jmegawarne's Tracked Items
This is your profile's page of Tracked Items. To add items, simply click "Track This" in the right-hand sidebar of the page for any bill, issue, or Member, and it will appear here automatically. You'll have assembled a one-stop overview of everything you're following in Congress.
Just getting started? Our special page of Hot Bills is an easy way to find bills that affect the issues you care about, and then add them to your tracked items. For next steps, including ways you can use social networking on OpenCongress, see our how-to guide.
-
S.178 - Religious Freedom Act of 2007
- kennyvaughan : Churches that are non profit organizations, allowed tax exemptions just like any non profit orginization. Whatever candidate they endorse alone does not change whether or not they are a non profitable organization.
In response to why are Churches considered non profit, because if they arent working for profit, then they are non profit. The 200 years of breaking away you are referring to, was to keep the state out of the Church, to avoid prohibition of how the Church may practice. If anything, punishing a Church for the opinions they voice, falls more into what we were breaking away from for 200 years.
The inquisition was not the only event in history, that people had a long time to apolgozie for, and i think the subject is a bit irrelevant. Anything you can say about the inquisitions, you can say about secular government practices anyway, you dont seriously think they were the only people killing people back then do you? People killed over land, politics, ideas, money, and pleanty of secular issues.
Churches are non profit like any other non profit orginzation, do you think The Red Cross, St. Judes Childrens Research Hospital, and other charitable orginzations should pay taxes too? If not, then you are treating the Churches differently, and therefor violating the Church and State ideas you say you support. When my Church goes to the Adolescent Treatment Center to talk to kids, when they go and clean up the city, they are not doing for profit, they are positively influencing society, and you have not given a good argument on why they should not enjoy the less financial burdens as other no profit orginzations.
"i wanna talk politics, but i don't wanna pay taxes... waaah" sob-story"
You still have failed to give a reason why having, and expressing political opinions change the fact of an orginzation being non profit or not.
Sorry if this came off a bit angry sounding, i have nothing but respect for the both of you, but this is a subject i am passionate about, and I may have come off as upset, for this I aplogize.
Here for Prayer, or someone to talk to - kennyvaughan7@yahoo.com,
God Bless You And Always Be With You All
kenny
- vincent : This is horrendous. I can't stand the Orwellian use of language. Protecting their free speech? They are free to speak just as I am, and if they do so, then they should pay taxes just like I do.
Free speech does not equate to freedom to suck off the teat of the American tax payer.
If you want to get handouts from the government then you have to obey certain reasonable restrictions on how you use those handouts.
This is further offensive because the requirements they put on churches to qualify would exclude atheist organizations, Unitarian churches, Wiccans, and even though it says "meditation" groups, none would qualify because of the other requirements.
This is nothing but pandering to the established churches at the expense of anyone who doesn't conform to that mold.
1 More
H.R.275 - Global Online Freedom Act of 2007
- sarahbrand : "companies limit searches all the time for all kinds of reasons"
The very portion of the bill you quoted specifically says that businesses only have to report filters that are implemented to comply with government restrictions on Internet freedoms. Reporting those filters should not be terribly difficult.
- bluethunder : I wrote a diary urging people to support the bill:
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/4/28/185058/103/328/505131
3 More
-
S.522 - Intellectual Property Rights Enforcement Act
- adelie : With the MPAA showing record profits for 2007, I think this is further proof that the government and people have been tricked into associating ~$10,000,000,000 profit with "starving artists". What a committee should really be looking into is the value and impact of work that has been effectively stolen from the public domain, and compare big media's gain to the loss by the American public. The only purpose for such a committee, let alone a not to 'limited period of time' copyright term is to control the ability for people to create and compete for a part of that ten billion dollars. How about a 'Public Domain Enforcement Act' that punishes people for destroying (intentionally or otherwise) works that have ever been of any kind of value, keeping them from ever falling into the public domain. Or further, mandate that copyrighted works be made EASILY available for purposes of fair use and make it a right rather than an 'affirmative defense'. Legislation like that would tell me that the government is looking out for the best interests of artists and people, and not just the guys that can steal more than anyone else such as Warner, Fox, and Disney.
-1 More
-
-
-
H.R.1689 - Curb Illegal Downloading on College Campuses Act of 2007
- adelie : P2P is not a crime! Also, didn't some big group of media guys recently have their cover blown that they completely manipulated the data on college campus piracy in their favor? If this 'piracy' is in any way harming the music or movie industry (wasn't there something about record profits?) it is only because this consumer powered 'try before you buy' internet allows people to be dissuaded from buying junk they never would have purchased had they been aware of the content they were planning on buying. Stop trying to buy congress into another BS war. Their already busy enough with the Bush Administration.
-1 More
H.R.1908 - Patent Reform Act of 2007
- Sparhawk2k : How is this one different from S.1145? The EFF seems to be in support of that one and they seem to be for individuals and innovation... Though they also have reservations about it and see it more as just a step in the right direction.
- twodox : While this bill does several useful things, and coordinates our patent policy with that of the rest of the world, as required by treaty, it has a major flaw.
It skews the patent law in favor of the large corporations, and reduces the likelihood and size of infringement actions. Thus there will be little incentive for a major corporation to pay attention to a patent held by a smaller entity or individual. This will stifle the inventiveness that has made our country great - and has come primarily from individual inventors and small businesses.
0 More
- 9 more bills
-
- 22% User Approval
- 6 Sponsored Bills
- Votes 100% with Party
-
- 36% User Approval
- 22 Sponsored Bills
- Votes 99% with Party
-
-
-
-
-
- H.R.4691 - Temporary Extension Act of 2010
- H.R.4575 - Open College Textbook Act of 2010
- S.2968 - Trademark Technical and Conforming Amendment Act of 2010
- S.Res.379 - A resolution to express the sense of the Senate regarding the protection of intellectual property rights for clean energy and environmental technology.
- H.R.4322 - National Foundation on Physical Fitness and Sports Establishment Act
- S.2764 - Satellite Television Extension and Localism Act of 2009
- H.R.4038 - Common Sense Health Care Reform and Affordability Act
- H.R.3962 - Affordable Health Care for America Act
- H.R.3777 - Drug Price Competition Act of 2009
- S.1714 - Open College Textbook Act of 2009
- S.Res.287 - Honoring the 25th anniversary of the enactment of the Drug Price Competition and Patent Term Restoration Act of 1984 (the Hatch-Waxman Act).
- H.R.3570 - Satellite Home Viewer Reauthorization Act of 2009
- S.1670 - Satellite Television Modernization Act of 2009
- S.1631 - Customs Facilitation and Trade Enforcement Reauthorization Act of 2009
- H.R.3498 - Statewide PTV Access Act of 2009
- H.R.3499 - Trademark Protection Act
- H.R.3443 - To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to modify the private activity bond rules to except certain uses of intellectual property from the definition of private business use.
- H.R.3288 - Department of Transportation Appropriations Act, 2010
- H.R.3299 - Seed Availability and Competition Act of 2009
- S.1466 - Trade Enforcement Act of 2009
-
-
-
-
-
- 27 more Issues
jmegawarne's Profile 
