You are viewing an obsolete version of the DU website which is no longer supported by the Administrators. Visit The New DU.
Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Reply #40: No, not right. I posted below before I saw this. [View All]

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU
jobycom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-03-05 10:04 AM
Response to Reply #19
40. No, not right. I posted below before I saw this.
The Church substitutes living conditions for income. As I said below, a friend of mine worked for the vatican, and lived a luxurious lifestyle, but didn't own anything. The Church's agreement is that they provide all your needs.

In the case of the Church, there is plenty of income, but no monetary wages to withhold. The Church holds all of the priest's wealth. Should the priest be allowed to live an upper middle class lifestyle yet not have to pay for his own child's support, simply because his employer has come up with a clever way of paying him?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC