Obama plans on removing tax exempt status for all churches... (Buddhist, Muslims)
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.
Sort of - but not quite. They can't fire anybody they want for any reason they want (such as being gay).
I didn't say it was legal. I asked why it shouldn't be legal for a private business owner to set forth whatever criteria he chooses for his employees? IOW, Hooters should be able to hire only women as waitresses and churches should be able to hire only those that meet biblical criteria.
If I want to hire only purple people, I should be permitted to do so.
Quote:
Originally Posted by b. frank
Anyway, your premise indicates that churches should be stripped of their tax-exempt status
No. I said that churches should reject tax-exempt status. I think the government should still make it available.
Quote:
Originally Posted by b. frank
and treated as regular private businesses.
If they are a business. Not all churches are business, even if they offer compensation to certain employees. In those cases, the employees are independent contractors. That's often the case with pastors, since the vast majority of churches have very, very little money.
I didn't say it was legal. I asked why it shouldn't be legal for a private business owner to set forth whatever criteria he chooses for his employees? IOW, Hooters should be able to hire only women as waitresses and churches should be able to hire only those that meet biblical criteria.
If I want to hire only purple people, I should be permitted to do so.
Yeah, and if you own a business and you only want to hire straight people then you can try to make sure you exclude gays and that's fine. But if you slip up and hire a gay person, then you can't fire them for being gay or, um, purple.
Quote:
I said that churches should reject tax-exempt status. I think the government should still make it available.
The church was never required, in the past, to pay taxes anyway, as that goes against the separation of church and state. Since they themselves have made themselves subject to the laws of the IRS code, then the government has them by the tail. There is no separation then. Even if it is a so called "tax-exempt" 501c3 corporate status.
As far as hiring who people want to hire, by becoming "little" government subjects themselves, the government can tell them who they can hire, or not to hire. Based upon orientation that is, whether religious, sexual, age, or disability. Follow the rules, or pay the price.
It is why you cannot serve two masters. It truly is either or, and since we sold our birthright for a bowl of "______", then we take it as it comes, and though only we can complain about it, it won't change at all, until we return to what made us great. Most American's have lost their birthright, and until a leader comes and restores what was lost, then the sheep will remain lost.
What not religious based organizations get tax exemption and what services does a church offer that the government can't reach. Also why should religious organizations get tax exempt status.
Im sure even as an agnostic person you churches do a lot of work within there communities.You can't tell me you've never heard of churches providing food, shelter,day care for people who cannot afford it.HIV awareness,drug rehabilatation,utility assistance,rent etc.Not all churches are about greed.
CARE,The Red Cross,UNCF etc are all non religeous based nonprofits that are not tax.(At least thats what i thought,I could be wrong ,if so let me know)
Okay, so let's look at this. Churches by and large do a lot of charitable work that benefits all people in society, including gays and lesbians, via feeding the poor and caring for the sick, etc...which takes some of the load off the government by reducing the amount of public money spent to take care of those things that churches help take care of. By removing the tax-exempt status of churches, how is the church going to afford to keep doing charitable works? Take away some of their money, and it places a heavier tax load on society to make up for what the churches will no longer take care of.
Something else....aren't public schools funded with tax dollars, including the tax dollars of Christians? Yet Christian teachings such as creationism and other religious observances are banned in public schools. Why is that? It seems one part of society that "discriminates" against another is viewed as bad, and therefore should be punished by having its tax-exempt status revoked. However another part of society is allowed to not only receive tax funding that comes partially (most likely predominantly) from Christians - but is allowed to discriminate against a part of society, and still retain its public funding. I might add that those public schools benefit homosexuals, atheists, different religions, and others opposed to Christian values. So why should Christians be required to pay taxes for an institution that discriminates against them? Why shouldn't Christians demand an end to the ban of school prayer and the teaching of creationism?
Okay, so let's look at this. Churches by and large do a lot of charitable work that benefits all people in society, including gays and lesbians, via feeding the poor and caring for the sick, etc...which takes some of the load off the government by reducing the amount of public money spent to take care of those things that churches help take care of. By removing the tax-exempt status of churches, how is the church going to afford to keep doing charitable works? Take away some of their money, and it places a heavier tax load on society to make up for what the churches will no longer take care of.
Something else....aren't public schools funded with tax dollars, including the tax dollars of Christians? Yet Christian teachings such as creationism and other religious observances are banned in public schools. Why is that? It seems one part of society that "discriminates" against another is viewed as bad, and therefore should be punished by having its tax-exempt status revoked. However another part of society is allowed to not only receive tax funding that comes partially (most likely predominantly) from Christians - but is allowed to discriminate against a part of society, and still retain its public funding. I might add that those public schools benefit homosexuals, atheists, different religions, and others opposed to Christian values. So why should Christians be required to pay taxes for an institution that discriminates against them? Why shouldn't Christians demand an end to the ban of school prayer and the teaching of creationism?
And now you know why the Amish are the way they are.
Okay, so let's look at this. Churches by and large do a lot of charitable work that benefits all people in society, including gays and lesbians, via feeding the poor and caring for the sick, etc...which takes some of the load off the government by reducing the amount of public money spent to take care of those things that churches help take care of. By removing the tax-exempt status of churches, how is the church going to afford to keep doing charitable works? Take away some of their money, and it places a heavier tax load on society to make up for what the churches will no longer take care of.
Something else....aren't public schools funded with tax dollars, including the tax dollars of Christians? Yet Christian teachings such as creationism and other religious observances are banned in public schools. Why is that? It seems one part of society that "discriminates" against another is viewed as bad, and therefore should be punished by having its tax-exempt status revoked. However another part of society is allowed to not only receive tax funding that comes partially (most likely predominantly) from Christians - but is allowed to discriminate against a part of society, and still retain its public funding. I might add that those public schools benefit homosexuals, atheists, different religions, and others opposed to Christian values. So why should Christians be required to pay taxes for an institution that discriminates against them? Why shouldn't Christians demand an end to the ban of school prayer and the teaching of creationism?
There are not religious based organizations whose sole business is to do charitable work and get tax exemption, yet they don't need to make everyone else believe nonreligious values.
For one creationism is NOT science so it shouldn't be taught in any science class. It's the work of fairydust. There's no empirical evidence to back it up. And also it's a religious view of origins, maybe public schools should teach pagan creationism. And public schools aren't opposed to 'Christian values.' Just because they don't preach them, that doesn't mean they're opposed to them, public schools are neutral on religious matters. Also not everyone in public schools are Christians, much as you want to believe it. There are atheists, agnostics, deists, muslims, Christians, Buddhists, Hindus, Neopagans etc. If there is going to be school prayer, maybe they should pray to Kali, don't want to make her angry.
it should be all or nothing in this case. if one church gets it, they all should. and if they all can't, then none of them should.
earlier, someone stated that christian churches are the only ones that receive tax exemption. i would be very interested in seeing actual sources for this. i've never heard that before, and think that it is unlikely to be true. if it us, however, it needs to be addressed and changed.
Gay News Blog: Did LDS Church violate tax exempt status with stand on gay marriage? (http://gay_blog.blogspot.com/2008/07/did-lds-church-violate-tax-exempt.html - broken link)
Where does the article mention anything about OBAMA? There are quite a number of churches who build multimillion dollar buildings for worship, often in very expensive areas. this is wrong, imo. these large lots comprise property which could be used for businesses and residences, which could generate tax revenue if used for those purposes. it might also cut down on the considerable suburban sprawl if the land was used more wisely. they should be taxed and contribute to the well-being of the communities that they operate in.
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.
