The 501c3 designation is what has destroyed the church

[PoliticalChic]

GT where did you go??

did you find where in the first A you can give up your rights or that the government can make a law if you volunteer???

Where did I go?

You can always have waived your rights in this Country...usually, you'd be an idiot to do so...but it's always been the case. It's not stipulated in the specific 1st amendment, wtf? I never said that it was.

but you keep ignoring that the 1st says congress shall make no laws,,,ands since a 501c3 is a law it violates the 1st A,,

why does this little nuance elude you???

501c3 is a tax code, and it's one that's completely voluntary. The congress shall make no law is a non-sequitur because 501c3 doesnt not prevent the free exercise of Religion.

but 501c3 does restrict speech,,,which violates the 1st A

and I hate to break it to you but the tax code is law,,

again, free speech is limited--not unlimited ---....

You need not prove yourself a moron....we've established it already.


Here, moron.....the only time there is any restriction on free speech....the Brandenburg decision.

....here is the Litmus Test:

Brandenburg test
Standard established in Brandenburg v. Ohio, 395 US 444 (1969), to determine when inflammatory speech intending to advocate illegal action can be restricted. The standard developed determined that speech advocating the use of force or crime could only be proscribed where two conditions were satisfied: (1) the advocacy is “directed to inciting or producing imminent lawless action,” and (2) the advocacy is also “likely to incite or produce such action.”

Brandenburg test


A lot of that in churches?????????

 

[G.T.]

I understand that - but the premise is flawed is all I'm pointing out.

When someone enters a contract regarding limitations on their speech, and without duress, that's a voluntary and binding contract and there's no point in bringing up the 1st amendment at all - - - that's like waiving my right to a fair trial and then crying from jail that my rights were violated. It's dishonestly invoking rights violations where they don't at all exist.

GT where did you go??

did you find where in the first A you can give up your rights or that the government can make a law if you volunteer???

Where did I go?

You can always have waived your rights in this Country...usually, you'd be an idiot to do so...but it's always been the case. It's not stipulated in the specific 1st amendment, wtf? I never said that it was.

but you keep ignoring that the 1st says congress shall make no laws,,,ands since a 501c3 is a law it violates the 1st A,,

why does this little nuance elude you???

501c3 is a tax code, and it's one that's completely voluntary. The congress shall make no law is a non-sequitur because 501c3 doesnt not prevent the free exercise of Religion.

eta...actually, 501c3 makes the exercise of religion freer, in the financial sense. LOL

If we want to debate what congress shall make no law in regards to, we can find ample examples in the tax code itself, not just the 501c3. The only taxes the constitution ever authorized are excise, duties, and tariffs. All taxes that can be avoided or paid through our own voluntary actions in the market.

The 501c3 isnt that, and the Amendment process is a legal one but still, yeah I agree we could find a fuck ton of dirty, social engineering dogshit.

 

[Grumblenuts]

...a bribe that was accepted in exchange for the church operating to specifics such as what they can and can’t say as part of their service...

"Can't preach politics from the pulpit"

is the only thing churches are prohibited from doing in order to attain and keep their 501c3

Which I feel is a violation of several constitutional principles and liberties. Churches have always played a important role in the social and political changes of this nation. Much that came from the pulpit.

..the churches are not perfect....they can be wrong also
..they rape children and then the hierarchy tries to cover it up
..they TORTURED people
...they punished Galileo
...they pillaged a CHRISTIAN city for -------------$$$$$
Siege of Zara - Wikipedia

Of course they are not. The church has a long and rich history. And let’s be real, a lot of that history is positively awful and barbaric.

So why do churches get a tax break? The OP is correct in that preaching politics from the pulpit violates separation of church and state as was Jefferson's clear intent behind the 1st.

Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between Man & his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship

Personal is personal. Not between Man & his govt. Not between Man & his church. Not between govt & churches. Now If churches could prove themselves of net tangible, nondiscriminatory value to the public at large,.. especially contrasted with secular institutions who'd obviously benefit from the tax free status tremendously,..

 

[PoliticalChic]

When a church takes the 501c3 non profit designation it becomes beholden to the state. It is for all intents and purposes a bribe that was accepted in exchange for the church operating to specifics such as what they can and can’t say as part of their service.

