|
Grex > Agora56 > #84: Newspaper in Denmark prints cartoon pics of Mohammed | |
|
| Author |
Message |
| 25 new of 432 responses total. |
tod
|
|
response 367 of 432:
| 
Feb 21 03:13 UTC 2006 |
All I have to say is that it was the Taliban that demolished the 1500 year
old Buddhists monuments and you didn't hear a squeak from the Muslim world.
|
cyklone
|
|
response 368 of 432:
|
Feb 21 03:54 UTC 2006 |
Jep, you used twisted "logic" to justify deleting items. Now you use a twisted
analogy of barbershops and grex. If you want to define me as a "jerk" for
pointing out your continued inability to think clearly, be my guest.
|
mcnally
|
|
response 369 of 432:
|
Feb 21 04:19 UTC 2006 |
re #366: who's panicking?
re #360, 368: I think jep's position, as expressed in #359 is quite
clear, furthermore totally agree with him that Cyberspace Communications'
raison d'etre is to maintain Grex for public use, not to speak out on
political issues or crusade for free speech.
Here's what he wrote, again:
> The Board does not have any authority to take political stands which
> claim to represent my position. I don't vote for Grex Board members in
> order to have someone else to make political statements for me. I do
> so in order that someone will be in charge of Grex, to provide a
> community forum where I can discuss things with other people who like
> to discuss things.
|
happyboy
|
|
response 370 of 432:
|
Feb 21 09:21 UTC 2006 |
re367: i recall more protest from archeologists than from
the buddhist community.
|
fudge
|
|
response 371 of 432:
|
Feb 21 10:54 UTC 2006 |
re#367: that's because their issue is indeed with representation of figures
of worship - they don't give a damn about respecting other religions (which
are fundamentally evil to them), the fuss they're making is only about their
rule being broken. what they expect to achieve by staging worldwide
violent demonstrations because of a stupid cartoon published by one newspaper
is beyond me, but the only likely outcome I can foresee is the proliferation
of material ridiculing islam.
|
jep
|
|
response 372 of 432:
|
Feb 21 14:06 UTC 2006 |
re resp:368: Do you disagree with my statement about the Board (or
staff) creating a Grex position on the question of anti-Muslim
cartoons? Or aren't you able to comprehend that part of the discussion
in this item? I can try to state it in simpler words if you're having
trouble following what I wrote.
|
naftee
|
|
response 373 of 432:
|
Feb 21 14:25 UTC 2006 |
GreX should create a barbershop quartet
|
rcurl
|
|
response 374 of 432:
|
Feb 21 16:07 UTC 2006 |
There is no reason for the Board to create a Grex position on anti-Muslim
cartoons if no one on the Board thinks tht Grex should take a position on a
matter that is not directly relevant to Grex. There are many much more
significant domestic freedom of speech issues that affect Grex and its
purposes than this Muslim dustup.
But even then, there is a perfectly good procedure in place to raise the issue
with the membership, by proposing a resolution and having it put to a vote.
Arguments for and against can be made at that time.
|
other
|
|
response 375 of 432:
|
Feb 21 16:55 UTC 2006 |
Get this straight. The ONLY organizations that have a _responsibility_
to republish the cartoons are press organizations whose role is to
inform their customers about the causes and nature of this issue. To
republish them in the absence of such a responsibility, even simply as a
symbolic statement supporting the freedom of speech and of the press, is
irresponsible and offensive and reflective of a narrow and parochial
mindset.
There are lots of ways to protest innapropriate limits on freedom of
speech (that includes the freedom to offend), but to offend on principle
and without reservation solely to make the point that being offensive i
that particular way is acceptable to you is ignorant in the extreme,
especially if you would admonish someone for similarly offending you and
your beliefs just to show that they can or have the right to.
