Jo Hovind Gets Time

1. Are Ham and Robertson actually breaking the law or are they simply abusing tax loopholes created for religious organizations. Ethically, I don’t really see much of a difference between “The Church needs a private jet for me to use” and “I need a private jet” but I’m not sure that the law is against them on this one.

   I was hoping to see Jo Hovind completely break down and stab Kent in the back. I bet we’d get some really interesting stories if she decided to go the “Tell all” route to get herself out of trouble. As for her sentence directly, I don’t know enough about her to experience any serious schadenfreude over the issue. She’s clearly on the wrong side of the law on this, so I can’t say I feel any pity. At the same time, Kent was such a world class jerk and was so obvious about it that it was fun to watch him go down.

2. Broke the law?

   I understand that there is “tax code”.. but code is not law.. just read the constitution..

   Actually , this may blow you away, but unless it is listed in the Federal or State constittions it is NOT a law.

   You are referring to “civil” laws that are not in the constitution… and since the constitution says that our laws must be put INTO the constitution, if a “civil law” is not in the constitution, then it really is not a valid law.

   You might reply to me that Congress passes Laws all day.. and they’re called “amendments”. But I say to that, Amendments to WHAT?! Theyre NOT amendments to the constitution as that requires a vote in all the states.. so what are these so called “laws” that you say were broken. And what are these “amendments” that we live our daily lives by… amendments like saying a citizen MUST pay X amount of taxes to the federal and state government?

   You of course are referring to the “tax code” which was one of these faux laws passed by congress. You could just as well call these “tax codes laws” SUGGESTIONS made by congress.

   That is what ALL laws passed by congress are.. unless they’re ratified into the constition they are SUGGESTIONS made by people in positions of power.

   Now you might say, well this means that virtually ALL laws that people live by on a day to day basis are INVALID.. such as speed limits, license requirements, TAXES, murder, theft etc.. would then be “legal”, and this would cause ANARCHY.

   The answer of course is that YES it WILL cause anarchy when more people figure out that these beloved “laws” that people like you quote are not laws at all.

   I agree that taxes SHOULD be payed in order to maintain our society, but could you please show me the LAW that says we HAVE TO?!

   finally, good luck explaining this to the FBI or the cops if they show up to collect back taxes— they’ll still arrest you because they… like you.. have been duped into believing a law has been broken. They, and you, are still plugged into the matrix so to speak.

3. mike,

   You might want to look up a little thing called the United States Code sometime to address that woeful lack of understanding you’re operating under. If that’s beyond your comprehension, see if your local High School would be willing to allow you to enroll in a remedial civics class.

4. finally, good luck explaining this to the FBI or the cops if they show up to collect back taxes— they’ll still arrest you because they… like you.. have been duped into believing a law has been broken. They, and you, are still plugged into the matrix so to speak.

   Yeah, the last time I robbed a bank and killed all of the hostages to make my getaway, the police were surprisingly unsympathetic to the fact that the Constitution doesn’t forbid either of those activities. Those guys are such sheep…

5. Troublesome Frog:

   Are Ham and Robertson actually breaking the law or are they simply abusing tax loopholes created for religious organizations.

   I don’t have any dirt on Ham, Robertson, or anyone else. But I remember the words of wisdom spoken by my father back when Microsoft was being sued for setting up an illegal monopoly. He said of Bill Gates that “guilty or not, nobody gets to be that rich without being an unprincipled bastard.”

   I figure that fleecing credulous sheep is a business like any other, and you don’t to the top of that business if you’re unwilling to engage in unethical behavior. I wouldn’t be at all surprised if an audit or investigation turned up some rather unchristian behavior.

   We already know that Ham is being sued by his old organization, and Robertson seems to have made out pretty well under the faith-based initiatives laws.

   If I had my druthers, religious organizations would be treated basically like any non-profit organization, as far as taxes go. Raising money to fix the roof, or send out flyers, or expand to a bigger location is one thing, but things like Jim Bakker’s water park or the Creation Museum are for-profit businesses, and should be treated as such.

6. Hmmm… Speaking of getting away largely unscathed, it looks like President Bush has commuted Scooter Libby’s sentence. He’s still on the hook for the $250K (maybe he can complete the Kent Hovind Challenge), but it looks like prison time isn’t in the cards.

7. On a second reading of the Constitution, it look like Scooter didn’t do anything against the law anyway. At worst, he just ignored some “suggestions” in the legal code. Man, this law stuff is easy…

Comments are closed.