Fallen heroes are tough for everybody.
-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
A word from a free man Kent Hovind
- Thread starter poncho
- Start date
Fallen heroes are tough for everybody.
Actually, he's not a hero to me at all. I didn't even know who he was until this story happened.
poncho
Well-Known Member
Ridiculous. He lost in a court of law and went to jail.
It is inane to ask what belongs to Caesar after the fact, the indictment and court case made that abundantly clear.
Hovind is what he is, a tax cheat.
poncho
Well-Known Member
ITL made some allegations. He should, as he knows provide evidence to back these allegations up.
No it's not "inane" as the question "what rightly belongs to Caesar" has nothing to do with Hovind's case one way or another.
It has to do with understanding what Jesus meant when he said "give unto Caesar what belongs to Caesar".
One cannot know what to give to Caesar unless one knows what rightly belongs to Caesar.
Caesar can claim your wife belongs to him.
Remember Jesus said "give unto Caesar what belongs to Caesar" would you give your wife to Caesar?
Not getting a building permit:
http://web.archive.org/web/20030625002114/http://www.drdino.com/cse.asp?pg=articles&specific=38
Not paying FICA taxes on employees, saying they are missionaries for God:
http://www.religionnewsblog.com/15261/kent-hovind-evangelist-arrested-on-federal-charges
Failure to pay income taxes:
http://www.ustaxcourt.gov/InOpHistoric/Hovind.TCM.WPD.pdf
Legal Indictment papers:
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/61/HovindIndictment.pdf
"The government proved that Kent knew the tax laws required the collection and payment of withholding taxes, but he refused to comply. Employees of Evangelism Enterprises, peers, and legal counsel testified that Kent disputed the authority of the Internal Revenue Service based on the separation of the church and state, debated the interpretation and application of the withholding requirements, and intentionally characterized Evangelism Enterprises as a "church" and his employees as "missionaries" to avoid tax obligations. Kent had opined to attorney David Gibbs that he was "smarter" than other church officials who had forfeited real property after they refused to collect or pay withholding taxes. . . . Evidence established that Kent and Jo Hovind structured cash transactions with knowledge of, and the intent to avoid, reporting of those transactions by AmSouth Bank. . . . Substantial evidence established that Kent obstructed investigation of his tax offenses."
http://media.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/unpub/files/200710090.pdf
http://web.archive.org/web/20030625002114/http://www.drdino.com/cse.asp?pg=articles&specific=38
Not paying FICA taxes on employees, saying they are missionaries for God:
http://www.religionnewsblog.com/15261/kent-hovind-evangelist-arrested-on-federal-charges
Failure to pay income taxes:
http://www.ustaxcourt.gov/InOpHistoric/Hovind.TCM.WPD.pdf
Legal Indictment papers:
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/61/HovindIndictment.pdf
"The government proved that Kent knew the tax laws required the collection and payment of withholding taxes, but he refused to comply. Employees of Evangelism Enterprises, peers, and legal counsel testified that Kent disputed the authority of the Internal Revenue Service based on the separation of the church and state, debated the interpretation and application of the withholding requirements, and intentionally characterized Evangelism Enterprises as a "church" and his employees as "missionaries" to avoid tax obligations. Kent had opined to attorney David Gibbs that he was "smarter" than other church officials who had forfeited real property after they refused to collect or pay withholding taxes. . . . Evidence established that Kent and Jo Hovind structured cash transactions with knowledge of, and the intent to avoid, reporting of those transactions by AmSouth Bank. . . . Substantial evidence established that Kent obstructed investigation of his tax offenses."
http://media.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/unpub/files/200710090.pdf
poncho
Well-Known Member
Thank you ITL. It'll take some time to read through all of this.
Nope, still ridiculous, still inane. The obvious seems to be escaping you, particularly in the Hovind case and when Jesus was asked about the Imperial tax.
