Baptist's bank accounts frozen- Steven Anderson

[poor-in-spirit]

Baptist Pastor Says Bank of America Shut Down All Of His Church's Bank Accounts

Bank of America has frozen their church bank accounts because of his preaching against homosexuality.

Regardless of agreement with him, this should open some eyes. This is not the first instance of this either, there are several examples like this already.

The banks are owned by progressive globalists as is all big tech and social media. Trump nor the government can change these facts. True power is held by globalist billionaires and not governments in these last days.

www.jesussaidwhat.com/trump-derangement-or-strong-delusio

 

[Scarlett O.]

I'm sorry, but I just can't feel anything for the guy nor can I get up in arms about it.

His money was frozen and they are waiting a couple of weeks for all activity to go through and then cutting him a check for his money.

They don't want someone like that associated with their bank who calls for the death of people. He has publicly called for the death of homosexuals by stoning and claimed that he hates them as God hates them. When the mass shooting at the gay club on Orlando happened, he said, "There's 50 less pedophiles in the world."

He hates Jews and has issues with women.

He is a hateful man calling for the death of people. That's a crime.

He can just find another bank.

I know I'll be disagreed with, but c'est la vie.

 

[Deacon]

Steven Anderson was a former member of the BaptistBoard
Kicked for bad behavior.

He gives Baptist’s a bad name.

Rob

 

[InTheLight]

From the article:

We're entering new territory when unelected bankers can close down people's bank accounts over their political and religious views.

It's not new territory for a business to decide not to do business with someone. It's as old as capitalism.

"Unelected bankers"? What?

 

[Rob_BW]

Bank of America and Citi are both garbage.

Redirect Notice

 

[Reynolds]

I'm sorry, but I just can't feel anything for the guy nor can I get up in arms about it.

His money was frozen and they are waiting a couple of weeks for all activity to go through and then cutting him a check for his money.

They don't want someone like that associated with their bank who calls for the death of people. He has publicly called for the death of homosexuals by stoning and claimed that he hates them as God hates them. When the mass shooting at the gay club on Orlando happened, he said, "There's 50 less pedophiles in the world."

He hates Jews and has issues with women.

He is a hateful man calling for the death of people. That's a crime.

He can just find another bank.

I know I'll be disagreed with, but c'est la vie.

I disagree. The bank could not discriminate against him if he were a queer. They should not be able to discriminate against him because he has non mainstream religious beliefs.

 

[John of Japan]

Bank of America and Citi are both garbage.

Redirect Notice

Years ago in Japan at one time or another I used the Tokyo branch of both of these to transfer funds. They both stuck it to the little guy, and aimed at corporate accounts. In other words, they both closed my accounts unilaterally, and focused on corporate accounts rather than individual ones.

 

[InTheLight]

I disagree. The bank could not discriminate against him if he were a queer.

People, go back and read the article carefully. Nowhere does Bank of America or Steve Anderson say that his account is being closed because of his stand against homosexuality. The only place that idea can be found is in the headline and in the innuendo in the article, i.e. "Anderson has attracted controversy over the years due to his fundamentalist preachings on homosexuality."

The idea that his account was shut down because of his religious beliefs is FAKE NEWS.

 

[Reynolds]

People, go back and read the article carefully. Nowhere does Bank of America or Steve Anderson say that his account is being closed because of his stand against homosexuality. The only place that idea can be found is in the headline and in the innuendo in the article, i.e. "Anderson has attracted controversy over the years due to his fundamentalist preachings on homosexuality."

The idea that his account was shut down because of his religious beliefs is FAKE NEWS.

Why was it shut down?

 

[InTheLight]

Why was it shut down?

Who knows? Insufficient funds? Overdrawn checks? Inactivity?

Nothing in the article says WHY it was shut down. Just that it was shut down.

The idea that it was shut down because of his preaching is total speculation by the writer of the article. Notice not even Steven Anderson went so far as to suggest a reason.

 

[Reynolds]

Who knows? Insufficient funds? Overdrawn checks? Inactivity?

Nothing in the article says WHY it was shut down. Just that it was shut down.

