The need to make churches pay tax

[Penelope]

Is Mike Huckabee an anti-religious bigot? Because he's promoted the same idea, in the name of religious freedom. He's seen firsthand how government is using tax-exempt status to pressure religious groups.

Is It Time for Churches to Abandon Tax-Exempt Status to Protect Religious Freedom?

or we can just stop preventing them from having political positions.

Since when is paying taxes required to have a political view or voice a political view?

Since the tax exempt perk was introduced. "That's how they get you".

"How they get them" is the Johnson Amendment, which was created in 1954, and more than likely was an attempt to stifle black churches from supporting civil rights actions.

Yep. The Johnson Amendment was always baked into the tax-exemption. Any time the government offers a special interest group a perk, they can easily take it away.

Then get rid of the Johnson Amendment. Problem solved.

Trump said he did, and we know its not enforced.

 

[martybegan]

or we can just stop preventing them from having political positions.

Since when is paying taxes required to have a political view or voice a political view?

Since the tax exempt perk was introduced. "That's how they get you".

"How they get them" is the Johnson Amendment, which was created in 1954, and more than likely was an attempt to stifle black churches from supporting civil rights actions.

Yep. The Johnson Amendment was always baked into the tax-exemption. Any time the government offers a special interest group a perk, they can easily take it away.

Then get rid of the Johnson Amendment. Problem solved.

Trump said he did, and we know its not enforced.

He only limited it's priority.

Repealing it would take Congress.

 

[dblack]

Since the tax exempt perk was introduced. "That's how they get you".

"How they get them" is the Johnson Amendment, which was created in 1954, and more than likely was an attempt to stifle black churches from supporting civil rights actions.

Yep. The Johnson Amendment was always baked into the tax-exemption. Any time the government offers a special interest group a perk, they can easily take it away.

Then get rid of the Johnson Amendment. Problem solved.

They can still threaten to declare that a given religion isn't "really" a religion. That it's a business or somesuch.

Equal rights are the only way to avoid this kind of state manipulation.

That's what we have courts for.

And? That's still government deciding what qualifies as a religion, deciding who gets the special perks and who doesn't. Equal rights is far clearer.

 

[Taz]

And here is the crux of your position. You are just an anti-religious bigot.

How progressive of you.

Not antireligious at all you can believe whatever you want and I can think it's stupid.

BUT that does not change the fact that by making laws that favor religions and giving them special tax treatment violates the first amendment

How does it violate the 1st if it applies to all religions?

How does it violate the 1st if the same things are granted to non-religious non-profits?

You have an axe to grind, stop trying to hide it. Again, very progressive of you.

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.

See that bold part?

The special tax treatment for religion is a law that respects establishments of religion by giving them special treatment

So Sharia law is allowed?

Again there is nothing in the Constitution that states the church and state must be separate.

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.

But then again if congress passes a law that is based on a particular religion that that is also a violation of the first amendment

So then Sharia Law should be allowed in the US. Then why isn't it? Why are there laws outlawing some Sharia practises like cutting off a hand for thievery?

 

[DrLove]

esp since they do not endorse the Johnson Amendment but Trump said he repealed it, it may be in the new tax cut , who knows.

Evangelical Faux Churches are popping up everywhere and they serve drinks under the pretense of "Communion". (we have on in our town)

Dan Johnson the Rep who just committed suicide used his home as a tax exempt church, not all were welcome, and they sold beer and drinks under the pretense of Communion, but he didn't quite sell beer, he lied and said it was a donation.

You can read and research the The Pope's Long Con , google it.

Since we can't maintain the division of Church and State, we need to start making churches pay tax, esp those Evan ones on TV.

I hope when the Dems get in and they will, they do this.

Faux preachers have abused this tax free status for far toooo long.

Great post - But it's not just the little idiots who become an ordained minister for 20 bucks online and start a blog offering a vile holy water from the River Jordan and blessed hanky for $50 that also guarantees entry to heaven.

The Mormon church rakes in billions and then invests in shopping centers and luxury condominiums. They are a Fortune 500 corporation and it's high time they paid their "tithing" to the US government. And particularly when they spend those dollars to fight gay rights (see Prop 8 CA) and back Mormon politicians.

Historian digs into the hidden world of Mormon finances, shows how church went from losing money to making money — lots of it

 

[martybegan]

"How they get them" is the Johnson Amendment, which was created in 1954, and more than likely was an attempt to stifle black churches from supporting civil rights actions.

Yep. The Johnson Amendment was always baked into the tax-exemption. Any time the government offers a special interest group a perk, they can easily take it away.

Then get rid of the Johnson Amendment. Problem solved.

They can still threaten to declare that a given religion isn't "really" a religion. That it's a business or somesuch.

