Episode 66: Barely a Child Rapist

9 comments on Episode 66: Barely a Child Rapist

  1. Ryan says:

    Holy crap you guys used my disclaimer. Super awesome thanks guys.

  2. Charles Deetz ;) says:

    Great disclamer Ryan. And the Rick Perry thing just has me fried.

  3. Steven Doyle says:

    “Crony” is still a good word. Much more applicable to the Bush administration than Obama’s, though. Case in point: Michael Brown, whom Bush appointed head of FEMA in spite of his utter lack of qualifications, because of Brown’s longtime friendship with Joe Albaugh, Bush’s 2000 campaign manager. That’s cronyism.

  4. Donovan says:

    I was beginning to wonder if you guys needed to have EMTs on standby while you were doing the thing on Ronmey there…. roflmao…

  5. ullrich fischer says:

    I love your show. Always hilariously irreverent. I’ve not seen photos of you guys, but from the voices, I imagine you are like the protagonists in the TV show “Franklin and Bash” with Cecil being Franklin and Tom, Bash. 🙂 The voices are eerily similar. It is very encouraging and uplifting to have you guys express what I think about the issues you cover. The fact that you can laugh about the absurdity of some of the horrors you describe is IMHO, a bonus.

    I notice the last few episodes I’ve heard you feature like minded people from Britain. This leads me to ponder the breakup of the English Language. As a Canadian, I have no problem understanding what you guys say at full speed, but when you interview some of those Merseyside skeptics, I feel like I did when I was working in Chile with my rudimentary working understanding of Spanish while the folks I was working with were speaking amongst themselves in full speed Spanish. I managed to work out what every third or 4th word was but while I was figuring out each word, they were saying several more words which I completely missed. British full speed English and Indian (always double speed) English are kinda like that. American Southern Redneck Hillbilly-God English would be like that except they talk real sloooow, so I have lots of time to figure out what they’re saying, and to wish I was listening to something else. In Chile, I had no problem being understood or understanding what was spoken (slowly — “despacio, por favor”) to me but had very little in the way of clues as to what these same people were saying to each other. (Probably “Who is this bonehead gringo and why do we have to work with him?” 🙂 ). I suspect this is only going to get worse within English given the fact that there are many more English (sort of) speakers in India than in any other part of the world. As all the tech support jobs and customer service jobs are exported to other lower paid areas of the world, we will likely see a complete breakdown of English and be left with complete new languages each with maybe 1000 or fewer words in common with each other. …Another example of evolution by natural selection.

  6. ullrich fischer says:

    Ok, now I saw your photos on that incredibly well hidden “about the hosts” link , and you know?… you guys look exactly like Franklin (Cecil) and Bash (Tom) respectively if only Tom would lose those braids. 🙂

  7. This episode had me farting in my car. Romney in brown face!

  8. Timothy says:

    A 501(c)(3) organization is not exactly the same thing as a nonprofit. Nonprofit status is determines when an organization incorporates–each state has its own laws under which an organization can choose to incorporate as for profit or not for profit. In fact, by law Illinois doesn’t even have “nonprofit” corporations–it has only “not for profit” corporations.

    Nonprofit corporations are not automatically tax exempt. Once incorporated as a nonprofit, or “not for profit corporation,” in Illinois, the corporation can then apply to the IRS to be recognized as tax exempt under one of the subsections found in Section 501(c) of the tax code. As you can see, this is a two step process; and the IRS may choose not to recognize a nonprofit as tax exempt. In other words, it is possible to be nonprofit, yet not tax exempt.

    Churches usually apply to be recognized under Section 501(c)(3), which is for charitable, religious, and educational organizations; however, there is also Section 501(c)(4), for “social wellfare” organizations, and other categories.

    While 501(c)(3) organizations are prohibited from endorsing candidates and otherwise participating in political campaign activity, 501(c)(4) organizations can do both, and lobby, so long as it is not their primary activity. The biggest difference is that while 501(c)(3) organizations are exempt from paying taxes on the income they receive, individual people can also deduct the contributions/donations they give to 501(c)(3) organizations. That’s not true with a 501(c)(4) organization–501(c)(4) organizations are also exempt from paying taxes on the income they receive; however, individuals may not deduct the contributions/donations given to a 501(c)(4).

    This all having been said, I have always been surprised that more churches don’t try to file for tax exemption under Section 504(c)(4), rather than Section 501(c)(3). In fact, I have always been surprised that they don’t forgo tax exemption entirely in order to be able to participate fully in the political process, as I believe many religious people most likely believe they have a duty to do so; and it seems a bit shallow that they would choose tax exemption over what they feel to be a duty to god.

    I’m all for taxing the churches. I’m just surprised that new nonprofit churches haven’t already sprung up, that choose not to file for tax exemption, so they can be political.

  9. Reynold says:

    I suspect that you people would be interested in a xian apologist’s talking about one of the topics in this particular podcast. I’ve never seen a more f***d up person than this guy!

    PZ Myers has something to say to that idiot here.

    More details are in the link with my name. That had gone on for a little while with that guy.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.