tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8384632623933772727.post290037883172429182..comments2024-03-07T00:24:23.674-05:00Comments on FBC Jax Watchdogs: Lawsuit Settled with Eye Toward Making Positive ChangesFBC Jax Watchdoghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10740366031265491559noreply@blogger.comBlogger146125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8384632623933772727.post-37610313893536222192010-10-31T10:44:47.596-04:002010-10-31T10:44:47.596-04:00good post, stt!
Katie is blinded by hatred of Mac...good post, stt!<br /><br />Katie is blinded by hatred of Mac.<br /><br />Katie, you are attempting to teach biblical principle about tithing. If not on this particular blog, then certainly on other blogs. Are we not taught in scripture for women not to teach over men? Do you feel that God is a male shovenist? Or do you think there was a purpose for these lessons on proper roles in the Kingdom?<br /><br />There are many women in the church that think the Bible is wrong and outdated when it comes to proper roles in the church. Where do you stand? Do you believe in the inerrency and infallability of Scripture? If not, that is all we need to know. If you do, then where does your attempting to use this platform as an avenue to "teach" fall into the demands of Scripture?<br /><br />BTW-Thank you for serving our country. I mean that sincerely! :)Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8384632623933772727.post-56382727333156783922010-10-30T06:12:51.292-04:002010-10-30T06:12:51.292-04:00...Letters come after the fact. If a Pastor knows ......Letters come after the fact. If a Pastor knows of a member's insidiuous conduct and who is deliberately stirring up trouble, then he has a duty. Tom was costing the church, his church at the time, in more ways than just money.<br /><br />The question is how he got the information in the first place. Did Brunson order someone or pay for the information? How much was Mac involved with in the uncovering? Did he approve something? I am sure that if he had foreknowledge he certainly might have been a cheer leader. I do not know and I have not seen anything that demonstrates Mac's involvement with the deed of unveiling the WD. <br /><br />The problem that you have with blogging is that you cannot change the other person's statement or put words in their mouth.<br /><br /><b>The question is: What did Mac do to the WD before the Blog was started?</b><br /><br />Since you will not answer and you want to change the question, then I will answer for you again.<br /><br /><b>Mac did nothing to WD prior to the start-up of this blog.</b><br /><br />The lesson for everyone is to not expect the First Ammendment to protect your anonymity or privacy. Do not expect that your right to free speech can over-ride another's right's. <br /><br />You have the right to say what you want about me and I have the right to recover any damages that you cost me. However, if my own actions are the root cause of my loss, I have diminished or removed my chance of recovery.<br /><br />I believe that the framers of the constitution intentionally left out privacy.<br /><br /><br />By the way...in the end, Jesus's accuser's had to make themselves public knowledge. Their case against Jesus was just about as flimsy as WD's is against Mac.sttnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8384632623933772727.post-2819525236916973292010-10-30T01:59:48.411-04:002010-10-30T01:59:48.411-04:00Anon 12:01,
"Katie should assume her biblica...Anon 12:01,<br /><br />"Katie should assume her biblical role and stop attempting to teach biblical principle over men".<br /><br />Lame, lame, lame......<br /><br />The Bible says that women should be silent "in church". This is a blog and it in no way even resembles a church. Where oh where is the praise band?<br /><br />So, who would I be teaching Biblical principle to? If you have any problem answering that... see the OT teaching about Deborah. <br /><br />I'm not teaching any Biblical principle because there is no principle here to be discerned. Scripture is crystal clear in this regard. If you think women shouldn't be teaching things to men at all... then you might want to read up on Priscilla. <br /><br />It could be argued quite successfully that this isn't even a religious issue. It's a free speech issue. I spent 20+ years in the Navy defending your right or that of WD to say what you want without fear of recrimination. So think of me as your friendly Gulf war veteran and defender of the Constitution of this great country.<br /><br />stt, <br /><br />Who exactly do you think drafted the 2 discipline letters to WD? Do you really think that the Elders would send out such letters to any member of FBC JAX without Mac knowing about it first? If you do then that's evidence of how far you will go escape truth. Who exactly said "shut 'em down"? <br /><br />If you are really that ignorant of the facts, then you'll deserve what you get in return. The Bible instructs us to be Bereans. I take that charge quite seriously. But if you want to follow the leadership of a man who cannot even use scripture properly, that is your problem.<br /><br />The road is narrow indeed.Katienoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8384632623933772727.post-81626774468546156452010-10-29T20:50:55.826-04:002010-10-29T20:50:55.826-04:00Katie,
You have not answered the questions yet. ...Katie,<br /><br />You have not answered the questions yet. If it were Mac that manipulated the system and took the short-cut to get Tom's identity, it was a result of the blog entries. Facts are facts. <br /><br />I have not seen a single fact that identifies Mac as personally and directly connected to actions on the part of the JSO. If there is a direct connection what is it? Has someone stepped forward and shown documents that link Mac directly? Is there a witness of those activities. I think not. Maybe Hinson acted alone and on his own accord or used an investigation opportunistically. Good luck finding otherwise. <br /><br />Since you like the "other words" I will pose the question again.<br /><br />What did Mac do to WD, personally, before the blog was started? Did Mac poke fun of Tom, insult him, or slice his car tires? Did he bring Tom up before some committee and declare him unfit to teach a Sunday School class or keep him off the Deacon board?<br /><br />What did Mac do to WD, personally, before the exposure?<br /><br />You can say that Mac brought this upon himself and he is a false teacher and all the other nasty accusations that you can dream up. You can say that Tom is pure gold and the best thing that has happened to Christianity since the King James Bible and neither is relevant to the legal actions, if they ever get off the ground.<br /><br />You still will not answer the question. <br /><br />Everyone understands who started this matter and what the root cause of all of the lawsuits is. That fact has to weigh heavily on Tom's counsel and his advice. If you think that Tom has not calculated the probabilities of success and failure, then you think him naive. <br /><br />If you think that the fact that Tom started this matter is insignificant and juvenile, then you are naive.<br /><br /><br /><br />Your writing seems to have improved dramatically...congratulations, Katie.sttnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8384632623933772727.post-83216096063624594802010-10-29T12:01:04.545-04:002010-10-29T12:01:04.545-04:00The dangerous things that Tom was saying about Mac...The dangerous things that Tom was saying about Mac could have endangered his life. By the baseless accusations of Tom, some wacko could have put Mac and his family in danger. You have to be cautious what you say in public about people. Tom was neither cautious nor caring. He had an agenda, and that was to oust Mac. His hatred for Mac blinded any good judgement he might have had. Katie is obviously a disciple of Tom's, so she will defend him to the bitter end. Katie should assume her biblical role and stop attempting to teach biblical principle over men.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8384632623933772727.post-84638812876750592172010-10-29T07:18:02.721-04:002010-10-29T07:18:02.721-04:00sst says:
"Would someone please inform her t...sst says:<br /><br />"Would someone please inform her that privacy, nor anonymity is guaranteed in the constitution. <br /><br />As far as I know, no one has deprived or sought to deprive WD from free speech...if that is what she is referring to. WD got exposed in a "now you see the public record now you don't." I think the boys played a little rough with Tom, but, you fight fire with fire. "<br /><br />sst, what you're missing is that the courts are clear: the right to speak anonymously IS free speech. So to remove someone's anonymity against their will, to parties that the person does not want to know, IS TO BURDEN THE PERSON'S FIRST AMENDMENT RIGHTS. Certainly the govt has a role in doing this in many law enforcement scenarios, but they must have a legitimate purpose, one that will further the interests of the government. That is what this case is about. Did the detective's actions further a governmental interest in finding my identity and releasing it to the church, or was it a detective doing a favor for his church?<br /><br />If it was the latter, then this should be of grave concern of every citizen, because someone's right to speak anonymously was violated and there could be a violation of the establishment clause of the first amendment.<br /><br />So that was the case, and that was what discovery for months was about, why experts were deposed on both sides, try to answer the simple (yet complicated) question: was the detective furthering a governmental interest in what he did, or was he sharing his govt power with his church by doing a favor on behalf of his church, to further their interests, and not the government's.<br /><br />So it is a bit more complicated that you are making it out to be, and the questions are certainly much more important that what you and many others want to believe.FBC Jax Watchdoghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10740366031265491559noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8384632623933772727.post-15564070372635772742010-10-29T03:45:43.916-04:002010-10-29T03:45:43.916-04:00stt,
As a teacher trained in reading intervention...stt,<br /><br />As a teacher trained in reading intervention, I think your reading comprehension could use some improvement.<br /><br />Not only did I answer your question, so did WD. Mac used Holy Scripture in a dishonest way and that is gravely serious. Worse, his motive was to manipulate people and that's clearly sinful. The only thing worse would have been if WD didn't address this egregious act of dishonesty.<br /><br />I'm sure you are familiar with 'All that is necessary for evil to succeed is for good people to do nothing'. WD saw a serious wrong and set about to 'right it'. <br /><br />You also need civics 101. While the Constitution doesn't use the word privacy, it's clear that government cannot act irresponsibily to invade the lives of others without a greater purpose. That's why we insist on subpoenas. Unless of course you think government can come into your home anytime they get an idea to do so. <br /><br />But the issue here isn't even his privacy. Mac didn't care who it was, he just wanted it to stop and he used the power of government to violate WD's right under the Constitution to free speech. So he found out who was criticizing him to what end? Everyone knows that he went to extreme methods to find out who it was. It doesn't matter who it was, it matters that WD has the right to say it... so in the end, his identification is a secondary issue. It could have just as easily been me who said it. Free speech is a protected right and Mac used unlawful methods to try to get WD stopped. How'd that work out? It didn't work. I'd go so far as to say, it showed just how desperate Mac was and is. <br /><br />Did you even read the court's ruling on the subpoena issue? Clearly the Court had serious problems with the actions of the DA. <br /><br />Would it be okay with you, if I made up a bunch of unsubstantiated lies, to get government agents into your home, to search your private financial information, or what you feed your kids? I guess it would be since you seem to think the end justifies the means. The Framers would be appalled at that and if you don't know that fundamental fact about our country, then your education is seriously lacking. My third graders could figure this out.<br /><br />I notice you don't have any problem remaining anonymous. Any particular reason? You want WD to provide his identity yet you have no problem using anonymity yourself. What a hypocrite.Katienoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8384632623933772727.post-81686256487255715212010-10-28T18:32:08.546-04:002010-10-28T18:32:08.546-04:00Eh Katie Uh well...this is embarassing.
I am sorr...Eh Katie Uh well...this is embarassing.<br /><br />I am sorry! I do not have the heart for this. <br /><br />Would someone please inform her that privacy, nor anonymity is guaranteed in the constitution. <br /><br />As far as I know, no one has deprived or sought to deprive WD from free speech...if that is what she is referring to. WD got exposed in a "now you see the public record now you don't." I think the boys played a little rough with Tom, but, you fight fire with fire. <br /><br />You can do or say whatever you want to. The issue is whether you are willing to accept responsiblity for your words.<br /><br />Speaking of dishonesty...<br /><br />The question was "What exactly did Mac do to the dog prior to the Blog? Be precise. What did Mac do, personally, to Mr. Rich prior to the Blog?"<br /><br />Since you changed the question, I presume that you agree that Mac really did not do anything to Tom...personally.sttnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8384632623933772727.post-53139605891675976662010-10-28T14:54:24.837-04:002010-10-28T14:54:24.837-04:00"Actually, you are really admitting how the i..."Actually, you are really admitting how the insatiable money hungry preacher and his family view their congregations. "Either give more money to our budget here, or money is your God." Sad and pathetic. But not surprising coming from someone who believes they are entitled to "God's money" to support the whole family. :)"<br /><br />What is pathetic is that you would bring the families of the pastors that you hate into your realm of hate. You are a sad pathetic human who is void of the love of Christ!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8384632623933772727.post-37155391198759057932010-10-28T14:51:34.610-04:002010-10-28T14:51:34.610-04:00"Wrong again! The city's maximum liabilit..."Wrong again! The city's maximum liability exposure per F.S. 768.28 is $100,000. For them to pay $50,000 is a major, major deal. They do NOT pay such claims lightly. Keep trying anon."<br /><br />That may be max insurance liability, but the award could have been much larger. The settlement was an easy decision for the city. Litigation is expensive. Insurance premiums can skyrocket in the event of an expensive litigation.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8384632623933772727.post-80832906615001411582010-10-28T14:40:43.387-04:002010-10-28T14:40:43.387-04:00Annons.10:23AM and 10:32AM: Agree Agree!Annons.10:23AM and 10:32AM: Agree Agree!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8384632623933772727.post-75423358660429858392010-10-28T13:24:18.867-04:002010-10-28T13:24:18.867-04:00stt,