“God’s Law, given to Moses for the people of Israel, forbade the taking of a bribe, “for a bribe blinds the discerning and perverts the words of the righteous” (Exodus 23:8). The same rule is repeated in Deuteronomy 16:19: “You shall not pervert justice; you shall not show partiality, nor take a bribe, for a bribe blinds the eyes of the wise and twists the words of the righteous.”

You can look your church up through the IRS’s search portal for 501c3 designated churches. If your church happens to be one, I suggest you switch. I know that’s going to be difficult to do because of the way human patterns and behavior work but it’s something to consider.

..the bible is irrelevant to it .....if they are helping people without profit , fine--no tax

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Democrats passed the restriction because they hate freedom and religion.

...ALL guidebooks/constitutions/laws/etc are just that = GUIDES....they can be interpreted many ways...they can't put everything into them

The Constitution is the law of the land.


And you're a moron.

so, you show your immaturity/idiocy by insults
...did the Constitution say anything about the internet? cars? etc?? NO---

Another lesson, moron???



Comin' right up:

Judge Bork makes the point that Originalists can easily apply timeless constitutional commands to new technologies, such as wiretapping and television, and to changed circumstances, as suits for libel and slander. All the judge needs is knowledge of the core value that the Framers intended to protect. And, while we may not decide every case in the way the Framers would have, “entire ranges of problems will be placed off limits to judges, thus preserving democracy in those areas where the framers intended democratic government.”



Have you ever read a book??????


Start here:

 

[G.T.]

...a bribe that was accepted in exchange for the church operating to specifics such as what they can and can’t say as part of their service...

"Can't preach politics from the pulpit"

is the only thing churches are prohibited from doing in order to attain and keep their 501c3

Which I feel is a violation of several constitutional principles and liberties. Churches have always played a important role in the social and political changes of this nation. Much that came from the pulpit.

..the churches are not perfect....they can be wrong also
..they rape children and then the hierarchy tries to cover it up
..they TORTURED people
...they punished Galileo
...they pillaged a CHRISTIAN city for -------------$$$$$
Siege of Zara - Wikipedia

Of course they are not. The church has a long and rich history. And let’s be real, a lot of that history is positively awful and barbaric.

So why do churches get a tax break? The OP is correct in that preaching politics from the pulpit violates separation of church and state as was Jefferson's clear intent behind the 1st.

Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between Man & his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship

Personal is personal. Not between Man & his govt. Not between Man & his church. Not between govt & churches. Now If churches could prove themselves of net tangible, nondiscriminatory value to the public at large,.. especially contrasted with secular institutions who'd obviously benefit from the tax free status tremendously,..

That was a good catch...

if the 501c3 is a Law doing something at all...its a Law that recognizes the establishment and its not supposed to do THAT, either.

 

[Paulie]

GT where did you go??

did you find where in the first A you can give up your rights or that the government can make a law if you volunteer???

Where did I go?

You can always have waived your rights in this Country...usually, you'd be an idiot to do so...but it's always been the case. It's not stipulated in the specific 1st amendment, wtf? I never said that it was.

but you keep ignoring that the 1st says congress shall make no laws,,,ands since a 501c3 is a law it violates the 1st A,,

why does this little nuance elude you???

501c3 is a tax code, and it's one that's completely voluntary. The congress shall make no law is a non-sequitur because 501c3 doesnt not prevent the free exercise of Religion.

eta...actually, 501c3 makes the exercise of religion freer, in the financial sense. LOL

If we want to debate what congress shall make no law in regards to, we can find ample examples in the tax code itself, not just the 501c3. The only taxes the constitution ever authorized are excise, duties, and tariffs. All taxes that can be avoided or paid through our own voluntary actions in the market.

The 501c3 isnt that, and the Amendment process is a legal one but still, yeah I agree we could find a fuck ton of dirty, social engineering dogshit.

There’s a specific reason the income tax and the federal reserve were both enacted at virtually the same time. The federal reserve creates unlimited money to grew an empire with and the income tax pays that debt back to the fed. We aren’t taxed for services, the federal reserve finances everything and then were taxed to pay the interest. It needs to stop and it soon will, but we need to be ready to accept much less government. I think many of us learned just how useless much of government is during the shutdown.

 

[progressive hunter]

...a bribe that was accepted in exchange for the church operating to specifics such as what they can and can’t say as part of their service...

