Originally posted by Starlight
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
Civics 101 Guidelines
Want to argue about politics? Healthcare reform? Taxes? Governments? You've come to the right place!
Try to keep it civil though. The rules still apply here.
Try to keep it civil though. The rules still apply here.
See more
See less
O�Rourke: Churches Should Lose Tax-exempt Status
Collapse
X
-
The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.
-
Originally posted by NorrinRadd View PostI've been thinking for quite a while -- like, decades -- that one of the worst things churches ever did was accept tax-exempt status. Whatever the original intent, it has long since turned into a backdoor way to nullify the First Amendment.
In a way, you have a point about the first amendment, because Congress should ALREADY (without the 501(c)3) leave churches alone concerning taxation and control, "not prohibiting the free exercise thereof".
There are many churches in our country that have chosen NOT to apply for 501(c)3 status -- they simply don't pay taxes because churches in the US were never required to.The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.
Comment
-
As the judiciary becomes more conservative, we'll probably see fewer churches bothering with 501(c)3 - or paying taxes. The IRS doesn't want another court battle and really doesn't want one without a sympathetic judiciary."He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep to gain that which he cannot lose." - Jim Elliot
"Forgiveness is the way of love." Gary Chapman
My Personal Blog
My Novella blog (Current Novella Begins on 7/25/14)
Quill Sword
Comment
-
Originally posted by Teallaura View PostAs the judiciary becomes more conservative, we'll probably see fewer churches bothering with 501(c)3 - or paying taxes. The IRS doesn't want another court battle and really doesn't want one without a sympathetic judiciary.
(It is an incredible tax advantage that, among other things, benefits smaller churches by making it easier for them to afford to pay clergy)The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Cow Poke View PostAnd the "worldly book" (that you so frequently denigrate) and the Love of Jesus taught therein - that's why I am like I am.
Comment
-
Originally posted by firstfloor View PostThat was my upbringing too. Sunday school, Bible class, prayers were read every day at school, and so on. I became a heathen quite late in life, but there is a Christian foundation to it.
I really think people who have run up against some element of faith they find distasteful need to take a step back and recognize the cost of actually ridding society of the Judeo/Christian values and beliefs that really do form a good bit of the foundation of western civilization.
JimMy brethren, do not hold your faith in our glorious Lord Jesus Christ with an attitude of personal favoritism. James 2:1
If anyone thinks himself to be religious, and yet does not bridle his tongue but deceives his own heart, this man’s religion is worthless James 1:26
This you know, my beloved brethren. But everyone must be quick to hear, slow to speak and slow to anger; James 1:19
Comment
-
Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post"NOT taxing" religious organizations is not "subsidizing" them - the members of those organizations already pay taxes.
See Texas Monthly, Inc. v. Bullock for SCOTUS confirming that a religious tax exemption amounts to a subsidy that other tax-payers have to pay and striking down a Texas law giving tax exemptions to religious publications.
SCOTUS ruling...
"a subsidy [that] incidentally benefits religious groups... [would be fine] so long as it is conferred on a wide array of nonsectarian groups as well as religious organizations in pursuit of some legitimate secular end.
However, when, as here, government directs a subsidy exclusively to religious organizations... it cannot be viewed as anything but impermissible state sponsorship of religion
Because it confines itself exclusively to such religious publications, the Texas exemption lacks a secular objective that would justify its preference along with similar benefits for nonreligious publications or groups."
And the first amendment prohibits Congress from making any law that would prohibit the free exercise of religion, so, there's that.