Please enlighten us all on why Mac felt he h...stt,<br /><br />Please enlighten us all on why Mac felt he had to involve the city of Jacksonville's Sheriff's office in his quest to find out who was hurting his poor, itty-bitty feelings, or who had the nerve to disagree with him? Do you think that any Pastor has the right to infringe on your 1st amendment rights? Pastors don't want the government to tell them what to say when it comes to subjects like adultery, and homosexuality, so why should they not afford that same concern to someone who disagrees with them? <br /><br />The fact is that Mac is a bully and he used his power to violate WD's rights. You cannot dispose of that fact. It's right in front of you. People like you only add to the sense of power, people like Mac have. I can't see that he can even tell right from wrong. For goodness sakes, he and the serial liar Ergun Caner collaborated on a book. <br /><br />If you care about the Great Commission at all, you'd run for your life and find a church where the Gospel is taught as written, not manipulated to accuse Christians of selfishness. <br /><br />You ask what exactly Mac did? I can tell you. He handled scripture in a dishonest way and he berated and accused people of robbing God. It's bad enough to treat your flock like disobedient children, but it's far worse to take the HOLY SCRIPTURES and misuse them to do it. <br /><br />WAKE UP! Our churches and church leaders are guilty of the real criminal behavior. They take your money and spend it on private planes, PR firms, etc. They have invited the moneychangers into your temple and you should be just as angry as Jesus was. If you aren't then I can't imagine that you really have your eyes on Jesus. It looks to me like your eyes are on Mac. Dear God in Heaven, what an abomination that is. <br /><br />WD had the courage to say enough of this. I'm grateful to him and his family. All of Christendom is being ridiculed because of the greedy and UnGodly leadership that shows the world, that Christians really are deluded and stupid for falling prey to these predators called Pastors. There are still very kind and loving Pastors out there. The kind who love to nurture their flocks with the truth of scripture and they'd never think of using it in such a heinous was as Mac does. <br /><br />The church of Jesus Christ isn't on a hill in Rome covered with gold and jewels, and it isn't in mega auditoriums with every technical gadget we can use. Most of the television ministries are completely and totally corrupt. The church isn't about buying private jets and multi-million dollar homes or hiring PR firms. It is about Jesus who came to save us from our corruptible sin and who showed us how to live. <br /><br />I don't want to compare Jesus to WD, but Jesus did tell us to run from the Pharisees... and Mac is a Pharisee. Also remember that it was these people who killed Jesus. WD simply rang the bell and I'm glad he did. <br /><br />If you have any influence with Mac, do the right thing and implore him to apologize and take responsibility for his sin.Katienoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8384632623933772727.post-43423819946180161332010-10-28T10:32:10.119-04:002010-10-28T10:32:10.119-04:00"I believe that the correct way to handle thi..."I believe that the correct way to handle things is confidentially, directly, privately, and with a solution in hand. I have done that a few times at work and no one has ever outted me as a trouble maker. You only need to go with an open mind and make sure that you speak well and in an organized manner. Be prepared to see the other persons point of view."<br />___________________________________<br /><br /><br />Well, more proof that some have learned nothing about why the blog was started in the first place. <br /><br />And by the way, I don't care what you believe. If you don't want to handle things different from how you like them, then expect a blog to form and stay out there for years with a national readership. It is your choice. So accept it and move on please.<br /><br />Like Jesus said, someone from the grave could come back and tell them the truth and they wouldn't believe it. <br /><br />Christians are some of the most stubborn, blind, hard headed people ever. Nothing will ever change their mind when they believe they are right. Sheesh!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8384632623933772727.post-58513641550277654462010-10-28T10:23:53.645-04:002010-10-28T10:23:53.645-04:00Simple. Their money is their god.
