It's High Time The Churches Began To Do The Fair Thing

[JohnA]

You don't like the Christian-based United States of America - move your Commie ass to Tehran, asswipe.

if you dont like the freedom to express a dislike towards those who put chrisitanity * in your face * take a hike bigot

 

[strollingbones]

 

[JohnA]

You don't like the Christian-based United States of America - move your Commie ass to Tehran, asswipe.

Sorry AMERICA IS NOT CHRISTIAN based how ever much you would like it to be
the foundling fathers gave us freedon of religion* get it *

 

[Avatar4321]

Cammpbell doesn't give a shit about that.

Nor does he care that if we taxed the churches, they would have less money to do all the hugely valuable work that they do. He has a one track mind that is incapable of using critical thought... or even basic comprehension.

I have to disagree with you. He's a bitter angry man. I dont have a doubt that he wants their money taken so that they are unable to do the hugely valuable work that they do. He has a problem with the work they do.

 

[MaryL]

There seems to be a thin line between Business and religion nowadays. Those hucksters that beg for money on TV, they can pay a few extra pennys. Those that contribute to political action committees. Who we call the "church" here seems to be the key word.

 

[Cuyo]

Then you have a business that became a "religion", just to escape taxes, Scientology.

Scientology is a cult, not a religion.

not according to the tax codes. And all religions are cults

Man SP, when you're right, you're right.

 

[Cuyo]

You don't like the Christian-based United States of America - move your Commie ass to Tehran, asswipe.

And you, you're just a fucking idiot.

 

[Avatar4321]

You don't like the Christian-based United States of America - move your Commie ass to Tehran, asswipe.

if you dont like the freedom to express a dislike towards those who put chrisitanity * in your face * take a hike bigot

No one is criticizing Campppbell or anyone elses right to express dislike towards Christians.

We are critcizing the content of what he is saying.

There's a difference.

 

[Avatar4321]

You don't like the Christian-based United States of America - move your Commie ass to Tehran, asswipe.

Sorry AMERICA IS NOT CHRISTIAN based how ever much you would like it to be
the foundling fathers gave us freedon of religion* get it *

Freedom of religion is a Judeo-Christian principle.

 

[AmericanFirst]

Scientology is a cult, not a religion.

not according to the tax codes. And all religions are cults

Man SP, when you're right, you're right.

Tax codes are wrong. Scientology is made up by a man, therefore it is a cult. Before you embarrass yourself, Christianity was not started by one man and is not a cult.

 

[Dr Grump]

You don't like the Christian-based United States of America - move your Commie ass to Tehran, asswipe.

Sorry AMERICA IS NOT CHRISTIAN based how ever much you would like it to be
the foundling fathers gave us freedon of religion* get it *

Freedom of religion is a Judeo-Christian principle.

With Jews yes, with Christians - only within the past couple of hundred years....

 

[Dr Grump]

not according to the tax codes. And all religions are cults

Man SP, when you're right, you're right.

Tax codes are wrong. Scientology is made up by a man, therefore it is a cult. Before you embarrass yourself, Christianity was not started by one man and is not a cult.

Christianity was started by man too. And you can bet your arse it started out as a cult. There are two main differences between Scientology and Christianity. Christianity has a better/more believable story around it. And time. If Scientology is still around in 2000 years from now, it will be pretty mainstream...

 

[Cuyo]

not according to the tax codes. And all religions are cults

Man SP, when you're right, you're right.

Tax codes are wrong. Scientology is made up by a man, therefore it is a cult. Before you embarrass yourself, Christianity was not started by one man and is not a cult.

They're all cults. An extremely successful and widespread cult is still a cult.

And I don't care what you call it... TAX THEM.

 

[Avatar4321]

Sorry AMERICA IS NOT CHRISTIAN based how ever much you would like it to be
the foundling fathers gave us freedon of religion* get it *

Freedom of religion is a Judeo-Christian principle.

With Jews yes, with Christians - only within the past couple of hundred years....

