how much does your local spiritual leader earn?

Originally posted by DoctorScribbles
And the pope's tricked out SUV with that custom made enclosure with 4-foot wide windows that he uses to go flossing around.

http://www.rotten.com/library/bio/religion/popes/john-paul-ii/popemobile-sm.jpg

I thought it was a joke the first time I saw it, but it's the real deal. One really amusing thing about that picture in particular is the a ...[text shortened]... t the Church's mishandling of funds, but it's been paraded before their very eyes for years.

Do you consider the US President's security detail and Air Force One "mishandling of funds"?

Originally posted by lucifershammer
Do you consider the US President's security detail and Air Force One "mishandling of funds"?

I consider nearly everything the U.S. Government does a mishandling of funds.

Originally posted by DoctorScribbles
I consider nearly everything the U.S. Government does a mishandling of funds.

The US Government in general or this particular Administration?

Originally posted by lucifershammer
The US Government in general or this particular Administration?

The government as it has been put into practice in every administration.

Originally posted by Nemesio
When I pay my lighting bill, it is after taxes are taken out of my wages. So, I may earn 100 dollars a week, but I take home 75 dollars (say), of which 15 dollars may go to my lighting bill, 10 to my water, 10 to my gas, 5 to food, and 15 to my mortgage. This leaves me 10 dollars.

When the priest's lighting bill gets paid, it comes out of the collection plate before it is taxed. And, so, the priest may make 50 dollars to my 100, and, because he falls in a lower tax bracket, may end up with 35, he has no expenses after that, making his job far more lucrative than mine.

Isn't that true of Protestant pastors as well? Every Protestant minister I've ever known (and I'll admit there aren't that many of them) has had housing, utilities and even their kids' education paid for them by their respective congregations.

Then again, maybe things are different in the US.

Originally posted by DoctorScribbles
The government as it has been put into practice in every administration.

Not a big fan of government spending then.

What would a government that does not "mishandle funds" look like to you? How would it differ from present or past administrations? Please be specific.

Originally posted by lucifershammer

Every Protestant minister I've ever known (and I'll admit there aren't that many of them) has had housing, utilities and even their kids' education paid for them by their respective congregations.

I know several and that is not true of any of them.

Originally posted by lucifershammer
Not a big fan of government spending then.

What would a government that does not "mishandle funds" look like to you? How would it differ from present or past administrations? Please be specific.

See the Great Debate of '06 for the specifics, in particular, my closing post. A government that only enables such a capitalist system while protecting citizens from violence and sustaining its own administration is not mishandling funds. A government that does anything extra, such as enforcing minimum wage laws or providing health care or housing marijuana users in jails, is mishandling funds.

Originally posted by DoctorScribbles
See the Great Debate of '06 for the specifics, in particular, my closing post. A government that only enables such a capitalist system while protecting citizens from violence and sustaining its own administration is not mishandling funds. A government that does anything extra, such as enforcing minimum wage laws or providing health care or housing marijuana users in jails, is mishandling funds.

What about laws against child labour? Healthcare (you've mentioned this, yes), housing, food etc. for those who cannot afford it?

Perhaps you like to live in a society where people who cannot afford to keep themselves alive simply curl up and die?

Originally posted by DoctorScribbles
I know several and that is not true of any of them.

The world is a big place.

Originally posted by lucifershammer
What about laws against child labour? Healthcare (you've mentioned this, yes), housing, food etc. for those who cannot afford it?

Perhaps you like to live in a society where people who cannot afford to keep themselves alive simply curl up and die?

I would prefer to live in such socitey than in one in which people are enslaved to keep the helpless alive.

Originally posted by lucifershammer
The world is a big place.

It sure is. It's a shame you have such a narrow view of it.

Originally posted by DoctorScribbles
It sure is. It's a shame you have such a narrow view of it.

Talking to yourself again, Doctor?

Originally posted by DoctorScribbles
I would prefer to live in such socitey than in one in which people are enslaved to keep the helpless alive.

Surely any government that tries to protect its citizens by restraining, dissuading or punishing people that wish to do (or actually do) violence against them is no less "enslaving" such people to keep the helpless alive.

Originally posted by lucifershammer
Talking to yourself again, Doctor?

No. My view of the world is as wide as the sky. Yours is as narrow as your catechism.