if the dems woulda won

[AtlanticBlue99]

but it isnt that way; it is all marginal taxing for income- you make more, you get taxed a greater percent.. you make less, you get taxed a less percent.. it is called a progressive tax rate and that is what our nation does.

 

[IntruderLS1]

Now I need a raincheck. Mac, you and I have had our fair share of good healthy debates. The big post you made up there does sound good, but you didn't do your homework fully. Is that shot glass really up for grabs?

I'll be back on after work so I have time to write. :rock :rock

Nah, I should've used a better example like satan worshippers or something. I did a little more research and I will send it to you if you find evidence he allocates the same amount of money to ALL religions.

Dang, and I was really wanting that glass. :dunno

Okay, I'll conceed that you've done your homwork on a piece of that, if you conceed you pulled some of it out your arse because it sounded good. That way we both save tendinitus in our 20's. :lol

When you say "ALL" religions, do you mean the one and two man "Everybody bow down to me the great Zorg" types? Because even though I've not heard them mentioned, I think they would still be able to apply as long as the money wasn't used to activly preach their message. But in general, the answer is "yes" all religions can apply, and "no" it's not just a Christian thing. If it were, then you would have a legitimate gripe, and I would agree that it was in violation of the Constitution.

 

[AtlanticBlue99]

the gov't does give out monetary grants to religions, but they must be established practicing religions.

:dunno maybe the religion has to have a "headquaters" like the catholics have the pope and cardinals and all over in the vatican, and the methodists have a leader of methodists somewhere- i dont remember where. but maybe the grant depends on if the religion is really big enough to use it properly?