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.
Have all the separation you (and the rest of us) want. But why should the rest of us as taxpayers have to subsidize your favorite hobby? How does looking for transparency actually have anything to do with separation of church and state. I mean, are you not just a teeny weeny bit concerned about where mosques might be getting their money from and where it is spent?
We pay our own way, asking nothing of you. As long as we're not breaking the law, how we spend our money is none of your business. The same goes for mosques, until they blow up buildings and kill people.
Churches are good for the community. They promote good citizenship and charity.
Location: In a little house on the prairie - literally
10,202 posts, read 7,926,708 times
Reputation: 4561
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmiej
We pay our own way, asking nothing of you. As long as we're not breaking the law, how we spend our money is none of your business. The same goes for mosques, until they blow up buildings and kill people.
Churches are good for the community. They promote good citizenship and charity.
Actually, yes, the general taxpayer DOES support religious bodies as they have to make up for the tax free status they have and tax deductions donors get. How do you know what mosques are spending their money on? How do we know what churches are? How do we know that there are not churches sponsoring, oh, say liberation radicals who want armed revolution, or say, race supremacists?
Actually, yes, the general taxpayer DOES support religious bodies as they have to make up for the tax free status they have and tax deductions donors get. How do you know what mosques are spending their money on? How do we know what churches are? How do we know that there are not churches sponsoring, oh, say liberation radicals who want armed revolution, or say, race supremacists?
Or supplying their pastors with mansions?
Church members are taxpayers too. Our country gives tax breaks to charitable organizations because they promote the general welfare. You get the same tax breaks I do.
You don't know, and as long as we're not breaking the law, it's none of your business how we spend our money, including buying our pastor a mansion.
Location: In a little house on the prairie - literally
10,202 posts, read 7,926,708 times
Reputation: 4561
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmiej
Church members are taxpayers too. Our country gives tax breaks to charitable organizations because they promote the general welfare. You get the same tax breaks I do.
You don't know, and as long as we're not breaking the law, it's none of your business how we spend our money, including buying our pastor a mansion.
Except those of us who do not support your religion, or any religion, need to make up for the infrastructure you do not use, and as my links have shown, the amount of real charity that churches spend their money on is minuscule to their revenue. In other words, as a whole, they talk a good story, but don't do the walk.
So yes, it is everyone's business where the money goes if they have to subsidize the organization. Why is it OK for all other charities to have to report, but religion should be exempt?
How often have we heard on CD that without churches, there would be little charitable work done? Mind you, it's virtually impossible to dig into church finances to discover the truth, simply because they don't have to disclose their information.
This blog posts highlights two studies done by Christian organizations which at least pierce the veil a bit. Shockingly to some and probably no surprise to others, very little actually goes to real charitable work.
There is no question churches spend a lot of money on themselves and their religious activities, but that really doesn't help anyone but their own, and not anyone outside of that group.
Yay. Another lame attempt by you to attack American Christianity.
So, those hospitals, wells being dug, homeless people being fed, etc are just our imagination?
Yes, there are bad "churches" like Osteen's church, and others that serve only to line the pocket of those in charge...but please don't lump all of us in with them. The article did not say that there are no good churches -- it simply said check out the financials. Many DO invest a lot in charitable works.
Location: In a little house on the prairie - literally
10,202 posts, read 7,926,708 times
Reputation: 4561
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vizio
Yay. Another lame attempt by you to attack American Christianity.
So, those hospitals, wells being dug, homeless people being fed, etc are just our imagination?
Yes, there are bad "churches" like Osteen's church, and others that serve only to line the pocket of those in charge...but please don't lump all of us in with them. The article did not say that there are no good churches -- it simply said check out the financials. Many DO invest a lot in charitable works.
And many don't.
The best case in the second survey was about 10%. The best case in the first was 5%. I can tell you that Rotary spends far, far, far in excess of that on charity. As do most other real charities.
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.
