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.
Churches can say whatever they want about politics; they just give up their tax exempt status when they do. Given a choice between speaking the truth, and money, they choose to take the money.
The church can be politically active, but it should in no way shape or form try and influence governmental decisions with religion. America is supposed to have a secular democracy where the government doesn't make decisions based on religion nor is hostile to it. I don't think religion and politics should entwine because then the government starts becoming closer to a theocracy where it makes decisions based on religion.
And who says they're going to lose the ability to fund those things?
True believers are going to tithe no matter what. As they all should. Or do you mean to tell me that the reason they tithe is because it's another tax deduction? What kind of believers are those?
My hospital asked for volunteers to go to Louisiana after Katrina and a bunch of us went and helped out. None of us deducted anything off our taxes. We used vacation time to go. We were glad to be of help. And yes, rich doctors went over there too. Every August I volunteer at certain facilities that give free check-ups/screenings to people who don't qualify for medicaid. I haven't even thought about deducting anything for that.
What's the point of helping out if you're going to deduct it off your taxes? To me, that's like getting paid!
I see no reason for non-religious charities to lose their tax exempt status. The OP was talking about churches and religious leaders meddling in politics. That, is an entire different thing.
My point was that by painting churches with a too broad brush of wrongdoing and punishing all of them financially might not be good for those that need the good works that many of them do.
Nothing to do with an individual's motives for giving of their time, labor and money.
My point was that by painting churches with a too broad brush of wrongdoing and punishing all of them financially might not be good for those that need the good works that many of them do.
Nothing to do with an individual's motives for giving of their time, labor and money.
That's why a church tax would work. The religious organization would be taxed at a lower rate so that the money can be set aside for humanitarian reasons [ie help the poor/assist victims of floods/set up safe neighborhood associations]. And each church/parish could receive funds back to do good work in the community.
As far as preachers in politics it has to be self-regulated. They can do as they want. Most religious groups have oversight by a bishop or church authorities. Those that aren't ordained clergy must be cautioned by the congregation IMO
The tangible results of faith -- stable families, loving relationships, charitable trusts, hospices, hospitals, and schools -- are evident everywhere.
The fatuous nature of 99% of politics -- high-flown economic obfuscation, pie-in-sky promises of this that and the other thing (if only you give to and elect whomever of the X party), and the whole partisan gridlock which characterizes much of the charade of "governance" in our country -- is so much smoke and mirrors.
If only, Bob.
The only churches that were ever threatened with losing tax status and investigated by the IRS were churches that supported Dems.
You may recall the buddhist temple and I believe there was a christian church in LA that was also investigated.
I want my representatives to have sat in a church at least weekly for most of his/her life.
I want my representative to have an understanding of guilt, a higher power than they are, and an understanding that the most powerful individual the world has ever known humbled himself by washing many unclean feet and did so by lifting the poor from the dirt.
Nonsense. These "qualifying factors" only amount to superficial grandstanding. I am not more or less secure knowing someone went to church weekly for most of their life. If anything, that would repel me. It shouldn't even be germane to their capabilities and aptitude.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but Ronald Reagan wasn't a regular churchgoer, yet he was very popular with evangelicals.
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.
