This page contains a single entry from the blog posted on
February 3, 2010 2:26 PM.
The previous post in this blog was
Is this a real fake....
The next post in this blog is
Who says Oregon's not a red state?.
Many more can be found on the
main index page or by looking through
the archives.
Comments (7)
Seems to me that a "church" is merely a christian word for a place to worship.
Now with that said, one could argue that one could worship anywhere and that religion is a concept that is interpreted differently by everyone.
Anyway, I just think that there are bigger issues to worry about than whether someone can say something they do and are passionate about and have built up a place where they can practice their passion and can claim it as a "church" and that they are practicing a religion.
Posted by Swede | February 3, 2010 2:57 PM
I noticed that they conducted the trial by phone....is that common? I have never heard of that.
Posted by mp97303 | February 3, 2010 3:13 PM
I noticed that they conducted the trial by phone...
ORE 305.501(4)(a) Subject to the rules of practice and procedure established by the tax court, a magistrate is not bound by common law or statutory rules of evidence or by technical or formal rules of procedure, and may conduct the hearing in any manner that will achieve substantial justice. A hearing may be conducted in person or by telephone. Magistrates may confer with each other in order to reach a decision on any matter.
Posted by John | February 3, 2010 5:11 PM
That should have been ORS 305.501(4)...
Posted by John | February 3, 2010 5:12 PM
Plaintiffs probably should have stuck with faith healing.
Posted by Allan L. | February 3, 2010 5:23 PM
Amen
Posted by David E Gilmore | February 4, 2010 6:13 AM
LOL! So, apparently some youth pastor(s) tried to trick young skaters to "hang-out together in a cool non-churchy environment", but then not disclose it was a church.
Do not most religions uphold honesty?
Posted by Norm! | February 4, 2010 10:00 AM