"Can't preach politics from the pulpit"

is the only thing churches are prohibited from doing in order to attain and keep their 501c3

Which I feel is a violation of several constitutional principles and liberties. Churches have always played a important role in the social and political changes of this nation. Much that came from the pulpit.

..the churches are not perfect....they can be wrong also
..they rape children and then the hierarchy tries to cover it up
..they TORTURED people
...they punished Galileo
...they pillaged a CHRISTIAN city for -------------$$$$$
Siege of Zara - Wikipedia

Of course they are not. The church has a long and rich history. And let’s be real, a lot of that history is positively awful and barbaric.

So why do churches get a tax break? The OP is correct in that preaching politics from the pulpit violates separation of church and state as was Jefferson's clear intent behind the 1st.

Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between Man & his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship

Personal is personal. Not between Man & his govt. Not between Man & his church. Not between govt & churches. Now If churches could prove themselves of net tangible, nondiscriminatory value to the public at large,.. especially contrasted with secular institutions who'd obviously benefit from the tax free status tremendously,..

sorry dumbass there is no such thing as separation of church and state,,,

and if jefferson based the 1st on that it would say that,,,

so take youre progressive bullshit and fuck yourself,,,

 

[Grumblenuts]

"Can't preach politics from the pulpit"

is the only thing churches are prohibited from doing in order to attain and keep their 501c3

Which I feel is a violation of several constitutional principles and liberties. Churches have always played a important role in the social and political changes of this nation. Much that came from the pulpit.

..the churches are not perfect....they can be wrong also
..they rape children and then the hierarchy tries to cover it up
..they TORTURED people
...they punished Galileo
...they pillaged a CHRISTIAN city for -------------$$$$$
Siege of Zara - Wikipedia

Of course they are not. The church has a long and rich history. And let’s be real, a lot of that history is positively awful and barbaric.

So why do churches get a tax break? The OP is correct in that preaching politics from the pulpit violates separation of church and state as was Jefferson's clear intent behind the 1st.

Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between Man & his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship

Personal is personal. Not between Man & his govt. Not between Man & his church. Not between govt & churches. Now If churches could prove themselves of net tangible, nondiscriminatory value to the public at large,.. especially contrasted with secular institutions who'd obviously benefit from the tax free status tremendously,..

sorry dumbass there is no such thing as separation of church and state,,,

and if jefferson based the 1st on that it would say that,,,

so take youre progressive bullshit and fuck yourself,,,

I love you too, Dear.

 

[progressive hunter]

"Can't preach politics from the pulpit"

is the only thing churches are prohibited from doing in order to attain and keep their 501c3

Which I feel is a violation of several constitutional principles and liberties. Churches have always played a important role in the social and political changes of this nation. Much that came from the pulpit.

..the churches are not perfect....they can be wrong also
..they rape children and then the hierarchy tries to cover it up
..they TORTURED people
...they punished Galileo
...they pillaged a CHRISTIAN city for -------------$$$$$
Siege of Zara - Wikipedia

Of course they are not. The church has a long and rich history. And let’s be real, a lot of that history is positively awful and barbaric.

So why do churches get a tax break? The OP is correct in that preaching politics from the pulpit violates separation of church and state as was Jefferson's clear intent behind the 1st.

Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between Man & his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship

Personal is personal. Not between Man & his govt. Not between Man & his church. Not between govt & churches. Now If churches could prove themselves of net tangible, nondiscriminatory value to the public at large,.. especially contrasted with secular institutions who'd obviously benefit from the tax free status tremendously,..

That was a good catch...

if the 501c3 is a Law doing something at all...its a Law that recognizes the establishment and its not supposed to do THAT, either.

except for the fact hes full of shit and nothing he said is true,,,

 

[progressive hunter]

Which I feel is a violation of several constitutional principles and liberties. Churches have always played a important role in the social and political changes of this nation. Much that came from the pulpit.

..the churches are not perfect....they can be wrong also
..they rape children and then the hierarchy tries to cover it up
..they TORTURED people
...they punished Galileo
...they pillaged a CHRISTIAN city for -------------$$$$$
Siege of Zara - Wikipedia

Of course they are not. The church has a long and rich history. And let’s be real, a lot of that history is positively awful and barbaric.