Is there a larger point you're trying, but failing miserably, to make?
poncho
Well-Known Member
Your first mistake is to assume this was a court of law. It could have been a court of travesty. Some of the details of those involved, the history of of the IRS abusing it's authority, and personal details about the judge, the prosecutor, and Hovind's lawyer calls this into question.
Your second mistake is to assume that the law is applied equally. It isn't. If the to big to fail banks get a slap on the wrist (fine) for laundering billions of dollars in drug money they can write off as the cost of doing business while another can have his property confiscated just for carrying cash on him should make all of us wonder if we have a system of law or a system of theft where the "big guys" can pay a small fine for laundering money on a massive scale while the "little guy" is sent to prison for not following every detail in the 7,000 pages of codes or has his money confiscated without charge.
http://www.businessinsider.com/charles-clarke-had-his-life-savings-seized-through-civil-forfeiture-2015-6
Your third mistake is to assume the law is not used to discriminate against political and/or religious people by an agency which demands people comply with it's orders that in turn refuses to comply with court orders.
http://www.baptistboard.com/showthread.php?t=101153
The IRS has been used to discriminate against conservative groups and the Tea Party. The IRS can lie cheat and steal with impunity. The IRS sole authority for it's actions is based on intimidation, discrimination and confiscation not the law.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O6ayb02bwp0
The 16th amendment never gave congress any new powers of taxation. This is the opinion of at least two supreme court cases that have never been overturned.
And this is based on your assumptions that, 1. he was tried in a court of "law" and a cursory look at the history of the agency and court officers prosecuting him calls this into serious question. 2. That the 16th amendment gave congress new powers of taxation which the supreme court has ruled at least twice is a false assumption.
Last edited by a moderator:
poncho
Well-Known Member
Okay, so you would give your wife to Caesar. Does she know you'd give her to Caesar if he claimed she belonged to him?
How can I be failing when the only argument you have is "that's ridiculous"?
Last edited by a moderator:
If you don't pay your taxes, that's on you, but your arguments have landed plenty of folks in jail, so have at it. Also, my only argument wasn't "that's ridiculous", there was the whole indictment and going to jail point, why quibble over such things?
poncho
Well-Known Member
Okay from this statement I can conclude that you don't pay taxes because you are certain the law requires you to but rather because you're afraid of what will happen if you don't.
So for you it's not a matter of the legality of the tax law it's a matter of you not wanting to go to jail.
Wish I knew who it was that said . . . "When governments fear the people, there is liberty. When the people fear the government, there is tyranny" so I could give them proper accreditation.
You'd give your wife to Caesar rather than question Caesar's legal authority to claim she belongs to him and you'll hand Caesar money that he may or may not have the legal authority to demand from you for fear of what Caesar might do to if you do not comply, . . . okay, in that case . . .
I feel sorry for your wife and you really should tell her that if Caesar "comes a knocking" she should start packing her things because you fear Caesar more than you love her.
Because there's a need for people like me to question whether people (agencies) that are known to have lied, cheated, stolen and abused their authority to discriminate against and/or silence opposition and confiscate property without charge should automatically be given the benefit of the doubt and have some false aura of credibility bestowed on them merely because of the office they hold.
"The law in all it's majestic equality forbids the rich as well as the poor to steal bread and sleep under bridges" author unknown.
Last edited by a moderator:
This whole post is beyond stupid. I pay taxes because it is the honorable, Christian thing to do.
The agency wasn't just given the benefit of the doubt, it was proven in court, that's why Hovind went to jail and why you would too if you did the same thing. I'll ignore the whole wife thing as it's an awful metaphor that makes your argument look even more ridiculous, quite a feat.
The established law of the land is citizens pay taxes. If you don't like it, gather your buddies, get elected and change it. This whole line of argument you've adopted isn't actually accomplishing any of the noble things you suggest and will instead send you to jail.
poncho
Well-Known Member
You said . . . "If you don't pay your taxes, that's on you, but your arguments have landed plenty of folks in jail, so have at it."