October 27, 201...Simple. Their money is their god.<br /><br />October 27, 2010 1:13 PM<br />___________________________________<br /><br />Actually, you are really admitting how the insatiable money hungry preacher and his family view their congregations. "Either give more money to our budget here, or money is your God." Sad and pathetic. But not surprising coming from someone who believes they are entitled to "God's money" to support the whole family. :)Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8384632623933772727.post-23101015091470107522010-10-28T10:20:59.019-04:002010-10-28T10:20:59.019-04:00Tom knew all along the city would settle and that ...Tom knew all along the city would settle and that would give them the appearance of wrongdoing. A settlement does not equal an admission of wrongdoing. Quite honestly, this is chump change to the city. Usually the larger the settlement, the greater the chances of guilt. Although $75,000 is massive bucks to me, it is pennies to a municipality like Jacksonville.<br />___________________________________<br /><br />Wrong again! The city's maximum liability exposure per F.S. 768.28 is $100,000. For them to pay $50,000 is a major, major deal. They do NOT pay such claims lightly. Keep trying anon.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8384632623933772727.post-33845628728711594832010-10-28T10:19:04.913-04:002010-10-28T10:19:04.913-04:00If we had a loser pay system where the loser would...If we had a loser pay system where the loser would pay all court costs and lawyer fees resulting from their insane lawsuit, you would see a lot more litigation.<br />___________________________________<br /><br />News flash: We DO have a loser pay system. Nuff said.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8384632623933772727.post-67871839651040847362010-10-27T20:59:19.527-04:002010-10-27T20:59:19.527-04:00"Don't be anonymous"
Well said anon..."Don't be anonymous"<br /><br />Well said anon, and "anon sst".<br /><br />:)FBC Jax Watchdoghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10740366031265491559noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8384632623933772727.post-60987367042626594482010-10-27T20:54:23.800-04:002010-10-27T20:54:23.800-04:00"I believe that the correct way to handle thi..."I believe that the correct way to handle things is confidentially, directly, privately, and with a solution in hand. I have done that a few times at work and no one has ever outted me as a trouble maker. You only need to go with an open mind and make sure that you speak well and in an organized manner. Be prepared to see the other persons point of view."<br /><br /><br />well said, stt.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8384632623933772727.post-34151642218673076612010-10-27T18:01:27.892-04:002010-10-27T18:01:27.892-04:00Wow!
So Dog is right and Brunson is wrong?
