Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Goz on September 15, 2010 at 3:47pm

I agree,but it will never happen.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Patricia on September 15, 2010 at 4:30pm

I also think people should stop handing over, but that won't happen either. If they have the silly belief to start with, why do they need special buildings when their belief is 24/7, in or out of the place? Religion is just a money money money making business with absolute control of people made to feel guilty about not handing over more more more!!!!

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Nam Duong on September 15, 2010 at 6:17pm

No shit. Of course they gotta pay up.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by §kürrý on September 16, 2010 at 7:01am

I have no idea why they originally avoided taxes. It pisses me off that they have these huge monuments that exist only to exclaim how much money they are sucking out of people's pockets and not a penny goes to the country that allows them to do it. This has always bothered me and recently as these discussions about taxes have been going on and on I have thought we should start taxing the churches. I don't think we will be able to until 60% of the population is agnostic.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Pat on September 16, 2010 at 7:48am

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; Appears to me that giving religious institutions tax exempt status, the Federal Government is "respecting" that establishment by giving them a privilege denied to others.

However, Congress and the Courts have viewed it differently. Tax exempt status for charitable organizations have a long history in the US. Churches, being deemed to do "good works" were included in this category. When the Federal Income Tax was passed by Constitutional Amendment in the early part of the 20th century, exemptions were granted to religious, charitable, scientific and educational organizations. There have been various attempts to remove the exemptions for churches as a result of political campaigning, lobbying, and attempts to "influence legislation." However, these are at best, hit and miss or spotty. The Courts have left a lot of this type of decision process to the IRS under that agency's mandate to "provide needful rules and regulations." Unfortunately, the regulations regarding lobbying and attempt to influence legislation are murky, at best.

Where a denial of tax exempt status has been upheld to a church, the reasoning generally goes something like this. 1) A tax exempt status can be looked upon as a 'subsidy,' and 2) denying the subsidy as a result of political activity by a church does not infringe on the other part of the 1st Amendment guaranteeing free speech to the church.

The argument which will come from the pulpits is that if you deny them tax exempt status, then you should deny it to all other charities, education, and scientific institutions. Don't get me wrong. I don't agree with that analysis, since these other agencies actually do "good works." But I strongly suspect that will be the position of religious institutions.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Zero_6ix on September 16, 2010 at 9:32am

Yes, that will be their position. And their argument will go as follows-

WE DO THE BEST WORK! THE REST OF THESE SWINE WISH THEY DID WORK AS GOOD AS US!

Now, if real change were to come about, we would railroad an addendum that states that any tax-exempt institution will have to offer up yearly proof of their good works. You know, charities have to show all the nice houses they built, science has to show off science, and education would keep track of all advancing students. Religion would have to show how many souls they saved from hell. Of course, they would also have to show their hell to everyone. Can't do it? Then you pay taxes. Simple, really.

• ▶ Reply