If by that you mean it's only been a few hundred years since Christians have been actively supporting their scriptures, then you may have a point.

 

[JohnA]

No business should be tax exempt. And religion is big business.

While I will agree that there are SOME churches that are run like a business...others are not. And most churches provide a lot for their communities. In our area, churches run a homeless shelter in the winter...they provide community suppers and lunches, all for free to those who ask as long as there is room. They provide gas for people who need it, bus tickets so people can get to work...I know a church that provides room and board for homeless families, this while they can't afford to replace their roof.

Then I know a church that has a restaurant, a book store and the preacher flies in a helicoptor...they don't provide a whole lot for the community and they get the same tax exempt status.

I don't know, maybe there should be something to qualify them for tax exempt status other than just declaring they're a church?

I can speak only for my own Church. The Catholic Church - and we do more charitable work, provide more money, provide more aid, food, shelter, clothing, etc than any other organization on this earth.

yes and have more pedifiles in your organization than any other on this earth
have more art treasures in the vatican than any other organization on this earth .
discriminate against women more than any other organization in this world .

 

[Dr Grump]

Freedom of religion is a Judeo-Christian principle.

With Jews yes, with Christians - only within the past couple of hundred years....

If by that you mean it's only been a few hundred years since Christians have been actively supporting their scriptures, then you may have a point.

No, I mean when you say freedom OF religion, I assume you are talking about the right to persue your own religion. Up until the past couple of hundred years (and even a lot more recent than that) if you were a heretic, you were in all sorts of trouble. Salem witch trials, medieval Europe, inquisition etc, reformation

 

[California Girl]

And own a tonne of property, don't allow priests or nuns to shag, are against abortion, and don't believe in contraception in an already over crowded world...and I would argue the Red Cross do more....

There are up and down sides....

You can argue it if you want. But the facts will not support your opinion. You are trying to compare an apple to an orange anyway, so it's irrelevant. The fact remains that the Catholic Church is the largest charitable organization on the planet. It does more, gives more, feeds more, houses more, supports more, and does more for humanity generally than any nation, charity, group or individual anywhere.

Your comments about 'shagging' are not only irrelevant, they are petty, childish and stupid so I'll ignore it.

Also, simple fact: if we force churches to pay taxes, they will have far less money to help those who need help. You might think that's a good idea but.... if they pull their support then the government will have to take up that slack. Logic. And who the fuck is gonna pay for that? Yep, taxes.

Links please to the Catholic Church being the largest charitable organisation.

I agree with regard to comments about taxes, but it bugs me that an organisation like Scientology gets the exemption. Then again, maybe they do charity work....

You may call it childish, but I find the church's stance on priests and nuns pathetic. You may also call it childish, but it was one of the reasons for the reformation and Henry the VIII splitting from the Catholic Church (albeit a minor one, as his libido was the main cause of that little skirmish). It is both unnatural and pathetic to expect humans to be celibate....

There are many things that I - as a Catholic - have an issue with regarding my Church, but, frankly, unless you are Catholic, I fail to see why it is anyone's business. I don't expect you to live according to my standards, and it would be great if you recognized that you don't have the right to expect others to live to yours. Priests and nuns all accept celibacy as part of their calling. It is their business - not mine, not yours. In short, mind you own business about how they choose to live. Simple.

I agree about 'religions' such as Scientology. But, frankly, I'd rather they get tax exempt status than do the untold amounts of damage to society that forcing all churches to pay taxes would do. If the Churches paid taxes, then they would not be able to do the huge amount of support and aid to our most vulnerable. To me, that outweighs any argument for the taxes. God knows (pun intended) that the Churches spend money better than the Government ever could.

As for a link, the only one that I deem legitimate is one that you would dismiss, because it comes from the Church itself.

Oh, and before you hold the Red Cross up as a shining example... it is an unfair comparison - for the Red Cross. Because it pays its employees - frankly, I am stunned that it pays so much in salaries - particular to it's CEO, but that's just me. I like my charities to be voluntary - not paid.