So why do churches get a tax break? The OP is correct in that preaching politics from the pulpit violates separation of church and state as was Jefferson's clear intent behind the 1st.

Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between Man & his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship

Personal is personal. Not between Man & his govt. Not between Man & his church. Not between govt & churches. Now If churches could prove themselves of net tangible, nondiscriminatory value to the public at large,.. especially contrasted with secular institutions who'd obviously benefit from the tax free status tremendously,..

sorry dumbass there is no such thing as separation of church and state,,,

and if jefferson based the 1st on that it would say that,,,

so take youre progressive bullshit and fuck yourself,,,

I love you too, Dear.

thats a piss poor comment,,,

better you prove youre right by providing links to back it up,,,

 

[G.T.]

Which I feel is a violation of several constitutional principles and liberties. Churches have always played a important role in the social and political changes of this nation. Much that came from the pulpit.

..the churches are not perfect....they can be wrong also
..they rape children and then the hierarchy tries to cover it up
..they TORTURED people
...they punished Galileo
...they pillaged a CHRISTIAN city for -------------$$$$$
Siege of Zara - Wikipedia

Of course they are not. The church has a long and rich history. And let’s be real, a lot of that history is positively awful and barbaric.

So why do churches get a tax break? The OP is correct in that preaching politics from the pulpit violates separation of church and state as was Jefferson's clear intent behind the 1st.

Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between Man & his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship

Personal is personal. Not between Man & his govt. Not between Man & his church. Not between govt & churches. Now If churches could prove themselves of net tangible, nondiscriminatory value to the public at large,.. especially contrasted with secular institutions who'd obviously benefit from the tax free status tremendously,..

That was a good catch...

if the 501c3 is a Law doing something at all...its a Law that recognizes the establishment and its not supposed to do THAT, either.

except for the fact hes full of shit and nothing he said is true,,,

It's the very 1st clause of the 1st sentence....the tax exemption actually seems to violate this sentiment:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion,

 

[ding]

...a bribe that was accepted in exchange for the church operating to specifics such as what they can and can’t say as part of their service...

"Can't preach politics from the pulpit"

is the only thing churches are prohibited from doing in order to attain and keep their 501c3

Which I feel is a violation of several constitutional principles and liberties. Churches have always played a important role in the social and political changes of this nation. Much that came from the pulpit.

That's true, but it doesn't give them special status over anyone else that has done same and it doesn't give them some divine right to not be taxed for their property like most everyone else.

The fact that the exemption exists at all is in honor of what you've just said which...isn't a good enough reason for me but that part's merely subjective.

I think they should be free to say whatever they wish from the pulpit and still remain tax exempt. The Johnson Amendment is the government’s heavy handed excuse to control speech from the pulpit. If individual members of the church find what’s being endorsed objectionable then they are free to find a more accommodating parish that aligns with their views.

There are at least two other arguments that can be made.

We don’t tax gifts below a certain threshold for anyone. So why would we treat a gift to a church any differently.

The establishment clause was written to prevent a national religion and to prevent the federal government from interfering with state established religions which were perfectly constitutional.

 

[ding]

..the churches are not perfect....they can be wrong also
..they rape children and then the hierarchy tries to cover it up
..they TORTURED people
...they punished Galileo
...they pillaged a CHRISTIAN city for -------------$$$$$
Siege of Zara - Wikipedia

Of course they are not. The church has a long and rich history. And let’s be real, a lot of that history is positively awful and barbaric.

So why do churches get a tax break? The OP is correct in that preaching politics from the pulpit violates separation of church and state as was Jefferson's clear intent behind the 1st.

Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between Man & his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship

Personal is personal. Not between Man & his govt. Not between Man & his church. Not between govt & churches. Now If churches could prove themselves of net tangible, nondiscriminatory value to the public at large,.. especially contrasted with secular institutions who'd obviously benefit from the tax free status tremendously,..

That was a good catch...

if the 501c3 is a Law doing something at all...its a Law that recognizes the establishment and its not supposed to do THAT, either.

except for the fact hes full of shit and nothing he said is true,,,

It's the very 1st clause of the 1st sentence....the tax exemption actually seems to violate this sentiment:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion,

And was expressly written to prevent the federal government from interfering with state established religions of which half the states had at the time the constitution was ratified.

