Time to lose the tax exemption for religions (churches, ghosts, gospel)

[cupper3]

Let's face it, what do religions really provide that is of any substance to society. Oh sure, to some people they provide some undefined spiritual guidance and solice, but that is undefined and does not help society in any way shape or form.

Of course the argument will be made that churches, mosques, temples and synagogues and the members thereof do charitable work such as food banks or working with the homeless.

Great.

For those activities, they can continue to have their charitable tax exemptions. But why should the rest of the income be tax exempt? Why should the buildings and the land they sit on be tax exempt? Why should the parsonage benefits continue?

It is time to recognize that churches in particular area who used to cover a large number of social areas, no longer do so because we as taxpayers are now doing that work there are various governments. There is no justification left for the churches and other religious groups to be free from taxation.

Here's a good article on this issue that focuses on Australia and their situation. It is not much different in the United States or Canada.

Only The Ghosts Of Christmas Past Know Why Advancing Religion Is Still Tax-Free*|*Hugh Harris

[kab0906]

many faith groups act in ways contrary to the public interest and to the ideals of charity.

We cannot afford the luxury of subsidizing arcane and increasingly irrelevant belief systems which provide little tangible benefit.

Excellent points and I would like to see Australia follow through.

[RonkonkomaNative]

I think Churches should pay their property taxes.
I have heard the following argument here ; But my church is 200 years old. My congregation is small. We can't afford it.
If church is that important, then church members can find a way and the cost is spread among the members.

Funny thing. The county does not want to hear I cannot afford my tax bill. Nor do they buy into the whole, my house is 200 years old, meme.

[southernbored]

Originally Posted by RonkonkomaNative

I think Churches should pay their property taxes.
I have heard the following argument here ; But my church is 200 years old. My congregation is small. We can't afford it.
If church is that important, then church members can find a way and the cost is spread among the members.

Funny thing. The county does not want to hear I cannot afford my tax bill. Nor do they buy into the whole, my house is 200 years old, meme.

Exactly. I think my house is more important than their church (you know, being where my family LIVES and all), and if I can't pay my taxes, well... we all know what would happen.


Churches should pay their property tax, end of story.

[Woodrow LI]

I am a theist and consider my Religion to be an important part of my life. But I agree the Tax Exemptions for Religious buildings and institutions need to go.

Looking from the religious side of the coin, tax exemptions harm religions more than they help. Some points as to why I believe that.

1. They indirectly become a threat that gives considerable government control over the religion.--Do what government says or loose your exemption

2, It reduces the responsibility of the members to support their religion

3. It is an incentive for Religious leaders to become greedy.

3.

[somebodynew]

Yes.

[jeffbase40]

Originally Posted by cupper3

Let's face it, what do religions really provide that is of any substance to society. Oh sure, to some people they provide some undefined spiritual guidance and solice, but that is undefined and does not help society in any way shape or form.

Of course the argument will be made that churches, mosques, temples and synagogues and the members thereof do charitable work such as food banks or working with the homeless.

Great.

For those activities, they can continue to have their charitable tax exemptions. But why should the rest of the income be tax exempt? Why should the buildings and the land they sit on be tax exempt? Why should the parsonage benefits continue?

It is time to recognize that churches in particular area who used to cover a large number of social areas, no longer do so because we as taxpayers are now doing that work there are various governments. There is no justification left for the churches and other religious groups to be free from taxation.

Here's a good article on this issue that focuses on Australia and their situation. It is not much different in the United States or Canada.

Only The Ghosts Of Christmas Past Know Why Advancing Religion Is Still Tax-Free*|*Hugh Harris

If you want them to go then separation of church and state goes as well. Churches will then be able to fully and openly endorse political candidates and get heavily involved in elections and law making. Can't have it both ways.

If you are completely divorced from church activities then how do you even know how much churches contribute to society? This tactic is nothing more than a desire to destroy the church. Then we will only have the government to help with social problems, and yea, they do such a great efficient job, huh?

And to be consistent and fair, all charitable organizations should be required to pay taxes if you force churches to pay up.

[JerZ]

Honestly the exemption policy bugs the shoot out of me too.

As the OP said, exemptions for actual, recorded charitable work, with numbers attached? Sure. Definitely. But just for standing there being a building where people come once a week to sit patiently for 40 minutes through a bunch of talk and songs waiting for the brunch afterward? Ummm, not so much.

Same, obviously, for synagogues, etc.

[caverunner17]

Originally Posted by jeffbase40

If you want them to go then separation of church and state goes as well. Churches will then be able to fully and openly endorse political candidates and get heavily involved in elections and law making. Can't have it both ways.

If you are completely divorced from church activities then how do you even know how much churches contribute to society? This tactic is nothing more than a desire to destroy the church. Then we will only have the government to help with social problems, and yea, they do such a great efficient job, huh?

And to be consistent and fair, all charitable organizations should be required to pay taxes if you force churches to pay up.

Then make it where churches below 200 members or 400 members or whatever are exempt. It's the mega churches that are the biggest offenders. There's one by me that's nearly as large as my high school.

Unrelated, I do think there needs to be a limit on fundraising for politics.

[mordant]

Originally Posted by jeffbase40

If you want them to go then separation of church and state goes as well. Churches will then be able to fully and openly endorse political candidates and get heavily involved in elections and law making. Can't have it both ways.

It can be argued that favored treatment of the state in the form of extra tax exemptions over and above other non-profit organizations ERODES separation of church and state.

Originally Posted by jeffbase40

And to be consistent and fair, all charitable organizations should be required to pay taxes if you force churches to pay up.

I think if churches paid property taxes that would put them on a parity with other non-profits. I think that is the point; much of the special dispensation for religious organizations relative to other non-profits consists of property tax exemptions, does it not?

As to the question of political involvement, I believe that you file for non-profit status and categorize yourself as to the purpose of your organization. It is inherently a conflict for a political organization to promote religion or vice versa. You would not want the local Democratic Party to promote Hinduism, nor should you want the local church to be in charge of Republican campaigning. Particularly given your dogma, which correct me if I'm wrong, is opposed to the "social gospel" and the intermixture of civil and spiritual concerns.