Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 05-20-2012, 08:52 PM
 
4,428 posts, read 4,481,378 times
Reputation: 1356

Advertisements

There is said to be an old Arabian proverb: "If the camel once gets his nose in the tent, his body will soon follow." This expression is especially pertinent in the tax exemption context. Churches are tax exempt under the principle that there is no surer way to destroy the free exercise of religion than to tax it. If the government is allowed to tax churches (or to condition a tax exemption on a church refraining from the free exercise of religion), the camel's nose is under the tent, and its body is sure to follow. It's the understanding of the U.S. Supreme Court too.

In its 1970 opinion in Walz vs. Tax Commission of the City of New York, the high court stated that a tax exemption for churches "creates only a minimal and remote involvement between church and state and far less than taxation of churches. [An exemption] restricts the fiscal relationship between church and state, and tends to complement and reinforce the desired separation insulating each from the other." The Supreme Court also said that "the power to tax involves the power to destroy." Taxing churches breaks down the healthy separation of church and state and leads to the destruction of the free exercise of religion.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 05-20-2012, 08:55 PM
 
4,428 posts, read 4,481,378 times
Reputation: 1356
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ruth4Truth View Post
Who says it would be Obama? It might not happen until a Repub. President.

It's already happened because of Obamacare.

Who is responsible for Obamacare?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-20-2012, 08:57 PM
 
4,428 posts, read 4,481,378 times
Reputation: 1356
Quote:
Originally Posted by wehotex View Post
That's a straw man argument. If certain churches could not afford to pay their taxes, then they simply should not exist, shouldn't have "gone into business" in the first place. Just like in business, the strongest would survive and the less strong would be acquired by others. I need to start MY own church so I don't have to pay any taxes.

You can't outlaw religious freedom in this country.

There is said to be an old Arabian proverb: "If the camel once gets his nose in the tent, his body will soon follow." This expression is especially pertinent in the tax exemption context. Churches are tax exempt under the principle that there is no surer way to destroy the free exercise of religion than to tax it. If the government is allowed to tax churches (or to condition a tax exemption on a church refraining from the free exercise of religion), the camel's nose is under the tent, and its body is sure to follow. It's the understanding of the U.S. Supreme Court too.

In its 1970 opinion in Walz vs. Tax Commission of the City of New York, the high court stated that a tax exemption for churches "creates only a minimal and remote involvement between church and state and far less than taxation of churches. [An exemption] restricts the fiscal relationship between church and state, and tends to complement and reinforce the desired separation insulating each from the other." The Supreme Court also said that "the power to tax involves the power to destroy." Taxing churches breaks down the healthy separation of church and state and leads to the destruction of the free exercise of religion.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-20-2012, 09:02 PM
 
41,813 posts, read 51,039,086 times
Reputation: 17864
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ruth4Truth View Post
The time may have come to levy at least a small tax on churches.
I'd only agree when you're willing to tax ALL non profit oraganizations.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-20-2012, 09:07 PM
 
41,813 posts, read 51,039,086 times
Reputation: 17864
Quote:
Originally Posted by lifeexplorer View Post
Isn't this the time for the mega churches to do something?
I don't know what you experience has been with churches and just to clarify I'm not a religious person. We recently had a natural diasater in my area with a flood. By far the local churches of all denominations were the most active organizations helping people. The very next day they were handing out water, cleaning products, and hot meals....... door to door. I think a large part of their effectiveness was already having in place the people and resources, for example many of these churches had very large kitchens.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-20-2012, 09:12 PM
 
Location: Wasilla, Alaska
17,823 posts, read 23,448,604 times
Reputation: 6541
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yooperkat View Post
You can't outlaw religious freedom in this country.

There is said to be an old Arabian proverb: "If the camel once gets his nose in the tent, his body will soon follow." This expression is especially pertinent in the tax exemption context. Churches are tax exempt under the principle that there is no surer way to destroy the free exercise of religion than to tax it. If the government is allowed to tax churches (or to condition a tax exemption on a church refraining from the free exercise of religion), the camel's nose is under the tent, and its body is sure to follow. It's the understanding of the U.S. Supreme Court too.

In its 1970 opinion in Walz vs. Tax Commission of the City of New York, the high court stated that a tax exemption for churches "creates only a minimal and remote involvement between church and state and far less than taxation of churches. [An exemption] restricts the fiscal relationship between church and state, and tends to complement and reinforce the desired separation insulating each from the other." The Supreme Court also said that "the power to tax involves the power to destroy." Taxing churches breaks down the healthy separation of church and state and leads to the destruction of the free exercise of religion.
It essentially comes down to "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;...", and through the application of the Fourteenth Amendment, the same is also true for the State and local governments. Tax law is still law, and therefore prohibited "respecting an establishment of religion."

This is why churches, mosques, synagogues, and other recognized religious institutions have been exempted from paying taxes of any sort.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-20-2012, 09:31 PM
 
531 posts, read 501,479 times
Reputation: 488
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yooperkat View Post
There is said to be an old Arabian proverb: "If the camel once gets his nose in the tent, his body will soon follow." This expression is especially pertinent in the tax exemption context. Churches are tax exempt under the principle that there is no surer way to destroy the free exercise of religion than to tax it. If the government is allowed to tax churches (or to condition a tax exemption on a church refraining from the free exercise of religion), the camel's nose is under the tent, and its body is sure to follow. It's the understanding of the U.S. Supreme Court too.

In its 1970 opinion in Walz vs. Tax Commission of the City of New York, the high court stated that a tax exemption for churches "creates only a minimal and remote involvement between church and state and far less than taxation of churches. [An exemption] restricts the fiscal relationship between church and state, and tends to complement and reinforce the desired separation insulating each from the other." The Supreme Court also said that "the power to tax involves the power to destroy." Taxing churches breaks down the healthy separation of church and state and leads to the destruction of the free exercise of religion.
Erik Stanley says the exact same thing. Word for word, even.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-20-2012, 09:33 PM
 
26,680 posts, read 28,665,061 times
Reputation: 7943
It's an injustice. The government should not be in the business of promoting religion.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-20-2012, 09:36 PM
 
Location: Rational World Park
4,991 posts, read 4,504,421 times
Reputation: 2375
Well, if we tax churches, they wont be able to fund the pimp my ride fund..



or the pimp my Jet fund (Creflo Dollar)



or the Cribs fund (Creflo Dollar)



You know, charitable funds.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-20-2012, 09:55 PM
 
1,168 posts, read 1,244,349 times
Reputation: 912
You can tax all and everything you want, with trillions or zillions of dollars more coming in, the government is still going to make a deficit and debts, because that's what it does.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 01:47 AM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top