy to see who actually lives a value-based life.    

  June 25, 2008 12:38 PM

• Clark said:

  Poor Keller. I think the religious right are the ones that really struggle with separation of church and state. I have no problem with the president saying the word, "God." Nor do I think that "God" should be taken out of the pledge of allegiance or off of the money. However, the religious right DOES use the church to influence politics and that's specifically the reason why the founding fathers put that that rule in the constitution in the first place. They were tired of the church in England influencing and corrupting the procedures of the state.

  June 25, 2008 4:27 PM

• JGolden said:

  Keller is not only a weak scriptorian, but his logic is also flawed. Hard to believe any intelligent person would take him seriously.

  June 25, 2008 5:48 PM

• CT Independent said:

  People like Keller are too stupid to realize that they expose themselves as the idiots that they truely are, and actually help the cause that they are so against.  I have a deep deep deep distrust or most preachers anyway, and totally have no respect for so-called religious leaders that have so little to say about their own beliefs that they have to tear down other's beliefs.  It always entertains me when people like this guy think they know who are going to be saved in heaven (people that pay their salaries), and those that are going to hell (people who don't pay them anything).

  June 25, 2008 6:02 PM

• Val216 said:

  Put it to Keller.  He knows the rules and is not willing to comply with them.  It was obviously a ridiculously weak cheap shot at Romney.  It just showed his (Keller's) inability to control himself when needed.  No breaks for anyone.  Break the rules....pay the price.  

  June 25, 2008 6:09 PM

• Joey said:

  Wow, Keller is so desperate to bring down Romney, that he is going to start whining about Romney's faith.  Personally, I know a few mormons, and yes some are a bit wacky, but for the most part they are normal people. I myself being a Catholic can also say I know some wacked out Catholics too, as well as Baptists and I'm sure that I have other friends from various other faiths that are quite wacky as well.  My point is that, Mitts Mormon faith is not out of the loop at all, as I don't see Mitt as a bad guy at all.  He is very electable and I hope people like Keller will be able to see the good in people and not judge them because of their faith. His faith is not harming me in anyway so I think as an American, we all have the freedom to choose what we want as a personal belief.  That is what being American is about!  Keller 4 Jail-time again! Mitt 4 VP and President in 2012!

  June 27, 2008 3:58 AM

• Geotopia said:

  I believe that the crux of the IRS rule (it may just be an IRS administrative rule from the "Regs", not actually found in the USC - anyone know for sure?) is that if Religions could take their religious donations (which are tax exempt), and apply them to back political parties and nominees (versus causes or initiatives), then any political party could solicit political donations through religious organizations (or even make up a new religion or church for that purpose) and gain the advantage of tax exempt political donation whereas political donations are not currently tax exempt.

  I don't think there's any moral or ethical dilemma if the US decided to make political contributions tax exempt, because you can use them as deductions in Canada and that doesn't seem to be the cause of any great societal decline in Canada. But that's the way the US does it, probably because lobbying is so prevalent and thus corporate $ would escape taxation through any tax exemption.

  Anyway, I've been quite surprised by Romney's church in that they've kept a pretty even balance between political parties in spite of the memberships strong leanings towards the GOP. Right now there are over a dozen mormans between Senate and Congress including the very liberal Senate Majority Leader, Harry Pelosy (I mean Reid). For the record, Mormans have backed initiatives like the California Initiative defining Marriage which was recently struck down by the very liberal CA Supreme Court decision. The LDS Church doesn't make much fuss until society starts messing with the family.

  Commenting on the employment of priests (someone above asserted that "paid priests = priestcraft"), they have to pay taxes, but their church doesn't get a deduction because they don't pay taxes. But, if men like Heller continue on the current course, they'll end up stripping their respective churches of tax exempt status. Then they can deduct the pay they give their preachers. However, of course they would lose their tax exempt status and their congregation can no longer deduct their contributions because the churches would no longer be qualified organizations on the IRS Schedule A.

  I asked an agent why the IRS doesn't track churches' political activity more carefully and it's because most churches operate as individual units without centralize financial structures so if, say, a Baptist Church came under investigation, the congregation could just disband and reform under a new name. The Baptists (which are a convention) would remain relatively immune to the audit of their status because of the lack of centralized authority and financial structuring. Catholics and Mormons need to be much more careful, however, because of centralized leadership and financial structures. There's a lot at risk for both faiths.

  June 27, 2008 4:47 AM

• Tom Lang said:

  Just call him Mittler and be done with it.

  July 10, 2008 4:39 PM

Leave a Comment