Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
BooDawg
Social climber
Polynesian Paradise
|
|
|
Topic Author's Original Post - Oct 15, 2010 - 01:51pm PT
|
Several years ago, Hawaii had an initiative on the ballot to permit same-sex marriage. The anti-gay effort was OVERWHELMINGLY FUNDED BY THE MORMON CHURCH. The initiative narrowly lost, depriving a large segment of our population of their civil rights.
Does anyone else object to churches having income tax immunity based on "freedom of religion" provisions in the Constitution when they continue to violate and ignore "separation of church and state" provisions which are also embodied in the Constitution?
Does anyone else think that churches are, in fact, for-profit businesses that lobby in elections and interfere in other areas of government? Does anyone else think they should pay corporate income taxes like other businesses?
|
|
Fat Dad
Trad climber
Los Angeles, CA
|
|
|
Oct 15, 2010 - 01:58pm PT
|
I saw your related link on the other Mormon thread.
I for one have never been clear on the whole 501(c)(3) and political advocacy issue. It seems to be that lots of non-profits and other exempt organizations do a LOT of political advocacy and manage to stay under the IRS' radar.
With the Mormons, I guess they would argue that the position is a social and religious one, not political, but you could make an equally valid argument in the opposite direction, so I don't get it. Given how odd the Mormon Church is, I don't see what their big gripe with gays and lesbians is. It's not like they're a lot of them living in Utah.
|
|
Seamstress
Trad climber
Yacolt, WA
|
|
|
Oct 15, 2010 - 02:03pm PT
|
Yes. I think that legitimate churches ahould continue to be exempt from income tax.
I am on the finance council of my catholic church. It would shock many people to see how much in taxes churces already pay. Their exemptions are limited. In the state of WA, a church can be exempt from property taxes for a maximum of 5 acres. So we pay taxes on all properties beyond 5 acres. The church is located in a place that had a minimum of 20 acre zoning when it was built. 15 acres are taxed. Parish employees are subject to payroll taxes. Taxes exceed utility costs.
Churches are not exempt from many regulations. We buy permits for all improvements, retrofit the building to meet building codes, .....
People have a right to their opinion, and it can be influenced by their parents, their friends, their church, their business, etc. Churches don't get to vote. People vote.
The biggest issue is campaign finance reform. The last Supreme Court decision striking down elements certainly makes real reform much more difficult.
|
|
donini
Trad climber
Ouray, Colorado
|
|
|
Oct 15, 2010 - 02:12pm PT
|
No!!!!
|
|
Seamstress
Trad climber
Yacolt, WA
|
|
|
Oct 15, 2010 - 02:13pm PT
|
Interesting to note that 50% of all tax returns filed had no income tax obligation or a credit paid to the taxpayer (child and earned income credits). In essence, politicians buy off voters with tax credits and pork.
Two parallel questions:
Should people who pay no taxes have a vote?
Should people who pay taxes get a vote?
I really choke on the last question. I pay income taxes and property taxes in Oregon, but I can not vote for the folks who get to impose those taxes on me.
|
|
Ghost
climber
A long way from where I started
|
|
|
Oct 15, 2010 - 02:23pm PT
|
I posted this on the Morman ad thread, but here it is, in its proper home:
You just don't get it, do you Ken? America is the land where cognitive dissonance has been eliminated. I think that's what the chemtrails are all about. Aliens landed on the dark side of the moon where they have a mothership (disguised as a boulder) which is really a tanker full of a chemical which the government of the US (in collusion with a variety of secret religious and anti-religious groups) uses in jet fuel so that it imperceptibly rains down on citizens.
The effect of the chemical is to break down the neurotransmitters that normally would light up your brain with danger signals when you attempt to hold two conflicting ideas simultaneously. Thereby rendering it easy to believe both that religious organizations should have tax immunity and also should take an active part in the political and economic running of the country, as both required and forbidden by the constitution.
Or something...
Edit
|
|
the kid
Trad climber
fayetteville, wv
|
|
|
Oct 15, 2010 - 02:24pm PT
|
i think all churches should pay taxes..
would help the bottom line.
|
|
blahblah
Gym climber
Boulder
|
|
|
Oct 15, 2010 - 02:30pm PT
|
Given how odd the Mormon Church is, I don't see what their big gripe with gays and lesbians is. It's not like they're a lot of them living in Utah.
Unless you believe that gays are made and not born, there should be about the same number of gays in Utah as anywhere else (disregarding migration).