As far as I can tell, in general the tax-exempt status specifically for churches or religious organisations would not be considered constitutional by SCOTUS due to the above. But a tax exemption for charities in general is considered to be fine (and churches happen to be one form of charity). Because a subsidy/tax-exemption for charities in general "is conferred on a wide array of nonsectarian groups as well as religious organizations in pursuit of some legitimate secular end [that only] incidentally benefits religious groups", and therefore legal according to the SCOTUS decision above."I hate him passionately", he's "a demonic force" - Tucker Carlson, in private, on Donald Trump
"Every line of serious work that I have written since 1936 has been written, directly or indirectly, against totalitarianism and for democratic socialism" - George Orwell
"[Capitalism] as it exists today is, in my opinion, the real source of evils. I am convinced there is only one way to eliminate these grave evils, namely through the establishment of a socialist economy" - Albert Einstein
Comment
-
Originally posted by oxmixmudd View PostAs are many atheists in western countries. And in many ways you do not know the extent to which you have benefited from the basic moral values that were instilled in such an upbringing, or the type of loving community you likely grew up in. I realize there are dysfunctional situations, and I do not know your specific circumstances, so I do not want to presume what your specific situation is, nevertheless, in general a church community is a loving supporting group of people that look out for one another, pray for each other, bring food, take care of kids, even offer financial when sickness or other calamities strike. For many that have chosen to walk away from faith, that sort of concept of community and love still forms the basis of what they believe is good and right. And the effect on society as a whole of removing that foundation is for most of us unknown.
I really think people who have run up against some element of faith they find distasteful need to take a step back and recognize the cost of actually ridding society of the Judeo/Christian values and beliefs that really do form a good bit of the foundation of western civilization.
...right up until you actually start to look at the empirical evidence. The least religious countries in the world, who are majority atheist, tend to be the ones who are doing the best (in terms of almost any international comparison you care to pick - e.g. happiness, low murder rate, lack of corruption, life expectancy, general multi-variate comparisons etc.)
A list of the top-10 least religious countries in the world, is pretty much a list of wonderful countries to live in (Australia, Sweden, Germany, Netherlands, New Zealand, Luxembourg, Denmark, Canada, France, Austria). That is certainly NOT a list of countries that are "going to hell in a hand-basket" or who are falling apart as a result of abandoning their Christian roots.
A list of the top-10 most religious countries in the world is pretty much a list of atrociously awful countries to live in. (Algeria, Chad, Ghana, Mali, Qatar, Republic of the Congo, Rwanda, Zambia, Cambodia, Cameroon) With the possible exception of Qatar, religion doesn't seem to be making these countries great.
So why doesn't abandoning religion cause countries to fall apart? The simple answer, as far as I can see from living in a majority-atheistic country is that the moral values you mention "community and love... forms the basis of what they believe is good and right" is just as true, even more true, of secular non-religious people, as it is of Christians. For Christians, morality is quite complicated and the ~1000 different commands in the Old and New Testaments interact in various ways to produce an overall and complex moral code, that you are are only very loosely boiling down here. I'm not objecting to your summary, but we should acknowledge that you're oversimplifying it greatly and what Christians believe, and focus on, and spend their time on is a lot more complex than that. Whereas for most secular non-religious people, to them the word "morality" is just a synonym for "altruism" aka "loving and helping others". It's direct, and straightforward, and they don't spend time tying themselves into pretzels over issues of how some parts of the bible affect the interpretation of other parts of the bible with regard to how they should act, they just try to be loving toward others."I hate him passionately", he's "a demonic force" - Tucker Carlson, in private, on Donald Trump
"Every line of serious work that I have written since 1936 has been written, directly or indirectly, against totalitarianism and for democratic socialism" - George Orwell
"[Capitalism] as it exists today is, in my opinion, the real source of evils. I am convinced there is only one way to eliminate these grave evils, namely through the establishment of a socialist economy" - Albert Einstein
Comment
-
Originally posted by Teallaura View PostThe power to tax is the power to destroy.
Government literally has no right to tax churches at all.
And 'subsidy' doesn't mean 'no taxation'.Last edited by Starlight; 10-12-2019, 05:00 PM."I hate him passionately", he's "a demonic force" - Tucker Carlson, in private, on Donald Trump
"Every line of serious work that I have written since 1936 has been written, directly or indirectly, against totalitarianism and for democratic socialism" - George Orwell
"[Capitalism] as it exists today is, in my opinion, the real source of evils. I am convinced there is only one way to eliminate these grave evils, namely through the establishment of a socialist economy" - Albert Einstein
Comment
-
Originally posted by Starlight View PostThere's no meaningful difference between having your taxes waived versus paying your taxes and then being sent a subsidy check from the government equal to the amount of taxes paid. They amount to the same thing.
You bring up an interesting point though -- if Americans had to actually PAY their taxes - as in sit down and write a check - there'd be a whole lot more tax rebellion. The government fools people into thinking that "getting a refund" is a GOOD thing, when all that happens is that any "refund" due is the taxpayer's money used interest-free by the government.The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Cow Poke View PostThe taxes of the members are not waived - they pay the same whether they are church members or not.
if Americans had to actually PAY their taxes - as in sit down and write a check - there'd be a whole lot more tax rebellion.
In other Western countries, taxes happen automatically in the background, the average person doesn't see them happening and never needs to devote time or brainpower to working out their taxes or focusing on the subject. e.g. here all prices for goods are tax inclusive, and the vast majority of people don't need to file any end-of-year tax returns or know their tax number. So for the average person there's never any in-your-face taxation the way there is in the US. For the average person, taxes are a theoretical mathematical and political concept rather than something they ever interact with in their everyday lives. This doesn't stop right-wingers pushing for lower taxes, but it does mean that the population isn't continuously annoying by having to spend time and effort on taxes."I hate him passionately", he's "a demonic force" - Tucker Carlson, in private, on Donald Trump
"Every line of serious work that I have written since 1936 has been written, directly or indirectly, against totalitarianism and for democratic socialism" - George Orwell
"[Capitalism] as it exists today is, in my opinion, the real source of evils. I am convinced there is only one way to eliminate these grave evils, namely through the establishment of a socialist economy" - Albert Einstein
Comment
-
Originally posted by Starlight View PostPeople who donate to churches are able to claim back the taxes they paid on the income they used for the donation.
ANYBODY, however, may give money or things to a charitable organization - including to a Church - and they'll get a deduction for that.
Basically that amounts to nothing but a government subsidy of those religious organisations from general taxpayer funds (including from taxpayers who wouldn't want to support that particular religious organisation).
You really got this mixed up, ff.
ETA: And MANY people voluntarily donate money or things WITHOUT claiming the deduction.Last edited by Cow Poke; 10-12-2019, 05:57 PM.The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Starlight View PostI think there already is more tax rebellion in the US than in other Western countries just because your tax system is so convoluted and so manual that it keeps it in the forefront of people's mind's
(and I think this is part of the intent behind why Republicans work to ensure it remains convoluted).
ff, you are demonstrating a profound ignorance of American taxation.The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Cow Poke View PostI was talking about Churches made of up Church members, and those members are taxed just like anybody else.
ANYBODY, however, may give money or things to a charitable organization - including to a Church - and they'll get a deduction for that.
You seem really, really, confused on this subject. Your posts are bonkers. You also seem to keep calling me ff... so I assume you're as confused about to my identity as you are about the subject, and think I'm FirstFloor?"I hate him passionately", he's "a demonic force" - Tucker Carlson, in private, on Donald Trump
"Every line of serious work that I have written since 1936 has been written, directly or indirectly, against totalitarianism and for democratic socialism" - George Orwell
"[Capitalism] as it exists today is, in my opinion, the real source of evils. I am convinced there is only one way to eliminate these grave evils, namely through the establishment of a socialist economy" - Albert Einstein
Comment
-
Originally posted by Starlight View PostYes, that's what I saidThe first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.
Comment
Related Threads
Collapse
Topics | Statistics | Last Post | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
Started by Ronson, Today, 08:45 AM
|
5 responses
50 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by Ronson
Today, 03:01 PM
|
||
Started by Cow Poke, 05-03-2024, 01:19 PM
|
26 responses
205 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by seanD
Today, 03:06 PM
|
||
Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 05-03-2024, 12:23 PM
|
100 responses
422 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by alaskazimm
Today, 10:09 PM
|
||
Started by Cow Poke, 05-03-2024, 11:46 AM
|
21 responses
138 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by Mountain Man
Yesterday, 06:52 AM
|
||
Started by seer, 05-03-2024, 04:37 AM
|
23 responses
115 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by seanD
05-03-2024, 02:49 PM
|
Comment