Equal rights are the only way to avoid this kind of state manipulation.

That's what we have courts for.

And? That's still government deciding what qualifies as a religion, deciding who gets the special perks and who doesn't. Equal rights is far clearer.

and accomplishes your un-stated task of ******* over religion...

How progressive of you.

 

[dblack]

Yep. The Johnson Amendment was always baked into the tax-exemption. Any time the government offers a special interest group a perk, they can easily take it away.

Then get rid of the Johnson Amendment. Problem solved.

They can still threaten to declare that a given religion isn't "really" a religion. That it's a business or somesuch.

Equal rights are the only way to avoid this kind of state manipulation.

That's what we have courts for.

And? That's still government deciding what qualifies as a religion, deciding who gets the special perks and who doesn't. Equal rights is far clearer.

and accomplishes your un-stated task of ******* over religion...

How progressive of you.

Back on that again, huh? Did you read the article about Huckabee's position? He's right.

Let me ask you this - why the exemption? Other than just currying favor with organized religion, what principled reason is there to exempt certain religious organizations from laws that everyone else must follow?

 

[martybegan]

Then get rid of the Johnson Amendment. Problem solved.

They can still threaten to declare that a given religion isn't "really" a religion. That it's a business or somesuch.

Equal rights are the only way to avoid this kind of state manipulation.

That's what we have courts for.

And? That's still government deciding what qualifies as a religion, deciding who gets the special perks and who doesn't. Equal rights is far clearer.

and accomplishes your un-stated task of ******* over religion...

How progressive of you.

Back on that again, huh? Did you read the article about Huckabee's position? He's right.

Let me ask you this - why the exemption? Other than just currying favor with organized religion, what principled reason is there to exempt certain religious organizations from laws that everyone else must follow?

Because they could be construed as impacting free exercise.

The individuals pay taxes, just like in non profit orgs.

They are just another non profit, they just have to do less paperwork to prove it.

 

[dblack]

They can still threaten to declare that a given religion isn't "really" a religion. That it's a business or somesuch.

Equal rights are the only way to avoid this kind of state manipulation.

That's what we have courts for.

And? That's still government deciding what qualifies as a religion, deciding who gets the special perks and who doesn't. Equal rights is far clearer.

and accomplishes your un-stated task of ******* over religion...

How progressive of you.

Back on that again, huh? Did you read the article about Huckabee's position? He's right.

Let me ask you this - why the exemption? Other than just currying favor with organized religion, what principled reason is there to exempt certain religious organizations from laws that everyone else must follow?

Because they could be construed as impacting free exercise.

No moreso than any tax impacts freedom.

They are just another non profit, they just have to do less paperwork to prove it.

Why? Why should they have to do less paperwork to prove it?

 

[martybegan]

That's what we have courts for.

And? That's still government deciding what qualifies as a religion, deciding who gets the special perks and who doesn't. Equal rights is far clearer.

and accomplishes your un-stated task of ******* over religion...

How progressive of you.

Back on that again, huh? Did you read the article about Huckabee's position? He's right.

Let me ask you this - why the exemption? Other than just currying favor with organized religion, what principled reason is there to exempt certain religious organizations from laws that everyone else must follow?

Because they could be construed as impacting free exercise.

No moreso than any tax impacts freedom.

They are just another non profit, they just have to do less paperwork to prove it.

Why? Why should they have to do less paperwork to prove it?

Why not? The only reason people like you and Skull single them out is your antipathy towards religion. So basically you act like progressives in this case, and use government to do your dirty work.

 

[dblack]

And? That's still government deciding what qualifies as a religion, deciding who gets the special perks and who doesn't. Equal rights is far clearer.

and accomplishes your un-stated task of ******* over religion...

How progressive of you.

Back on that again, huh? Did you read the article about Huckabee's position? He's right.

Let me ask you this - why the exemption? Other than just currying favor with organized religion, what principled reason is there to exempt certain religious organizations from laws that everyone else must follow?

Because they could be construed as impacting free exercise.

No moreso than any tax impacts freedom.

They are just another non profit, they just have to do less paperwork to prove it.

Why? Why should they have to do less paperwork to prove it?

Why not?

See all my other posts.

The only reason people like you and Skull single them out is your antipathy towards religion. So basically you act like progressives in this case, and use government to do your dirty work.

Yes. You've made that accusation repeatedly. Why? It's totally unfounded, other than the fact that I disagree with you on this one issue. Is ad-hom all you got?

 

[DrLove]

Why not? The only reason people like you and Skull single them out is your antipathy towards religion. So basically you act like progressives in this case, and use government to do your dirty work.

Neither the first nor second amendments are without limits. Scalia said so.

Comment about post #85 regarding Mormons?

 

[martybegan]

and accomplishes your un-stated task of ******* over religion...

How progressive of you.

Back on that again, huh? Did you read the article about Huckabee's position? He's right.

Let me ask you this - why the exemption? Other than just currying favor with organized religion, what principled reason is there to exempt certain religious organizations from laws that everyone else must follow?

Because they could be construed as impacting free exercise.

No moreso than any tax impacts freedom.

They are just another non profit, they just have to do less paperwork to prove it.

Why? Why should they have to do less paperwork to prove it?

Why not?

See all my other posts.

The only reason people like you and Skull single them out is your antipathy towards religion. So basically you act like progressives in this case, and use government to do your dirty work.

Yes. You've made that accusation repeatedly. Why? It's totally unfounded, other than the fact that I disagree with you on this one issue. Is ad-hom all you got?

It's merely my observation that when it comes to Religion you guys act just like JoeB.

Not a compliment.

 

[martybegan]

Why not? The only reason people like you and Skull single them out is your antipathy towards religion. So basically you act like progressives in this case, and use government to do your dirty work.

Neither the first nor second amendments are without limits. Scalia said so.

Comment about post #85 regarding Mormons?

The article says nothing about these businesses claiming to be tax exempt organizations.

By most State law, they would not be exempt from property taxes.

 

[dblack]

It's merely my observation that when it comes to Religion you guys act just like JoeB.

Not a compliment.

Not taken as one.

Well, I'll challenge you to prove that. I have no beef with religion. Most of my friends are religious (and many of them agree with me on this issue). My problem is with corporatist government (Corporatism - Wikipedia) - ie government that caters to special interests rather than protecting equal rights.

 

[DrLove]

The article says nothing about these businesses claiming to be tax exempt organizations.

By most State law, they would not be exempt from property taxes.

I guess Utah is a special kind of state. The Mormons' 2 billion dollar mall pays no taxes.

 

[martybegan]

Because they could be construed as impacting free exercise.

No moreso than any tax impacts freedom.

They are just another non profit, they just have to do less paperwork to prove it.

Why? Why should they have to do less paperwork to prove it?

Why not?

See all my other posts.

The only reason people like you and Skull single them out is your antipathy towards religion. So basically you act like progressives in this case, and use government to do your dirty work.

Yes. You've made that accusation repeatedly. Why? It's totally unfounded, other than the fact that I disagree with you on this one issue. Is ad-hom all you got?

It's merely my observation that when it comes to Religion you guys act just like JoeB.

Not a compliment.

Not taken as one.

Well, I'll challenge you to prove that. I have no beef with religion. Most of my friends are religious (and many of them agree with me on this issue). My problem is with corporatist government (Corporatism - Wikipedia) - ie government that caters to special interests rather than protecting equal rights.

When the Churches have more influence then the people with the actual money on politics, get back to me.

Say you get all this passed, and they have to pay all taxes, well you probably just forced every single synagogue in a major urban area to sell their buildings, and probably a lot of smaller Christian organizations as well.

Can you imagine what the property Taxes would be on Saint Patrick's Cathedral?

Again, its an attack on religion from people who have an axe to grind with it, no matter how much they doth protest.

 

[martybegan]

The article says nothing about these businesses claiming to be tax exempt organizations.

By most State law, they would not be exempt from property taxes.

I guess Utah is a special kind of state

The money behind the Mormon message

The article states that these are for-profit enterprises, that thusly pay corporate taxes, property taxes, etc.

More than likely the only thing the Church is involved with is taking the profits, which have been taxed.

 

[dblack]

When the Churches have more influence then the people with the actual money on politics, get back to me.

What does that have to do with anything?

Say you get all this passed, and they have to pay all taxes, well you probably just forced every single synagogue in a major urban area to sell their buildings, and probably a lot of smaller Christian organizations as well.

Can you imagine what the property Taxes would be on Saint Patrick's Cathedral?

Again, its an attack on religion from people who have an axe to grind with it, no matter how much they doth protest.

Again, no it's not. And I don't appreciate the completely unfounded accusation. In my case, it's defense of religious liberty. I asked before - did you read the Huckabee article? He makes the point well.

 

[DrLove]

When the Churches have more influence then the people with the actual money on politics, get back to me.

Say you get all this passed, and they have to pay all taxes, well you probably just forced every single synagogue in a major urban area to sell their buildings, and probably a lot of smaller Christian organizations as well.

Can you imagine what the property Taxes would be on Saint Patrick's Cathedral?

Again, its an attack on religion from people who have an axe to grind with it, no matter how much they doth protest.

Nobody is interesting in stripping small community churches of their tax exempt status.

Any church that pulls in over a billion from tithing or whatever technique they use to fleece their flock needs to pay taxes.