[dead]

Its tenants dine together once a week to discuss religion in their daily lives. "We do have a Bible study," said DeMint, a Presbyterian who asked to move into the house less than a year ago when there was a vacancy. "Somebody'll share a verse or a thought, but mostly it's more of an accountability group to talk about things that are going on in our lives, and how we're dealing with them."

I did nine years in the big house (Catholic school.)

I’d pay $600 a month to not live in this place.

[wideawake]

One of the most amusing things I've heard was the absolute demolition of Barry Lynn by James White on a debate about homosexuality.

[DoctorMichael]

Hey, not everyone is Hillary Clinton and therefore capable of commanding an 8 million dollar book advance and a 'loan' from Terry McCaulife to purchace a couple of houses, let alone furnish them with articles from the White House.

How about Stephanopoulous's deal that enabled him to purchase a Georgetown townhouse?

OTOH.........A number of congessmen like Dick Armey literally slept in their offices because the Washington area is so expensive.

[Freedom'sWorthIt]

What a good idea! All for it. Only today in our upside down world would anyone consider such an arrangement "scandalous". Substitute: Brothel and subsidized by Playboy - and nobody would bat an eye....

[Mr. Bird]

"What concerns people is when you mix religion, political power, and secrecy," Lynn said.

I'd like Lynn to illustrate how six people of both political parties, comprising 1.1% of the congressional membership, are in any way endangering the Republic. This appears to be a complete non-issue.

[Corin Stormhands]

"What concerns people is when you mix religion, political power, and secrecy," Lynn said.

And just exactly what is Lynn doing?

I don't know these congressmen, but I know several people very involved with the Fellowship. It is loosely organized for the purpose of ministry, not to influence public policy.

I lived in DC, worked on the Hill and attended church on the Hill for eight years. Pretty much the only way single people can live on the Hill is to share a house (even at Congressional salary levels).

There's no "story" here, other than Lynn's continual quest to stir up trouble.

[BibChr]

Rev. Barry Lynn, a United Church of Christ minister

I'd like to see his Statement of Faith. I'd also like to see his ordination papers. If he wrote a thesis, that might be worth a glance. Maybe a sermon or two.

If he's any indication, UCC ordinations must be available in boxes of Cracker Jacks.

Dan

[sitetest]

Dear areafiftyone,

If I'm reading this right, the congressmen's rents are not being subsidized.

The townhouse has three floors, the first two of which are used by the organization that owns the house. The congressmen all appear to live in rooms on one floor.

The value of the home is placed at $1.1 million, by the author of the article. Housing prices in the Washington, DC area have risen dramatically in the past few years, and it would be fair to assume that the purchase price of the house was something less than $1.1 million. But for the sake of argument, let's say the current owners paid $1.1 million, and financed the entire amount (unlikely, but it is the worst case). Assuming an interest rate of 7.5% (I did a no-doc refinance in the fall for around 6.5%), the monthly mortgage amount here is about $7,700 per month. Property taxes are probably about $1,000 per month or less.

Thus, the owners of the property are receiving rent in the amount of $3,600 for one-third of a property costing about $8,700 per month. The break-even point for that one-third of the property is about $2,900 per month. The property's owners, even assuming the worst-case facts, have a positive cash flow on the part of the property that they rent out. If they have owned the property for a little while, then they likely paid substantially less, meaning that their positive cash flow is even greater. On this basis, it's hard to say that these rents are "subsidized". Thus, the underlying premise of the article is false.


sitetest

[ladyjane]

Didn't Barney Frank have to rent out some of his rooms a few years ago?

[aruanan]

That secrecy is unsettling to the Rev. Barry Lynn, a United Church of Christ minister who heads the watchdog group Americans United for the Separation of Church and State.

The AUSCS is as scabrous a group as Pax Christi and Barry Lynn manipulates history to serve his own ends. Since this is related to what I posted on another thread, I'll post it here:

Methodists, indeed any church, should be free to engage in political activities...but not with a tax exemption. This church needs to be audited for compliance with the "no politics" rules for their tax exemption.--NetValue

No church should be prevented from speaking on any matter, political or otherwise. Nor should its tax-exempt status depend on this. It never did before until relatively recently when, for political purposes, churches were throttled by making their ab initio tax exemption depend on keeping quiet about political matters. Le[earn] a bit more history on the subject, because in this area your net value is zero.--aruanan

Lest anyone should think I was way out of bounds with my final sentence and consider it to be a personal comment or a flame or a personal put-down when, as he may think, all we have is a difference of opinion:

No, I made no personal put-down, attack, or flame. Nor is our difference merely one of opinion. A difference of opinion is merely a difference in tastes--you like expresso roast, I prefer Ethiopian Sidamo--but a difference in matters of fact requires that someone be closer or farther from the truth. I described the content value of your observation in the historical context.

Tax exempt status of churches antedated Lyndon Johnson's successful attack on the First Amendment in 1954 when he introduced a bill requiring that all non-profit organizations refrain from "political speech" to maintain their tax-exempt status. It passed without debate. This was the beginning of the rape of the First Amendment. The recent campaign finance "reform" laws continued the assault. Of course, Johnson's action, like the more recent ones, was simply a politician using the power of government to protect his own personal interests. After his reelection it was discovered that he had done this to shut down a couple of non-profit, anti-communist Texas organizations that were opposing his primary re-election bid.