Okay, so then you were just trying to scare me into compliance with a system you assume to be legally binding on American citizens. Here's an easy way to end the argument.
Produce the law that says an American citizen is legally required to pay an income tax. Should be easier than a walk in the park. If it's true.
You specifically said "court of law".
You said . . . "Ridiculous. He lost in a court of law and went to jail."
You assume that the law was being represented in this court. Was it?
First let's look at another case presided over by Judge Margaret Casey Rodger.
Lawmakers back officials facing jail for prayer
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/sep/17/lawmakers-back-school-prayer-leaders-on-trial/
https://www.baptiststandard.com/resources/archives/51-2009-archives/10088-florida-principal-athletic-director-not-guilty-of-contempt-of-court
Little anti - Christian bias there?
Now let's look at the lead prosecutor. John David "Roy" Atchison.
U.S. Prosecutor Accused of Seeking Sex With Girl, 5
He committed suicide on the second attempt.
Now let's look at the the grand jury precedings.
Three attempts to indict Kent Hovind on tax evasion by a grand jury failed.
The IRS had to resort to using the RICO, a drug enforcement law to get an indictment.
If at first you don't succeed, use another "law".
Two juries were excused before the third jury found Kent Hovind "guilty".
Then there's the matter of tampering with the court transcript. Many people in the courtroom heard judge Margaret Catharine "Casey" Rodgers say that "the crime Kent Hovind is guilty of is worse than rape" and they all affirmed they heard her say this in their affidavits. These words can not be found in the court transcripts. Tampering?
And there's more information out there to prove that the IRS is a rogue agency that preys on American ignorance by using scare tactics and intimidation that are not only unjust but illegal than I care to look up and if I did there isn't enough pages left in this thread to post them all.
If you call that a "court of law" then it was a "court of law" in the hands of criminals.
I guess it's better for you to ignore it than to tell your wife if Caesar claims her as his you won't "quibble the details" with Caesar over it.
Is it really the established law of the land? If it is then you should have no trouble producing this law. Where is this law? Please post it here so we can all see it.
Many people have been working on it. So far every attempt to petition the government for a redress of grievances which is our first amendment right has either been ignored or thwarted by congress.
The first amendment states . . .
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.
See this . . . http://www.wethepeoplecongress.org/
"We the people" have consistently been denied this right.
My argument hasn't even started yet.
You're probably right in that I would go to jail. But the real tax cheats never do. Like Timothy Geithner and Al Sharpton and Charlie Rangel. These guys are tax cheats. But they aren't treated like Kent Hovind. Maybe because they don't travel 200+ days a year leading souls to Jesus and making evolutionists and atheists look like idiots.
If you're going to say it is "The established law of the land is citizens pay taxes" then you best be able to produce that established law to prove it.
The burden of proof falls on the one making the statement that's you.
You made the statement, now you prove it.
Now I have a question for CMG. Have you heard of a subcontractor? A subcontractor is "a business or person that carries out work for a company as part of a larger project." They are not employees of the company they have contracted with so the company is under no legal obligation to with hold any tax money from their checks. At the end of the year they file a 1099.
What is an IRS 1099 Form?
https://turbotax.intuit.com/tax-tools/tax-tips/Self-Employment-Taxes/What-is-an-IRS-1099-Form-/INF14810.html
Last edited by a moderator:
poncho
Well-Known Member
The IRS will tell you that it has never lost a court case.
Let's see if that's true.
NO IRS CHALLENGE
What's interesting to note here is that the prosecution did not challenge or attempt to refute any of the cases cited, or the conclusions of the courts. Furthermore, on the following defense, once again the prosecution did not challenge or attempt to refute the point made by Long's attorneys, nor were they able to show a statute that made anyone liable for income tax.
