There you go again, baldbeardedbahamian, ignorantly and maliciously broad brushing every pastor and every church, including those you know nothing about! You demonstrate your ignorance and unreasonableness by such unconditional, sweeping statements, and I doubt that you would do so if you were not hiding behind a pen-name. Anyone who has personal shame would not put their name to the things you are saying. They are devoid of evidence and civility.

You also seem not to understand the difference between for profit and non-profit companies, which accounts for how they are treated in terms of the payment or non-payment of business license fees. In the case of VAT and NIB, all churches pay them, and there is no credit. Most businesses in this country do not really pay VAT at the end of the day; they pay VAT and collect VAT and give the net to the government. So if a business pays VAT of $100 and collects VAT of $150, the business pays the $50 difference to the government, and essentially the business paid no VAT; its customers did. VAT is a tax paid on the backs of consumers, and this is why so many business owners love VAT and customs duties hate income tax. Are you one of them?

Also, the owners of for-profit companies can handle their profits however they wish for their personal benefit. If the profits of non-profit companies are handled for the personal benefit of anyone, it is an offence, and such companies will lose their license if caught.

While I agree with you that some pastors live off offerings, I'm not one of them. It is public knowledge to many, many Bahamians that I made my money in the international financial services sector, and I continue to make the overwhelming amount of my income from the international financial services company I founded and in which I continue as a significant minority shareholder. So, when you broad brush pastors and churches and paint them in a negative light, please don't include me. We can disagree, but let's be respectful, civil, and honest.

It would be great if we could have constructive criticism of content and not people.

Baldbeardedbahamian,

It is interesting that in accusing me of not understanding the message taught by Jesus, I respectfully submit that demonstrate your own biblical illiteracy and ignorance about Scripture in general and what Jesus taught in particular. But you hide behind a pen name, so I guess you're not embarrassed by it. i encourage you to read your bible as a whole and not as a disjointed book. Almighty God is the divine author of all of Scripture, and there is no contradiction between the Old and New Testaments.

CatislandBoy, read my letter. I do not support the death penalty as a deterrent to murder. I support it because it is the fit and proper punishment for murder.

You are amazing: You conclude that I and the rest of churches are doing nothing to correct the situation because you have yet to hear what social programs we are doing! When since you became the standard! You don't hear everything! Come on, be reasonable!

Economist, since you seemed to miss my foundational point, I'll restate it:
"To be clear, I do not support the death penalty as a reaction to our high rate of murder (even though I firmly believe that swift and consistent execution of convicted murderers will reduce our high rate of murder). I support the death penalty because it is the only just and fitting punishment for the crime of murder."

It is very easy to hide behind a pen name and make comments like yours. If you disagree with my position on marriage, criticize my position, but don't attack me and attribute ulterior motives to me. I don't need to try to attract funding for the church that I'm privileged to serve, and if I did I would not be speaking what I know to be the truth about marriage. Speaking the truth is not a recommended way to win friends and seduce people to give you money. Instead, you tell them falsehoods and what they want to hear. By God's grace, I'll never resort to such conduct.

I have a few questions for those who feel that the debauchery and sexual immorality of carnival should be allowed in public in The Bahamas:

Would any of you object to your neighbours having sex their yard where you and/or your children are able to see them doing so?

What about women walking around in their yard or in the street in a g-string or in the streets, in full view of you and your children? Would you object?

What about loud, blaring music? Should people be allowed to blare music in public at ear drum damaging levels?

All of these questions are relevant for carnival.

My point is simple. We live in shared space, and we have to be considerate of each other. I don't believe we should allow people to block up our streets, intoxicate themselves, and be on their worst behaviour, half naked and virtually having sex on the street, while blaring music. And it is simplistic to say that I don't have to watch it. That's not the point.

If everyone gets to do what he or she wants to do in public space, we will have anarchy. We need commonsense rules to govern how we live in shared space.

I fully concur, ThisisOurs. And the so called carnival band owners want a protected oligopoly just like the few who operate numbers gambling houses. The whole thing is a recipe for disaster and further moral decadence, and both the overturning of the gambling referendum and the introduction of carnival are bankrupt ideas of former PM Mr. Christie and his PLP government, all intended to enrich a few at the expense of the country, and an attempt to try to give legitimacy to what is and will always be illegitimate.

Sorry for being long winded!