Should the US begin taxing religious institutions?

pecker · Post by **pecker** » 2002-11-16 07:55pm

jegs2 wrote:
pecker wrote:
jegs2 wrote: Which church was responsible for those actions? Calvary Chapel certainly had no hand in them. If you speak of the Roman Catholic church, I've never been a member of that organization, nor do I intend to become one.
Normally when one speaks of the Church, they mean the Roman Catholic.

Well, I and many others don't think of those fellows when we think of church. I could go into my own tirade against what I consider to be a fatally-flawed doctrine within the R.C. church, but this isn't the place for it.

Certainly don't want the actions of my church judged by the misdeeds of the R.C. church. That would be like saying that all Southerners still want slaves.

Going by conventional speaking, when someone says The Church, they mean Roman Catholic. If you mean something else, you should specify (Protestant, Anglican, Bob's Church of Give Me Money)

jegs2 · Post by **jegs2** » 2002-11-16 07:56pm

Colonel Olrik wrote:
jegs2 wrote: Well, I and many others don't think of those fellows when we think of church. I could go into my own tirade against what I consider to be a fatally-flawed doctrine within the R.C. church, but this isn't the place for it.
Yeah, right. Even when your fundies have much more power and influence. When they are actually more numerous. When the Pope has recognized Science numerous times and preaches peace, while you have Falwell and worse preaching holy crusades against everyone slightly different.

You do not have the higher ground.

...and that has what to do with what I wrote?

pecker · Post by **pecker** » 2002-11-16 07:56pm

I'll put it this way: When someone says America, it's infered they mean the United States.

pecker · Post by **pecker** » 2002-11-16 07:56pm

jegs2 wrote:
Colonel Olrik wrote:
jegs2 wrote: Well, I and many others don't think of those fellows when we think of church. I could go into my own tirade against what I consider to be a fatally-flawed doctrine within the R.C. church, but this isn't the place for it.
Yeah, right. Even when your fundies have much more power and influence. When they are actually more numerous. When the Pope has recognized Science numerous times and preaches peace, while you have Falwell and worse preaching holy crusades against everyone slightly different.

You do not have the higher ground.
...and that has what to do with what I wrote?

Nothing I can see...

jegs2 · Post by **jegs2** » 2002-11-16 07:59pm

pecker wrote:I'll put it this way: When someone says America, it's infered they mean the United States.

See your point, so I'll consider all future posts of "the church" to mean "the Roman Catholic church"
...unless otherwise specified.

Durandal · Post by **Durandal** » 2002-11-16 08:26pm

Did your pastor tell people to vote for Bush because he was anti-abortion? Would your church organize a protest if prostitution were suddenly legalized where you live?

HemlockGrey · Post by **HemlockGrey** » 2002-11-16 08:51pm

Absolutely not. My pastor actually voted for Gore.

Durandal · Post by **Durandal** » 2002-11-16 08:56pm

Ah, you've got one of those liberal, fake-Christian churches, then?

HemlockGrey · Post by **HemlockGrey** » 2002-11-16 08:58pm

fake-Christian? You mean, non-idiotic, real Christian? Yes.

patkelly · Post by **patkelly** » 2002-11-16 09:04pm

If you look closely at religious institutions, you will find they could easily be defined with the Inc. designation. Catholics Inc. or Muslims Inc. or Jews Inc. and so on and so on. The business of religion is highly completive though its tax free status obviously conflicts with the concept of separation of church and state. Not only does such an advantageous status give religion a special designation within government it clearly shows government bias towards religion.

Some would say religious institutions are basically non-profit and therefore entitled to their tax-free status. No doubt the average American would be very pleased to take home the same paycheck as Pat Robinson or live with the opulence of the average rectory.

Raptor 597 · Post by **Raptor 597** » 2002-11-16 09:28pm

I agree, with Patkelly particularly with Fundies, they tax the follower's ass by 10% or more life earnings in most cases thats highway robbery. They certainly need too be taxed excessively especially the Fundie demionations, and they are very slightly, a Baptist Church was taken over not paying taxes a few years ago, go FBI!

Durandal · Post by **Durandal** » 2002-11-16 09:53pm

Reminds me of Reverend Lovejoy from The Simpsons.

"When we say 'tything,' we mean 10% of gross income, not net. Come on, people, don't make us audit."

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2002-11-16 09:59pm

patkelly wrote:Some would say religious institutions are basically non-profit and therefore entitled to their tax-free status. No doubt the average American would be very pleased to take home the same paycheck as Pat Robinson or live with the opulence of the average rectory.

