this post was submitted on 28 Mar 2024

1518 points (99.9% liked)

196

16416 readers

2262 users here now

Be sure to follow the rule before you head out.

Rule: You must post before you leave.

^other^ ^rules^

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

moss@lemmy.blahaj.zone

greembow@lemmy.blahaj.zone

moss@lemmy.world

queue@beehaw.org

funky_rodent@lemmy.blahaj.zone

PeachyMcPeachface@lemmy.blahaj.zone

threegnomes@lemmy.blahaj.zone

greembow@lemmy.world

remotelove@lemmy.ca

Roflmasterbigpimp@feddit.de

qaz@lemmy.world

A_Very_Big_Fan@lemm.ee

qaz@lemmy.blahaj.zone

A_Very_Big_Fan@lemmy.world

qaz@lemmy.dbzer0.com

qaz@sh.itjust.works

qaz@lemmy.sdf.org

1518

Trump bible (sh.itjust.works)

submitted 7 months ago by sjmarf@sh.itjust.works to c/196@lemmy.blahaj.zone

99 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] ivanafterall@kbin.social 52 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Hadn't considered that angle.

[–] HumanPenguin@lemmy.cafe 3 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

Its def a way around church funding. But a legal one. So the use of laundering weakens the complaint.

The only potential legal question. Is are churches buying the bible or openly encouraging memembers to. And let's be honest. That tax dodge is totally ignored by the IRS for so long. I can see it getting challenged as unequal application of law. Unless the IRS dose some major attack on most churches.

Edit; odd autocorrect. Nuking vs buying.