The sneaky thing in all this is the twisted logic used when folks claim that tax-exemption constitutes a funding of the organization and that whoever does the funding, the government in this case, should control the speech, "Hey, you want to say whatever you want to? Then give up your tax-exempt status." But church tax-exempt status doesn't originate in laws controlling not-for-profit organizations but came from the First Amendment. It was later that tax-exempt status was extended to non-church-related not-for-profit organizations; at first, in addition to churches, tax-exemption was enjoyed by "charitable" organizations that provided service to the poor or relief of poverty. Church organizations usually provided these services. Tax-exempt status was gradually extended to organizations said to be providing a "benefit" to the community.

But church tax-exempt status antedates all this as well as all the laws that were created to define and to govern not-for-profit organizations. Church tax-exempt status is not a creature of these regulations. It exists apart from them in the understanding that the First Amendment prohibition on Congress giving special treatment to one church over others also meant that Congress couldn't screw over one church over others and that the prohibition on Congress with regard to establishments of religion meant that it could neither levy taxes on churches nor prohibit their freedom of practice (which included their freedom of speech).

The attitude referenced above also assumes that free speech is something that one is granted by the government in exchange for the payment of taxes. This has never been the case. Freedom of speech, freedom of the press, and freedom of the church, together with the consent of the governed, have been seen as the necessary conditions, not for a "democratic government", but for a free society. The government exists only for the purpose of protecting that society and for ensuring its continued freedom. This is why the current campaign finance reform laws and why Johnson's sneak attack on the Constitution [as well as the actions of Rev. Barry Lynn, et al] are literally an assault on that society whose liberty the government was instituted to protect.

Your take on the situation appeared to be in ignorance of its historical background. Because the tax-exempt status of churches antedated Johnson's conflating them with other non-profit organizations and because they, as any other organization, profit (as in newspapers) or non-profit (voluntary social action groups), had, ab initio, a First Amendment right to freedom of speech, your suggestion that they could say anything they wanted if they gave up their tax-exempt status was without either historical or Constitutional foundation. As such, it had a net value of zero.

[kayak]

ping

[Mister Baredog]

That secrecy is unsettling to the Rev. Barry Lynn, a United Church of Christ minister who heads the watchdog group Americans United for the Separation of Church and State

It's despicable for this moron to prance all over the TV and elsewhere pretending to be a religious leader. He is a religion hater. He wants religion practiced ONLY in the closet. He totally ignores the part of the 1st amendment HE doesn't like.

[Grampa Dave]

This is not news! It is just more sniping by the anti Christians on the left and right.

Here is some real news that the left and right should be up in arms about some housing in the DC area!

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/895719/posts

Movers & Shakers Daschle Does D.C.

Who's buying, who's selling in the world of high-end real estate:


Minority Leader Livin' Large


The honorable(gag) gentleman from South Dakota.


Senator Tom Daschle may earn a meager salary of $171,900, but together with lobbyist wife Linda, he's got enough to live large. The Daschles are currently under contract to buy a $2.25 million seven-bedroom house on Washington D.C.'s ritzy Foxhall Road, according to local sources. The property itself is described as a French country colonial home, with four stories, and a 12,855 square-foot yard with a heated pool. The home the Daschles are selling is a considerably more modest three-bedroom $739,000 townhouse.

So La Da$$hole is ready to buy a French Estate in DC and move in, and people have their BVDs uptight about 6 Christian Congressmen renting room to be able to stay in DC!

It is amazing how the Christian Haters and Jewish haters control the media and have a lapdog following.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/895719/posts

[concerned about politics]

"What concerns people is when you mix religion, political power, and secrecy," Lynn said.

When a president keeps foreign leaders waiting in the Rose Garden while he does the nasty it's considered his private life, yet when a few men pray together AFTER work, their private life is a national crises? Huh?

[AnalogReigns]

"The Fellowship," just so people know, is the group behind the National Prayer Breakfast, officially hosted every year by members of Congress but really organized by these guys. The President always attends, as do many congressmen and foreign dignitaries. My Dad has been loosly affiliated with them for many years--they are about the nicest, kindest, most welcoming (and scrupulously apolitical) group of evangelical Christians around. They help organize bible study groups among busy politicians--very purpously bi-partisan--and do absolutely no lobbying.

It's amazing that such a benign group can raise any hackles at all--but proves to me again that "spiritual warfare" is real.

God bless these guys--they'd appreciate your prayers FReepers....

[Eva]

If the resident Congressman were speaking publicly about the effect of religion on their lives this "watchdog" would complain, also. What he is really saying is that he doesn't want any "Christians" in congress. I put quotes on Christians because I am sure that this minister of the United Church of Christ thinks of himself as a Christian, but his church is probably more appropriately called the United Church of the anti-Christ.

[eleni121]

"What concerns people is when you mix religion, political power, and secrecy," Lynn said

What concerns me is Lynn's witchunting of Christians. What concerns me is Lynn's tax exempt organization whose sole mission is to undermine morality and democracy. What concerns me is Lynn's psychopathic single minded anger at Christians while ignoring every other religious faith - including that ideology called Islam.

[Diddle E. Squat]

I say they all move out and rent market rate rooms from a building owned by the Masons. That'll stir the tinfoil pot...

[Guyin4Os]

"Congress shall make no law respecting the establishment of a religion..."

How in the world does a congressman living in a church-owned apartment violate this? I suppose Barry Lynn would get all bent out of shape if he knew that congressmen actually brought their bibles to their offices. Gasp! They even pray!

Seriously here, Barry Lynn is having trouble even getting leftists to pay attention to him anymore.

[Illbay]

So when you join Congress, you are not allowed to associate with any religious group?

Not sure what this portends.

Barney Franks' townhouse played host to a homosexual prostitution business. Was that okay?