 

[CarlinAnnArbor]

When a church takes the 501c3 non profit designation it becomes beholden to the state. It is for all intents and purposes a bribe that was accepted in exchange for the church operating to specifics such as what they can and can’t say as part of their service.

“God’s Law, given to Moses for the people of Israel, forbade the taking of a bribe, “for a bribe blinds the discerning and perverts the words of the righteous” (Exodus 23:8). The same rule is repeated in Deuteronomy 16:19: “You shall not pervert justice; you shall not show partiality, nor take a bribe, for a bribe blinds the eyes of the wise and twists the words of the righteous.”

You can look your church up through the IRS’s search portal for 501c3 designated churches. If your church happens to be one, I suggest you switch. I know that’s going to be difficult to do because of the way human patterns and behavior work but it’s something to consider.

I agree, but the first Amendment protects a church DOUBLY. They dont need the IRS' permission to speak on ANYTHING

 

[ding]

So why do churches get a tax break?

Why do individuals who receive a gift from others get a tax break?

 

[G.T.]

Of course they are not. The church has a long and rich history. And let’s be real, a lot of that history is positively awful and barbaric.

So why do churches get a tax break? The OP is correct in that preaching politics from the pulpit violates separation of church and state as was Jefferson's clear intent behind the 1st.

Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between Man & his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship

Personal is personal. Not between Man & his govt. Not between Man & his church. Not between govt & churches. Now If churches could prove themselves of net tangible, nondiscriminatory value to the public at large,.. especially contrasted with secular institutions who'd obviously benefit from the tax free status tremendously,..

That was a good catch...

if the 501c3 is a Law doing something at all...its a Law that recognizes the establishment and its not supposed to do THAT, either.

except for the fact hes full of shit and nothing he said is true,,,

It's the very 1st clause of the 1st sentence....the tax exemption actually seems to violate this sentiment:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion,

And was expressly written to prevent the federal government from interfering with state established religions of which half the states had at the time the constitution was ratified.

It was written to prevent Congress from passing a law respecting an establishment of religion...I'm sure there were other side effects other than what the words expressly mean, wouldn't deny that.

 

[ding]

If you give someone a gift of $10,000 why would it need to be taxed?

It’s already been taxed.

 

[G.T.]

If you give someone a gift of $10,000 why would it need to be taxed?

It’s already been taxed.

there's a lot of double, triple sometimes quadruple tax fuckery going on. its gross

 

[ding]

So why do churches get a tax break? The OP is correct in that preaching politics from the pulpit violates separation of church and state as was Jefferson's clear intent behind the 1st.
Personal is personal. Not between Man & his govt. Not between Man & his church. Not between govt & churches. Now If churches could prove themselves of net tangible, nondiscriminatory value to the public at large,.. especially contrasted with secular institutions who'd obviously benefit from the tax free status tremendously,..

That was a good catch...

if the 501c3 is a Law doing something at all...its a Law that recognizes the establishment and its not supposed to do THAT, either.

except for the fact hes full of shit and nothing he said is true,,,

It's the very 1st clause of the 1st sentence....the tax exemption actually seems to violate this sentiment:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion,

And was expressly written to prevent the federal government from interfering with state established religions of which half the states had at the time the constitution was ratified.

It was written to prevent Congress from passing a law respecting an establishment of religion...I'm sure there were other side effects other than what the words expressly mean, wouldn't deny that.

No. It was literally written to prevent the federal government from interfering with state established religions.

 

[G.T.]

That was a good catch...

if the 501c3 is a Law doing something at all...its a Law that recognizes the establishment and its not supposed to do THAT, either.

except for the fact hes full of shit and nothing he said is true,,,

It's the very 1st clause of the 1st sentence....the tax exemption actually seems to violate this sentiment:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion,

And was expressly written to prevent the federal government from interfering with state established religions of which half the states had at the time the constitution was ratified.

It was written to prevent Congress from passing a law respecting an establishment of religion...I'm sure there were other side effects other than what the words expressly mean, wouldn't deny that.

No. It was literally written to prevent the federal government from interfering with state established religions.

Seems really daft to have worded it that way, granting your premise. "no, it wasnt written to prevent congress from passing a law respecting the establishment of religion DESPITE that's what it says verbatim."

If I grant you that, it means it was daftly written.