 

[waltky]

Supreme Court: Churches have right to make employment decisions free from government interference; Case involved discrimination laws...

High court ruling landmark for religion
Wednesday, January 11, 2012 - Justices allow firing of teacher by church in bias case brought by government

Religious organizations won a landmark victory Wednesday as the Supreme Court held that churches have the right to make employment decisions free from government interference over discrimination laws. In a 9-0 decision, the Supreme Court endorsed for the first time the “ministerial exception” to state and federal employment discrimination laws while rejecting the Obama administration’s argument that churches should be treated no differently than other employers. “The interest of society in the enforcement of employment discrimination statutes is undoubtedly important. But so too is the interest of religious groups in choosing who will preach their beliefs, teach their faith, and carry out their mission,” said Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr., who wrote the court’s 39-page opinion. “When a minister who has been fired sues her church alleging that her termination was discriminatory, the First Amendment has struck the balance for us,” Chief Justice Roberts said. “The church must be free to choose those who will guide it on its way.”

Allowing former employees to file anti-discrimination lawsuits “could end up forcing churches to take religious leaders they no longer want,” he said. Advocates of religious liberty hailed the ruling as a crucial win for churches in the face of government encroachment. “We are pleased that the Supreme Court rejected the Obama administration’s profoundly troubling claim of power over churches, and glad to see that the Supreme Court has stayed out of the Lutheran Church’s affairs and allowed its internal rules as a body of believers to stand,” said Ken Klukowski, director of the Center for Religious Liberty at the Family Research Council. The case, Hosanna-Tabor Evangelical Lutheran Church and School v. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, centered on a former teacher, Cheryl Perich, who argued that she was fired from the Missouri Synod Lutheran school in violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act.

Mrs. Perich had been promoted from a temporary lay teacher to a “called” teacher in 2000, but had taken leave after being diagnosed with narcolepsy. School officials refused to hire her back because they had already replaced her with a substitute for the year. After she threatened to sue to get her job back, the Redford, Mich., church fired her, saying using secular courts to solve an interchurch issue violated its teaching on resolving such disputes. After the EEOC sued on her behalf, a federal judge threw out the lawsuit, holding that her firing fell under the law’s ministerial exception. But the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled in her favor, holding that the ministerial exception failed to apply because Mrs. Perdich taught primarily secular subjects. The high court overturned the Circuit Court, concluding that the constitution’s free exercise and establishment clauses protect a church’s ability to select its leadership and lower-level employees.

The EEOC had argued that the ministerial exception would give churches “unfettered discretion” to violate employment laws, such as by hiring children or undocumented workers, or retaliating against employees who report criminal misconduct. The court refused to rule on those issues, expressing “no view on whether the exception bars other types of suits.” “It is enough for us to conclude, in this, our first case involving the ministerial exception, that the exception covers Perich, given all the circumstances of her employment,” Chief Justice Roberts said. The Becket Fund for Religious Liberty, which argued the case before the Supreme Court, called it “the most important religious liberty case in 20 years.”

MORE

 

[California Girl]

While I will agree that there are SOME churches that are run like a business...others are not. And most churches provide a lot for their communities. In our area, churches run a homeless shelter in the winter...they provide community suppers and lunches, all for free to those who ask as long as there is room. They provide gas for people who need it, bus tickets so people can get to work...I know a church that provides room and board for homeless families, this while they can't afford to replace their roof.

Then I know a church that has a restaurant, a book store and the preacher flies in a helicoptor...they don't provide a whole lot for the community and they get the same tax exempt status.

I don't know, maybe there should be something to qualify them for tax exempt status other than just declaring they're a church?

I can speak only for my own Church. The Catholic Church - and we do more charitable work, provide more money, provide more aid, food, shelter, clothing, etc than any other organization on this earth.

yes and have more pedifiles in your organization than any other on this earth
have more art treasures in the vatican than any other organization on this earth .
discriminate against women more than any other organization in this world .

Less than 1% of priests stand accused of being 'pedifiles' (it's spelled pedophiles, fyi). And you have no evidence to support your claim that we have more than any other organization on earth. None. Nada. Zip. It is an opinion, and you are welcome to it - no matter how stupid it is.

