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: The Chatterdome in La La Land, CaliFUNia
39,031 posts, read 23,012,380 times
Reputation: 36027
Quote:
Originally Posted by Boompa
Agreed, Churches have engaged politics too much and need to be taxed
Churches are made up of folks who have a constitutional right to engage in politics. Why is everyone expressing outrage over churches participating in politics but ignore the various other non-profits that are heavily enmeshed in our nation's politics? Is it because the churches views are not "popular" so their opinions need to be squelched? Sounds unconstitutional to me.
Simply charging churches property taxes would drive most, if not all, churches out of existence because they would not be able to afford the tax. Contrary to popular belief on this forum, most churches are small and can barely keep their heads above water. Pastoring a church is NOT a lucrative career choice money-wise.
If the congregation cannot support the church properly, there is no reason to expect everyone else to support said church through the government.
If they cannot afford to pay a property tax, then they certainly cannot afford charitable works.
Churches are made up of folks who have a constitutional right to engage in politics. Why is everyone expressing outrage over churches participating in politics but ignore the various other non-profits that are heavily enmeshed in our nation's politics? Is it because the churches views are not "popular" so their opinions need to be squelched? Sounds unconstitutional to me.
People do indeed have a Cosntitutional right to vote, as does the clergy as well.
However, by definition, a preist holds a certain authority over his congregation. He can, in fact, influence the votes of the people of that church. The priest's voting power is therfore increased by the nubmer of parishioners.
Do you consider THAT fair? Do you consider that to be merely part of the democratic process?
Location: The Chatterdome in La La Land, CaliFUNia
39,031 posts, read 23,012,380 times
Reputation: 36027
Quote:
Originally Posted by AxisMundi
If the congregation cannot support the church properly, there is no reason to expect everyone else to support said church through the government.
If they cannot afford to pay a property tax, then they certainly cannot afford charitable works.
How are people supporting a church through the government? Underneath all this outrage about churches not paying property taxes has to do more with what churches teach or else this thread would be about non-profits cripping the US economy. How do you expect churches to be able to afford charitable works AND property taxes when many churches struggle just to stay afloat? Not all charity requires money and there's other ways churches serve their communities even when they are personally struggling.
If the congregation cannot support the church properly, there is no reason to expect everyone else to support said church through the government.
If they cannot afford to pay a property tax, then they certainly cannot afford charitable works.
What taxes go to a church? Charitable works can be done voluntarily for free. Besides all that you seem to just gloss right over the fact that if the church couldn't pay its property taxes the government would then own a church. Is it really that hard for you to understand why tax exempt is less entangling and more of a secular position?
Location: The Chatterdome in La La Land, CaliFUNia
39,031 posts, read 23,012,380 times
Reputation: 36027
Quote:
Originally Posted by AxisMundi
People do indeed have a Cosntitutional right to vote, as does the clergy as well.
However, by definition, a preist holds a certain authority over his congregation. He can, in fact, influence the votes of the people of that church. The priest's voting power is therfore increased by the nubmer of parishioners.
Do you consider THAT fair? Do you consider that to be merely part of the democratic process?
Not as much influence as television. Maybe we ought to limit political endorsements shown on TV as it skews politics. Prior to my becoming more educated about politics, I was always under the impression that republicans and conservatives were "for the rich" because that was always the theme that was echoed throughout the media. It was only when I stepped back and analyzed the issues for myself when I realized that the Democratic platform did not resonated within me. I think we ought to get rid of all political endorsements and ads as that unfairly taints political elections. After all, tv stars and other media personalities have a greater influence than a pastor of a small church. Why are we allowing celebrities to skew the democratic process?
How are people supporting a church through the government? Underneath all this outrage about churches not paying property taxes has to do more with what churches teach or else this thread would be about non-profits cripping the US economy. How do you expect churches to be able to afford charitable works AND property taxes when many churches struggle just to stay afloat? Not all charity requires money and there's other ways churches serve their communities even when they are personally struggling.
Empty lip service is all I see.
Not all churches have so-called charities.
Not all charities prostylize and forward a religious agenda.
There is no reason for every US citizen to support religious institutions.
Not as much influence as television. Maybe we ought to limit political endorsements shown on TV as it skews politics. Prior to my becoming more educated about politics, I was always under the impression that republicans and conservatives were "for the rich" because that was always the theme that was echoed throughout the media. It was only when I stepped back and analyzed the issues for myself when I realized that the Democratic platform did not resonated within me. I think we ought to get rid of all political endorsements and ads as that unfairly taints political elections. After all, tv stars and other media personalities have a greater influence than a pastor of a small church. Why are we allowing celebrities to skew the democratic process?
Firstly I perfectly agree. Politics have become much more about Party, as opposed to Nation. ONly the rich have any hopes of being elected at the national level, since only they can afford all the TV spots.
However, a pastor has the authority to over-ride any and all celebrities.
Location: The Chatterdome in La La Land, CaliFUNia
39,031 posts, read 23,012,380 times
Reputation: 36027
Quote:
Originally Posted by AxisMundi
Empty lip service is all I see.
Not all churches have so-called charities.
Not all charities prostylize and forward a religious agenda.
There is no reason for every US citizen to support religious institutions.
How are tax payers supporting churches?
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.