The idea that it was shut down because of his preaching is total speculation by the writer of the article. Notice not even Steven Anderson went so far as to suggest a reason.

Just like their decision to not do business with gun manufacturers.
Behind Bank of America's Decision to End Business With Some Gun Makers[/QUOTE]

 

[InTheLight]

Just like their decision to not do business with gun manufacturers.
Behind Bank of America's Decision to End Business With Some Gun Makers

No, it's not just like their decision to stop doing business with gun makers. There is a clear reason why the stopped working with gun makers. There is no clear reason why they stopped with Steven Anderson. Maybe Anderson is a credit risk. Who knows?

There is nothing, no law, compelling Bank of America to do business with either of these entities.

 

[Reynolds]

No, it's not just like their decision to stop doing business with gun makers. There is a clear reason why the stopped working with gun makers. There is no clear reason why they stopped with Steven Anderson. Maybe Anderson is a credit risk. Who knows?

There is nothing, no law, compelling Bank of America to do business with either of these entities.

If they refused to do business because the company baked gay wedding cakes, you would find it violated some law. How can a checking account be a credit risk?

 

[InTheLight]

If they refused to do business because the company baked gay wedding cakes, you would find it violated some law.

<we got another mind reader, here>

It could violate a law. Depends on the state law and the outcome of the trial (if there is one.) The key is to refuse service and don't come out and say, "I'm not making the cake because you're gay." Just say you can't do it and suggest another bakery. Then no law is involved.

How can a checking account be a credit risk?

The owner gives the banking information out to unauthorized people. These people make unauthorized charges. Or there is a credit line and/or overdraft protection attached to the account that is routinely invoked and not paid back. I could probably think of other examples.

 

[Reynolds]

Every

<we got another mind reader, here>

It could violate a law. Depends on the state law and the outcome of the trial (if there is one.) The key is to refuse service and don't come out and say, "I'm not making the cake because you're gay." Just say you can't do it and suggest another bakery. Then no law is involved.



The owner gives the banking information out to unauthorized people. These people make unauthorized charges. Or there is a credit line and/or overdraft protection attached to the account that is routinely invoked and not paid back. I could probably think of other examples.

Every check you write has that info on it.

 

[InTheLight]

Every

Every check you write has that info on it.

I'm talking about debit cards being used in online transactions, PIN numbers being given to unauthorized people (or stolen), not necessarily physical paper checks being written. Physical checks require a person's signature to be on file at a bank in order for them to be valid. Debit cards used online don't need a signature.

If someone's debit card gets defrauded over and over again the bank will just stop having that person as a customer since they obviously don't safeguard the card's use.

 

[Reynolds]

I'm talking about debit cards being used in online transactions, PIN numbers being given to unauthorized people (or stolen), not necessarily physical paper checks being written. Physical checks require a person's signature to be on file at a bank in order for them to be valid. Debit cards used online don't need a signature.

If someone's debit card gets defrauded over and over again the bank will just stop having that person as a customer since they obviously don't safeguard the card's use.

They could just stop giving them debit cards. You well know that is not the case here.

 

[InTheLight]

They could just stop giving them debit cards.

Having a bank account where you can't access the money is a bit inconvenient, isn't it?

You well know that is not the case here.

No one knows what is truly going on here. But I would say shutting down his bank account because of his sermon topics is probably not the scenario.



Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk

 

[Reynolds]

Having a bank account where you can't access the money is a bit inconvenient, isn't it?



No one knows what is truly going on here. But I would say shutting down his bank account because of his sermon topics is probably not the scenario.



Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk

I don't have debit cards. Risk is too high for fraud. I use my credit cards and stay a couple free weeks at the beach every year on the rewards points. My credit card numbers do get stolen often.
Your comment about the signature on checks is comical. Banks don't look at it. Ask anyone in banking.

 

[InTheLight]

Your comment about the signature on checks is comical. Banks don't look at it. Ask anyone in banking.

My comment was that banks require businesses (and I assume non-profits, like churches) to have a signature card on file at the bank showing the authorized people that can sign checks. I didn't say anything about whether or not people look at signatures on checks.

I will now let you have the last word in this thread, since you seem intent on getting there.