I don't think it was at all apropriate of the Jyllens-Posten to solicit
and publish these cartoons originally, but I do think it entirely
appropriate once the response gathered steam that other news agencies
republished them to inform their constituencies about the conflict and
its causes. Grex has no such role or responsibility, and for Grex to
republish these cartoons would be an act of unvarnished affrontery which
serves no justifiable real or symbolic purpose.
|
nharmon
|
|
response 376 of 432:
|
Feb 21 17:13 UTC 2006 |
Can Grex maintain its charity status while also officially bashing
religions?
|
tod
|
|
response 377 of 432:
|
Feb 21 17:17 UTC 2006 |
Grex has charity status?
|
nharmon
|
|
response 378 of 432:
|
Feb 21 17:23 UTC 2006 |
Isn't that how donations are tax deductible?
|
tod
|
|
response 379 of 432:
|
Feb 21 17:38 UTC 2006 |
100% deductible? You sure?
|
nharmon
|
|
response 380 of 432:
|
Feb 21 17:50 UTC 2006 |
Not now I'm not.
|
tod
|
|
response 381 of 432:
|
Feb 21 18:04 UTC 2006 |
http://apps.irs.gov/app/pub78
|
rcurl
|
|
response 382 of 432:
|
Feb 21 18:06 UTC 2006 |
Grex is a 501(c)3 charitable organization and donations to it are tax
deductible.
When has Grex ever officially bashed religions? Oh, you mean if it
runs the Muhammed cartoons? That depends on whether they are run as a Grex
editorial starement or for informational purposes.
Further than that, if Grex decided to take stands in regard to religions,
positive or negative, I wouldn't think this could have any affect upon
Grex's status as a recognized charitable organization, so long as it was
not lobbying for laws or supporting or opposing candidates for election
further than allowed by law. What's illegal about bashing - or praising -
religions?
|
tod
|
|
response 383 of 432:
|
Feb 21 18:10 UTC 2006 |
re #382
Grex is a 501(c)3 charitable organization and donations to it are tax
deductible.
see #381 (You may be serious mistaken. Also, I seriously doubt you can
deduct any more than 50% of a donation.)
|
rcurl
|
|
response 384 of 432:
|
Feb 21 18:30 UTC 2006 |
Any donation to a 501(c)3 charitable organization is deductible depending on
the tax circumstances of the individual. If one does not claim deductions,
for example, one cannot deduct. But if one can claim deductions, the donation
is 100% deductible from gross income. (It is not a tax credit, which you may
be thinking of.)
If you think there is a limit of 50% within the above general framework,
please cite the chapter and verse saying that.
|
tod
|
|
response 385 of 432:
|
Feb 21 18:38 UTC 2006 |
re #384
Arbornet fell within the "A public charity with a 50% deductibility
limitation." under the Publication 78 deductibility codes by the IRS.
I'm certain Grex would find itself in the same boat if it were eligible.
http://www.irs.gov/charities/charitable/article/0,,id=150830,00.html
All eligible charities are available via IRS lookup
http://apps.irs.gov/app/pub78
If you don't see it then there's a 99% chance its not eligible for ANY
deduction.
|
nharmon
|
|
response 386 of 432:
|
Feb 21 18:45 UTC 2006 |
I tried looking up Grex, Cyberspace, Arbornet, and found none.
|
rcurl
|
|
response 387 of 432:
|
Feb 21 18:59 UTC 2006 |
Hmmmm....has Grex submitted their 990s faithfully? Aruba? Janc?
|
tod
|
|
response 388 of 432:
|
Feb 21 19:09 UTC 2006 |
re #387
Exactly
|
jadecat
|
|
response 389 of 432:
|
Feb 21 19:19 UTC 2006 |
resp:375 Well said.
|
bru
|
|
response 390 of 432:
|
Feb 21 20:27 UTC 2006 |
Hey, if you want to post the pictures, post the pictures. Thats what free
speech is all about. You have the power to put a link tot he pictures in the
Agora. Do so.
|
tod
|
|
response 391 of 432:
|
Feb 21 20:33 UTC 2006 |
I've got the pictures but I also don't feel comfortable expressing my bigotry
that way.
|