I agree with your point, but I can't help but laugh whenever I hear the name "rectory". It's so appropriate

Durandal · Post by **Durandal** » 2002-11-16 10:14pm

<Clicks Stopwatch>

5 pages for Mike to make an anal sex reference. You're slipping, Mike.

data_link · Post by **data_link** » 2002-11-16 10:19pm

You know, I don't see why we shouldn't tax religious institutions. They've been taxing our patience for years.

Antediluvian · Post by **Antediluvian** » 2002-11-17 12:00am

data_link wrote:You know, I don't see why we shouldn't tax religious institutions. They've been taxing our patience for years.

Heh. LoL.

On-Topic: I say tax them.

Everyone else has to pay them, why not them?

Plus, it would cut the legs out from under Pat Robertson and the like, to some degree, and that can't be a bad thing.

pecker · Post by **pecker** » 2002-11-17 12:04am

Actually, when I think about it, I can see A LOT of bad coming from taxing churches.

Antediluvian · Post by **Antediluvian** » 2002-11-17 12:08am

pecker wrote:Actually, when I think about it, I can see A LOT of bad coming from taxing churches.

How's that?

pecker · Post by **pecker** » 2002-11-17 12:12am

Antediluvian wrote:
pecker wrote:Actually, when I think about it, I can see A LOT of bad coming from taxing churches.
How's that?

Well, first, it'll cause an uproar in both the religious and the 'separation of church and state' communities.

And also, where do you draw the line? Say we tax a church. Does that mean we can then tax a charity affiliated with the church?

Knife · Post by **Knife** » 2002-11-17 12:19am

pecker wrote:
Antediluvian wrote:
pecker wrote:Actually, when I think about it, I can see A LOT of bad coming from taxing churches.
How's that?
Well, first, it'll cause an uproar in both the religious and the 'separation of church and state' communities.

And also, where do you draw the line? Say we tax a church. Does that mean we can then tax a charity affiliated with the church?

Yup, equal taxation that goes along with equal representation is what I say. What should make a bunch of story tellers(bad ones at that) so special that they shouldn't pay taxes.

neoolong · Post by **neoolong** » 2002-11-17 12:22am

pecker wrote:
Antediluvian wrote:
pecker wrote:Actually, when I think about it, I can see A LOT of bad coming from taxing churches.
How's that?
Well, first, it'll cause an uproar in both the religious and the 'separation of church and state' communities.

And also, where do you draw the line? Say we tax a church. Does that mean we can then tax a charity affiliated with the church?

If they fall under the same category as other non-taxed charities, then no.

pecker · Post by **pecker** » 2002-11-17 12:22am

Knife wrote:
pecker wrote:
Antediluvian wrote: How's that?
Well, first, it'll cause an uproar in both the religious and the 'separation of church and state' communities.

And also, where do you draw the line? Say we tax a church. Does that mean we can then tax a charity affiliated with the church?

Yup, equal taxation that goes along with equal representation is what I say. What should make a bunch of story tellers(bad ones at that) so special that they shouldn't pay taxes.

Because the majority of the world disagrees that they're just storytellers.

Durandal · Post by **Durandal** » 2002-11-17 12:25am

If you own property, it gets taxed. Period.

Here's a big problem with tax-exempting churches. It necessitates that the government deem what is and is not an "official" religion, which is establishing religion. If I wanted the property taxes on my house to be waived because I say it's a Sun-Worshipping Church, the government would tell me to go fuck myself, thus elevating Christianity and the other officially-recognized religions above Sun Worship.

pecker · Post by **pecker** » 2002-11-17 12:25am

neoolong wrote:
pecker wrote:
Antediluvian wrote: How's that?
Well, first, it'll cause an uproar in both the religious and the 'separation of church and state' communities.

And also, where do you draw the line? Say we tax a church. Does that mean we can then tax a charity affiliated with the church?

If they fall under the same category as other non-taxed charities, then no.

That's what i was thinking. But the 'church and state' faction would raise hell the likes of which we've never seen. I figure taxation of churched would go the way of prohibition. Good on paper, but torture in real life. If nothing else, churches would just change their title to charities. Hell, it's what I'd do in their shoes.

Knife · Post by **Knife** » 2002-11-17 12:29am

pecker wrote:
Knife wrote:
pecker wrote: Well, first, it'll cause an uproar in both the religious and the 'separation of church and state' communities.

And also, where do you draw the line? Say we tax a church. Does that mean we can then tax a charity affiliated with the church?

Yup, equal taxation that goes along with equal representation is what I say. What should make a bunch of story tellers(bad ones at that) so special that they shouldn't pay taxes.
Because the majority of the world disagrees that they're just storytellers.

And it still comes down to special treatment.