Again - because I have already dealt with this once - the Catholic Church does not own those 'art treasures' you refer to. It holds them in trust for the benefit of mankind. Those treasures do not form part of it's 'wealth'. It has rescued, saved, salvaged, collected each and every one so that they are not destroyed or disappear into private collections. It pays for the restoration, it stores them, and maintains them as part of it's commitment to provide a storage for the world's most historic treasures. It does this at substantial cost to the Church and asks nothing in return. It lends those treasures out to museums across the world - for free. It pays shipping and storage and insurance to ensure that those treasures are seen by the people of the world. But it does not own those treasures - it holds them in trust for future generations.

And as for that hysterical claim about discriminating against women. Well, that is just laughable. Seriously. Hysterical hyperbole is not something I bother responding to. Suffice to say.... when the Catholic Church insists that women cover themselves from head to toe, and treats women like Islam does, then you might have a point. But hell will freeze over before that happens.

Idiot.

 

[Dr Grump]

You can argue it if you want. But the facts will not support your opinion. You are trying to compare an apple to an orange anyway, so it's irrelevant. The fact remains that the Catholic Church is the largest charitable organization on the planet. It does more, gives more, feeds more, houses more, supports more, and does more for humanity generally than any nation, charity, group or individual anywhere.

Your comments about 'shagging' are not only irrelevant, they are petty, childish and stupid so I'll ignore it.

Also, simple fact: if we force churches to pay taxes, they will have far less money to help those who need help. You might think that's a good idea but.... if they pull their support then the government will have to take up that slack. Logic. And who the fuck is gonna pay for that? Yep, taxes.

Links please to the Catholic Church being the largest charitable organisation.

I agree with regard to comments about taxes, but it bugs me that an organisation like Scientology gets the exemption. Then again, maybe they do charity work....

You may call it childish, but I find the church's stance on priests and nuns pathetic. You may also call it childish, but it was one of the reasons for the reformation and Henry the VIII splitting from the Catholic Church (albeit a minor one, as his libido was the main cause of that little skirmish). It is both unnatural and pathetic to expect humans to be celibate....

There are many things that I - as a Catholic - have an issue with regarding my Church, but, frankly, unless you are Catholic, I fail to see why it is anyone's business. I don't expect you to live according to my standards, and it would be great if you recognized that you don't have the right to expect others to live to yours. Priests and nuns all accept celibacy as part of their calling. It is their business - not mine, not yours. In short, mind you own business about how they choose to live. Simple.

I agree about 'religions' such as Scientology. But, frankly, I'd rather they get tax exempt status than do the untold amounts of damage to society that forcing all churches to pay taxes would do. If the Churches paid taxes, then they would not be able to do the huge amount of support and aid to our most vulnerable. To me, that outweighs any argument for the taxes. God knows (pun intended) that the Churches spend money better than the Government ever could.

As for a link, the only one that I deem legitimate is one that you would dismiss, because it comes from the Church itself.

Oh, and before you hold the Red Cross up as a shining example... it is an unfair comparison - for the Red Cross. Because it pays its employees - frankly, I am stunned that it pays so much in salaries - particular to it's CEO, but that's just me. I like my charities to be voluntary - not paid.

Well it becomes everybody's business when these priests interfere with kids, which an inordinant amount do. I don't honestly think a lot of them are wired to be pedophiles, but being celibate causes them to lose it a little when it comes to sex and they do dispicable things. So, you are wrong. It is other peoples' business in that regard.

I agree with the red cross - bad example on my part. And you are right, I wouldn't believe the Catholic Church's own website, even if it were notorised.

Yeah, I think it would be better to deregister Scientology's tax exempt status than other religous organisations. That aside, I would love to have been in the room when it was decided they were a bona fide religion. I wonder if I start the religion of "Grump" that I can become tax exempt. I write too, and I bet I can come up with something more believable than Thetans jumping into volcanos...