I m...Wow! <br /><br />So Dog is right and Brunson is wrong?<br /><br />I must have missed something. Dog admitted. in previous posts, that he never confronted Mac with his concerns and that he chose to air things anonymously and publicly. <br /><br />I believe that the correct way to handle things is confidentially, directly, privately, and with a solution in hand. I have done that a few times at work and no one has ever outted me as a trouble maker. You only need to go with an open mind and make sure that you speak well and in an organized manner. Be prepared to see the other persons point of view.<br /><br /><br />Try it! It might work and if you do it properly the other party will respect you forever.sttnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8384632623933772727.post-20318253545246309432010-10-27T14:20:45.234-04:002010-10-27T14:20:45.234-04:00To STT and other spiritual zombies, who worshipful...To STT and other spiritual zombies, who worshipfully follows some guy on a platform:<br /><br />Your Mac-O-Latern will get lit up nicely come court time. Why don't you just encourage Mac to settle this thing now, out of court, make an apology and let the fellowship avoid this nasty and needless routine?<br /><br />Why the Baptist-Jihad against some one who asks valid, but unpopular questions? Why the Stalin-esque tactics to silence them?<br /><br />This so much like the Spanish inquisition. You guys amaze and astound me with your mindless following of some guy with a microphone or TV image, droning away about money and strict adherance to twisted scripture.<br /><br />Knowing this about Mac, I am glad he aint in Dallas anymo'.<br /><br />GarlandoAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8384632623933772727.post-40708380243697205422010-10-27T13:20:04.236-04:002010-10-27T13:20:04.236-04:00WRONG! No one has to "foot the bill" for...WRONG! No one has to "foot the bill" for wife and son(s) to be hired on staff. No one has to foot the bill for millions and millions of bloated salaries, renovations, overhead, wasteful spending, Maurilio's services, TV advertising, and anything else mac decides to do. WAKE UP! Christians do NOT, NOT, NOT, have to "foot the bill" for your family empire!<br /><br /><br /><br />Wake up Christians!!! No you do not have to "foot the bill" for the missionary in China. No you do not have to "foot the bill" for the missionary in the mountains of West Virginia. No you do not have to "foot the bill" for the service of a Pastor who prepares to exposit God's Word (regardless of what Paul said in II Timothy. What did Paul know?) Wake up, Christians, these things are not done on a have to basis (grundgingly). These things are done willingly (cheerfully). Therein lies the blessings of God.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8384632623933772727.post-71867269953299793402010-10-27T13:13:27.495-04:002010-10-27T13:13:27.495-04:00By the way, if every church has the majority of pe...By the way, if every church has the majority of people not tithing, even though they are being taught it...what does that tell you?<br /><br /><br />Simple. Their money is their god.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8384632623933772727.post-52285124002723056962010-10-27T13:12:11.768-04:002010-10-27T13:12:11.768-04:00Are you saying that the city will spend $25,000 de...Are you saying that the city will spend $25,000 defending a frivolous lawsuit against a detective, then offer to pay $50,000 as a business decision when they believe the city and the detective did nothing wrong?<br /><br /><br />Yes, because the cost to litigate frivilous lawsuits can run up into the hundreds of thousands of dollars. Also, the city could decide that it is worth doing to protect their image. It happens everyday. If we had a loser pay system where the loser would pay all court costs and lawyer fees resulting from their insane lawsuit, you would see a lot more litigation.<br /><br />Tom knew all along the city would settle and that would give them the appearance of wrongdoing. A settlement does not equal an admission of wrongdoing. Quite honestly, this is chump change to the city. Usually the larger the settlement, the greater the chances of guilt. Although $75,000 is massive bucks to me, it is pennies to a municipality like Jacksonville.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8384632623933772727.post-52737289138311564502010-10-27T10:44:26.840-04:002010-10-27T10:44:26.840-04:00If everyone tithed then preachers would never have...If everyone tithed then preachers would never have to preach controversial money sermons. Every church that I have ever been a part of has the same set of circumstances when it comes to tither's.<br />___________________________________<br /><br />WRONG! If everyone tithed, the insatiable millionaires would build bigger buildings, hire more staff, take more trips, hire more consulting firms, buy more advertising and then preach "the tithe is just the beginning point" and "if 10% was under the law, shouldn't we do more under grace." <br /><br />By the way, if every church has the majority of people not tithing, even though they are being taught it...what does that tell you? It tells me that the majority can't be fooled and are not as gullible as you boys wish they were. But keep beating them up. The more you beat the more they give. Now that is true of all churches. Amen?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8384632623933772727.post-39220941249957726022010-10-27T10:41:12.947-04:002010-10-27T10:41:12.947-04:00As for tithing...someone has to foot the bill.
___...As for tithing...someone has to foot the bill.<br />___________________________________<br /><br />WRONG! No one has to "foot the bill" for wife and son(s) to be hired on staff. No one has to foot the bill for millions and millions of bloated salaries, renovations, overhead, wasteful spending, Maurilio's services, TV advertising, and anything else mac decides to do. WAKE UP! Christians do NOT, NOT, NOT, have to "foot the bill" for your family empire!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com