Anyway, churches not be taxed because that has the effect of discouraging religion, which the government is not supposed to do.
|
|
BooDawg
Social climber
Polynesian Paradise
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Oct 15, 2010 - 02:31pm PT
|
I believe that churches have the right to not have gays get married in their own religious institutions.
But I DO NOT believe that churches or anyone else has the right to deprive anyone else of the civil rights that others people possess.
"Just follow the laws and rules..." Gimme a break! Gandhi got it right when HE RESISTED UNJUST LAWS!
Yes, the political campaign financing process means that those with the most money win elections. That's why the amount of money in various campaign coffers is, itself, "news." And that's why many unjust laws get passed and perpetuated.
Edit: Thanks, David, for explaining it to me; I got it now!
|
|
JEleazarian
Trad climber
Fresno CA
|
|
|
Oct 15, 2010 - 02:38pm PT
|
I wonder, Ken, how many churches make a positive income. Most are probably money-losing propositions that rely on subsidies (i.e. offerings/donations) to pay their necessary expenses.
John
|
|
Fat Dad
Trad climber
Los Angeles, CA
|
|
|
Oct 15, 2010 - 02:54pm PT
|
Unless you believe that gays are made and not born, there should be about the same number of gays in Utah as anywhere else (disregarding migration).
That argument only holds water if you posit that people never move from their place of birth. If that were true, Utah never would have become a Mormon state in the first place since they all came from Illinois, Missouri and New York.
Re the paying taxes = right to vote, I didn't read the Harper case someone graciously posted, but the right to vote is based upon citizenship, not whether or not you have taxable income or property.
I think it was Seamstress who obliquely mentioned the Citizen's United case. In light of that decision, it would be laughable to question the ability of a church to spend money to influence voters now that corporations may do so.
|
|
Peter Haan
Trad climber
San Francisco, CA
|
|
|
Oct 15, 2010 - 03:25pm PT
|
It is of course particularly hard for those of us who are rabid atheists, confronting this BooDawg question. I mean, the first shot is of course religious organizations should have always paid all taxes. However it is not so simple. Wish that it were.
Let us be reminded that if a church is then now taxed, the tithing and other donations to these religious entities would consequently not be allowed as charitable deductions in Federal returns at least. And this is certainly in the billions of dollars annually. Many---contractors I know even---tithe a flat 10% annually from their net, for example. And for many believers, that change in deductibility would be a dealbreaker, along with the general notion that their churches haven’t special status with our government; after all they still hope--- many of them at least--- for a time when church and state are back in bed together and just don’t stop working towards that result.
I think the original spirit of the early twentieth-century IRS rule must have been partly to encourage private donation as well as encourage the important benevolent works of many such organizations. But it was also the first crappy step back to a reunion of a church and state, at least potentially. By granting certain tax immunity our government avoids waking the gorilla in the living room, the separation of church and state, by then requiring religious organizations to have no influence in our political process nor in our elections and thereby giving itself, the IRS, the infinite task of policing these groups in that regard. That is the imperative and the price religion must pay to stay the hell out of politics but it seems likely to be very hard to enforce thoroughly. And it is in the heart of heart of many sects to imagine a time when the country is truly ruled by "God".
It is clear we have come a long way. We now have enormous forces such as the Mormons, openly swinging elections and offering candidates even. We have slipped too far from the original paradigm and by the “torture of a thousand cuts” arrive at church groups at times acting like political action clubs that also happen to be handing out soup and clothing, incidentally. The groups really get worked up over recent issues.
With the way churches are set up in this country, John, of course they have had to have tax-exempt status for their donations and for much of their activity and their often overly copious properties to be retained. There also might just be an excess of them as well...tiny towns with 46 churches, big towns with the most important lots holding giant temples of worship. But at the same time, it is apparent they both have not kept their noses clean and have aggressively chipped away at the public’s lenience like 7-year olds at a candy store begging Mom: they really ARE political organizations and DO meddle with our political system and mostly have, always. This is a fact. So, concluding, either the IRS needs to apply the already-existing rules more thoroughly or we need to start fully taxing these entities, as they are actually special interest groups with some benevolent stuff as window-dressing and often as Ken Boche, OP’er, indicates, are just mothereffing mean-spirited dogs-in-the-manger, ironically enough, and some would even have segments of our own people either jailed or killed, even though plenty of their leaders turn out to be secretly gay or some crazed kook-fest version of gay, or other totally hypocritical status for a minister or priest. And don't get me started on the child-abuse issues of the Catholic Church. Such a world-wide scandal involving many many thousands of youths would never have been handled in this tippy-toed manner were it not to have involved the Catholic Church and its satraps and minions. And clearly they even have a CULTURE of this activity going back---what?---back to the beginning?
|
|
hooblie
climber
from where the anecdotes roam
|
|
|
Oct 15, 2010 - 03:55pm PT
|
"income tax immunity" frames the issue as if it were an accounting blip.
anthropology is replete with examples of the masses toiling to provide sustenance, infrastructure and protection without benefit of the privileges
reserved for an embedded priest class.
we're not so different. i don't see the table being turned any time soon.
but imagining such, highlights the absurdity of our present arrangement
|
|
ontheedgeandscaredtodeath
Trad climber
San Francisco, Ca
|
|
|
Oct 15, 2010 - 04:01pm PT
|
We should all get immunity until the guv stops dumping trillions down the Afganaraq drain holes.
|
|
Douglas Rhiner
Mountain climber
Truckee , CA
|
|
|
Oct 15, 2010 - 04:32pm PT
|
I think they should.
Until they spend one thin dime on any form of advertising/promotion for; their religion, a political stance, community activism, etc....
Once they slip the bounds of the inner sanctum of "their" religion all bets are off as far as I'm concerned.
Churches/religions do some wonderful things but they can still do it without "interfering" with others beliefs.
|
|
Norton
Social climber
the Wastelands
|
|
|
Oct 15, 2010 - 04:34pm PT
|
SOME churches DO attempt to influence the political vote of their parishioners.
I have sat in many Catholic churches and listened to the Priest giving the sermon speak out strongly against abortion while throwing in the reminder that the Democratic Party supports the taking of these innocent lives in the womb.
My mother, who is damn near a Communist in her personal socialism for all, votes Republican because the Catholic Church has convinced her Democrats are baby killers.
By all means yes the Catholic Church should not be exempt from taxes.
They are in violation of the Constitution's separation of Church and State.
They, like many other Churches, meaningfully influence political votes, and so should be taxed.
|
|
Spider Savage
Mountain climber
SoCal
|
|
|
Oct 15, 2010 - 04:39pm PT
|
Not only churches but individuals and companies should have income tax immunity.
Taxes should only be levied on commerce, the actual motion of money (sales tax, not use tax) and then only a very small amount. It's the only way to tax fairly.
Also, taxes should only be taken by one agency then distributed to all levels of government from there.
Also it should be in the constitution that all levels of government taxes combined may be no more that 5% of anything.
Does this make me Tea Party?
|
|
FRUMY
Trad climber
SHERMAN OAKS,CA
|
|
|
Oct 15, 2010 - 04:43pm PT
|
seamstress- that's one more stupid right wing lie. the 50% of filings that don't send in money to the IRS or get money back have already had their taxes taken out of their pay check. you only get money back if you paid money in. the IRS does not give money out except to people that have over paid.
if churches get tax breaks they should stay out of politics. if church leaders focused on helping their flock & not telling everyone else how to live no one would care. but at this point they don't deserve tax breaks.
|
|
Norton
Social climber
the Wastelands
|
|
|
Oct 15, 2010 - 04:53pm PT
|
Very low income people DO get more money back than they pay, or not pay at all.
Tax credits.
For example, last year anyone who filed an income tax return who made roughly
less than 75K received an additional $300 as a result of the Recovery Act's
tax credit provision.
This included millions of people who paid NO Federal income tax.
|
|
Jennie
Trad climber
Elk Creek, Idaho
|
|
|
Oct 15, 2010 - 05:28pm PT
|
Several years ago, Hawaii had an initiative on the ballot to permit same-sex marriage. The anti-gay effort was OVERWHELMINGLY FUNDED BY THE MORMON CHURCH. The initiative narrowly lost, depriving a large segment of our population of their civil rights.
Boodag, Please substantiate your charge that the Mormon Church "'overwhelmily funded" this effort, if you will.
Similar charges were made in California after Propositon 8 by gay activists that proved to be quite false. The LDS church actually contributed less than $5,000 cash and about $189,000 in "in-kind" donations which were less than 1% of the total Prop 8 budget (in favor). Private Mormons likely contributed seven and a half to nine percent of of total.(6 1/2 % of contributions came from Utah where74% of the population is Mormon...only1.7% of the California population is Mormon)
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!