Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Location: By the sea, by the sea, by the beautiful sea
68,327 posts, read 54,350,985 times
Reputation: 40731
Advertisements
Quote:
Originally Posted by suddenstorm
I think that churches should be taxed like any other corporate citizen. Understand that I say this as a minister whose church pays taxes, even though we don't have to by law.
If an organization or church is truly non-profit, then its net income at the end of the year will be 0... hence there will be no income to declare -- however, if a church maintains a profit over time, it is only fair that they carry their fair share of the community's tax burden.
I also think that there should be tax credits for churches or other organizations that take on the burden of caring for the more needy portion of our community, or who take on public service projects to improve their community at large. If the only benefits are to the church congregation, I don't think those should count. I feel that it should only be projects in which the civic community outside the church experiences the benefits -- especially if those benefits take the burden off of our public offices in caring for our brothers and sisters who need an extra helping hand.
It is not the responsibility of our government or our cities to fund our churches. If we belong to a church, it is like any other organization in that we are -choosing- to express our energy as a contribution to that community. Setting some organizations outside of the realm of contributing to the community at large is a poor precedent.
In addition to the church's contribution to the community, there is the issue of the hidden "costs" of being tax exempt. Very few people talk about the censorship of our ministers and spiritual community because of the regulations involved with being tax exempt, but that censorship can be very oppressive. Because of their "generosity" in setting these organizations aside from taxes, the government requires that ministers stay silent on matters of public interest -- matters involved with issues of peace, stewardship of our planet, and the poor example set by our governmental leadership as spiritual brothers and sisters in the world. For our congregation, it is my preference to PAY the taxes that we rightfully owe, in order that we not be indebted to the government, and, in turn, required to hold our tongue on matters that need to be addressed for the good of -all-.
Rev. Weaver
Houston
You have a refreshing point of view. I was raised RC with all its hierarchy and have little knowledge of how other churches function outside a local area. I'm curious if yours is just a local decision or is it shared by others of the same faith?
Last edited by burdell; 03-22-2007 at 09:51 AM..
Reason: Poor proofreading
For our spiritual path, the decision to pay taxes and be a fully responsible member of the community in which we exist is both a congregational and a doctrinal choice.
I suppose that it would be possible that another congregation of the same spiritual background as ours would be able to validate accepting tax exemption, however, our way is one of personal responsibility, and for us, that washes over into taking personal responsibility for ones impact on the community in which one lives. I have never known one of our congregations to accept "special benefits" status, either in this country or any other, as a religious organization, though one of our congregations in Eastern Europe does accept a reduction in property taxes on a "dollar for dollar" equivalency, since the building in which they worship is also being used as a public health facility and an orphanage for 1-3 year olds, and they are providing all shelter, blankets, food, and are arranging for medical care volunteers to care for the sick, since the government is not able to provide these services themselves.
One other difference is that our order does not prostheltize, especially not to those who need our assistance rather than religious rhetoric. If we are contributing in the community, there is -no- requirement that the recipient be of our spiritual background, or that he or she even -know about- or -listen to- anything about our beliefs or doctrine in order to "qualify" for care. It bothers me when I see "charity" organizations based in particular religious doctrines make conversion, joining the religious group, or claiming a certain religious belief structure a requirement for helping out. I believe that if we see someone in need and we are -capable- of helping, that we have a responsibility to do so, with no strings attached. When I am able to look at myself in the mirror and say "I did everything I was able to do today to help my fellow man", I know that I've had a good day. *smiles*
For our spiritual path, the decision to pay taxes and be a fully responsible member of the community in which we exist is both a congregational and a doctrinal choice.
I suppose that it would be possible that another congregation of the same spiritual background as ours would be able to validate accepting tax exemption, however, our way is one of personal responsibility, and for us, that washes over into taking personal responsibility for ones impact on the community in which one lives. I have never known one of our congregations to accept "special benefits" status, either in this country or any other, as a religious organization, though one of our congregations in Eastern Europe does accept a reduction in property taxes on a "dollar for dollar" equivalency, since the building in which they worship is also being used as a public health facility and an orphanage for 1-3 year olds, and they are providing all shelter, blankets, food, and are arranging for medical care volunteers to care for the sick, since the government is not able to provide these services themselves.
One other difference is that our order does not prostheltize, especially not to those who need our assistance rather than religious rhetoric. If we are contributing in the community, there is -no- requirement that the recipient be of our spiritual background, or that he or she even -know about- or -listen to- anything about our beliefs or doctrine in order to "qualify" for care. It bothers me when I see "charity" organizations based in particular religious doctrines make conversion, joining the religious group, or claiming a certain religious belief structure a requirement for helping out. I believe that if we see someone in need and we are -capable- of helping, that we have a responsibility to do so, with no strings attached. When I am able to look at myself in the mirror and say "I did everything I was able to do today to help my fellow man", I know that I've had a good day. *smiles*
Rev. Weaver
Ok, reps for the Rev!
This is a church I might actually join, at least as a volunteer.
Please give us the name of your organization, and information on where we can find you in other states. I'm still an atheist, but helping people is not a religious matter.
I would like to think there are several other atheists and agnostics out there that agree.
Location: By the sea, by the sea, by the beautiful sea
68,327 posts, read 54,350,985 times
Reputation: 40731
Quote:
Originally Posted by YapCity
Ok, reps for the Rev!
This is a church I might actually join, at least as a volunteer.
Please give us the name of your organization, and information on where we can find you in other states. I'm still an atheist, but helping people is not a religious matter.
I would like to think there are several other atheists and agnostics out there that agree.
~TT
There's at least one other
I sent the Rev. a PM as I didn't want to get too far off topic.
Location: By the sea, by the sea, by the beautiful sea
68,327 posts, read 54,350,985 times
Reputation: 40731
Quote:
Originally Posted by YapCity
A church that actually helps people without preaching, and without hypocrisy?
That's a new one on me. Here's my ante, deal me in!
~T
I very much like the concept that you help someone because they need help, not because they need help and believe what you believe. It really fits my idea of the purpose of a church.
It is heartening to see so many people interested in helping out, and in being part of organizations that do so.
The truth is that I would be doing you a dis-service if I started telling you now about my church. What I can tell you, if you want to help and don't want to be lost in religious rhetoric is that there are a LOT of service organizations who are starving for people to help out, right in your own cities or towns. There are probably also a lot of homeless people who need new blankets or clean clothes, there are probably shelters who could use your help in handing out a hot meal -- if we want to help our fellow man, there are so many places where people need our help that it isn't difficult to see places where we can do good.
If someone is physically challenged, as I am, and can't wander through the park or head downtown carrying a gallon thermos of hot soup and clean blankets, there are libraries and schools that are critically short-handed when it comes to people able and willing to teach things like basic reading skills and literacy. There are readers needed to make literature available to the blind...
If you want to share in a special "pet" project of our congregation, I would love to find others interested in helping restore sustainability to our inner cities, which would be devastated if transportation problems or crop failures limited our ability to get food into our cities. Since most cities in the US do not have sustainable food supplies, and since most inner-city families haven't seen a garden in their whole lives, except on magazine covers or on TV, and since our city dwellers are becoming more and more isolated from one another and from sharing in our "common good", one of our congregation's goals has been to promote "sustainable urban agriculture", so that our inner city families can learn to feed themselves in healthy ways, and have the joy and pride of producing some of their own food. It would be great if this could be spread throughout cities in the US by encouraging other inner-city families and apartment complexes to put in community gardens using things like "EarthBoxes" and "Garden Patch" boxes, so that our inner cities can become self-sustaining and less subject to toxic food that is transported in from corporate farms with little concern for what their dangerous gardening practices and processing is doing to the nutritional value of our food. If folks are interested in how we're doing this here, I'll be happy to share this in a different thread, so as not to hijack this one.
There are so many ways to help that don't require being part of a church, and many ways to encourage our churches to become part of the communities that sustain them. I believe that it is crucial for our churches to be accountable for the health and well-being of the communities that they are a part of, and that kind of accountability can be encouraged by the congregation itself, if they know that they have the right to expect such a thing. For those of us who cherish living, and want to share our joy in life, there are hundreds of opportunities all around us. You don't need to be a part of my congregation, or follow the beliefs of our church to help someone. Just look around you and be available, and let other people know you want to help -- and plenty of opportunties will become available to you.
I very much like the concept that you help someone because they need help, not because they need help and believe what you believe. It really fits my idea of the purpose of a church.
So did the rev ever get back to you?
I'm also wondering where this legislation is about churches and political statements?
Anybody have an idea where I can find that? Even though I find myself agreeing with Falwell, I'm wondering if he and others like him are not breaking the laws around their tax exemption?
I'm also wondering where this legislation is about churches and political statements?
Anybody have an idea where I can find that? Even though I find myself agreeing with Falwell, I'm wondering if he and others like him are not breaking the laws around their tax exemption?
The thing I don't understand is this. Who in for instance the Catholic church would have to preach a political opinion in order for them to lose their tax-exempt status? That confuses me. The pope???
Makes me want to go to law school, then sit in churches with a camcorder
-TT
I agree with your statement. How come the Catholic Church always has active lobbyists that influence State & Nat'l legislatures? Anytime there is legislation that concerns gay marriage or abortion, they are there. Why should they have tax exempt status for that?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
A fellowship decision.