This testimony, brought out by Defense was the fact that NOWHERE IN THE ENTIRE INTERNAL REVENUE CODE (some 9,722 separate Sections, as of 1992!) WAS ANYONE ACTUALLY MADE LIABLE FOR THE INCOME TAX.
Tennessee Man Wins "Willful Failure to File" Case
Taxpayers take the IRS to court -- and actually win
Woman Beats IRS in Court Over Income Tax Protest
MANY AMERICANS MAY NOT BE LIABLE FOR FEDERAL INCOME TAX!
Grandfather Beats IRS In Tax Court Without Lawyer
Attorney Tommy Cryer Beats the IRS in court; Jury says not guilty!
LAWYER WHO BEAT IRS SUES AGENTS
3 People Who Fought the IRS & Won
Pilot Beat the IRS in Court? - Vernie Kuglin
Let's see if that's true.
NO IRS CHALLENGE
What's interesting to note here is that the prosecution did not challenge or attempt to refute any of the cases cited, or the conclusions of the courts. Furthermore, on the following defense, once again the prosecution did not challenge or attempt to refute the point made by Long's attorneys, nor were they able to show a statute that made anyone liable for income tax.
This testimony, brought out by Defense was the fact that NOWHERE IN THE ENTIRE INTERNAL REVENUE CODE (some 9,722 separate Sections, as of 1992!) WAS ANYONE ACTUALLY MADE LIABLE FOR THE INCOME TAX.
Tennessee Man Wins "Willful Failure to File" Case
Taxpayers take the IRS to court -- and actually win
Woman Beats IRS in Court Over Income Tax Protest
MANY AMERICANS MAY NOT BE LIABLE FOR FEDERAL INCOME TAX!
Grandfather Beats IRS In Tax Court Without Lawyer
Attorney Tommy Cryer Beats the IRS in court; Jury says not guilty!
LAWYER WHO BEAT IRS SUES AGENTS
3 People Who Fought the IRS & Won
Pilot Beat the IRS in Court? - Vernie Kuglin
Last edited by a moderator:
I am curious. Are you actively protesting by not paying your taxes?
(No, I am not from the Government and I am not here to help. :laugh
poncho
Well-Known Member
I am curious. Are you actively protesting by not paying your taxes?
(No, I am not from the Government and I am not here to help. :laugh
What my protest is about is how Christians are so quick to judge a man guilty before they know all the facts and evidence and how quickly those same Christians will discount any evidence that may prove the system they are so busy defending might be corrupted by crooked biased judges and pedophile prosecutors. And this by the same Christians that are always complaining about liberal anti Christian activist judges while watching the increasing persecution of Christians in this country by this government through this "legal" system.
I have a hard time condemning any brother or sister in Christ that runs afoul of this world system and it's many thousands of laws and edicts.
But that's just me. I'm in this world but I am not of this world I'm just passing through so I personally feel no obligation to defend this world's corrupt legal system especially at the expense of a brother in Christ who puts most of if not all of us to shame with his evangelizing ministry.
Everyone on this board might being committing three felonies a day without even knowing it. So who are we to to judge anyone that has been charged or even found guilty of a felony?
And what about Kent Hovinds work he's been doing for the Lord all these years? Should all the people he led to Christ question whether their salvation is genuine because Kent may have committed a crime?
Jimmy Swaggart got caught with a prostitute. Does this mean that all the souls he won for Christ prior to that should be declared null and void or recalled because he sinned?
I'm also curious, what do you think about Kent Hovind's message/theory?
Nobody seems to want to talk about it. Have you watched his videos? Have you listened to any of the debates he's had?
Do you believe the bible is the inspired inerrant word of God? Or do you believe it's a good book but it has some errors?
Do you believe God created the earth as the bible says in six days? Or do you believe we evolved from a rock over the course of billions of years?
Last edited by a moderator:
poncho
Well-Known Member
That is not what I asked. (See your post #6)
That makes us even doesn't it?
Last edited by a moderator:
:laugh::laugh: