America needs to start taxing Churches, synagogues, Temples and Mosques , NOW!

Originally posted by Exuberant1
reply to post by tinfoilman

 

Don't worry tinfoilman - I am a strict Constitutionalist.

I am just providing some comic relief and counterbalance.

"America needs to start taxing Churches, synagogues, Temples and Mosques , NOW! "

"Now!!!!"?

"NEEDS?"

Just tax 'em - No legislation needed, just DO it!! You Need to!

I think this thread was designed to provoke more than anything.

Like I said I don't mind. It won't help for various reasons. But it says right in the Bible we should pay taxes if we are asked.

But they just don't realize it won't fix the problem like they think it will.

[edit on 23-6-2009 by tinfoilman]

Originally posted by tinfoilman
But it says right in the Bible we should pay taxes if we are asked.

The bible has been used to justify numerous atrocities by governments and people working to achieve a political objectives.

Overtaxing is one of the things that the bible can be used to help one rationalize away.

Jesus didn't write the Bible we read - it is translations of translations of translations...

For example the King James Authorized version of the bible was not authored by him; It was the only version you were authorized to own and having another version could result in death, torture etc...

It is obvious why his version told the peasants to pay taxes and obey his authority - he was the government.

If the government decided to tax you at 85 percent - would you still use your version of the bible to justify those taxes?

Imagine if the government decided to do that...


*You should read what god has to say about taxes and interest rates in the Koran (the latest version, obviously )

[edit on 23-6-2009 by Exuberant1]

Originally posted by Exuberant1
Perhaps atheists are the reason we built all those FEMA camps - they must be kept isolated from the rest of Christian North America.

"Christian North America"?

Maybe you should come out of your cave.

Christians no longer have ownership of America and are now the slowest growing religion in the world. By the end of this century, there might not even be a Christian church in America. I hope there is but I wouldn’t put money on it.

Originally posted by Exuberant1

*You should read what god has to say about taxes and interest rates in the Koran (the latest version, obviously

)

read the Koran, well that explains your last post where your were acting like a crazy fire and brimstone Christian but you are a Moslem.

Nice trick, and congratulation, Islam is growing very rapidly here in America, I guess winner takes all.

They don't tax Mosques in Iran do they? But then they don't have to the Ayatollahs own the whole country.


[edit on 23-6-2009 by gdeed]

Originally posted by gdeed

read the Koran, well that explains your last post where your were acting like a crazy fire and brimstone Christian but you are a Moslem.

You have deduced that based on what? The recommendation to read opinions on taxation and interest from a book originating with another culture?

If I recommend that you read Ludwig Von Mises - will you call me an Austrian...



I don't share personal information on ATS - my beliefs are private.
-I could be a Free Mason for all you know... Or Shinto


So, Do you feel that the Bible justifies the taxing of churches?

If your Priest asked for donations under the table because he felt that the hypothetical tax law we are discussing here was unjust, would you turn him in?

[edit on 23-6-2009 by Exuberant1]

Originally posted by Exuberant1
We should tax atheists moreso than anyone else.

There should be tax on those who do not donate to churches.

The atheists will complain - but they don't care about the poor that their money would help.

Perhaps atheists are the reason we built all those FEMA camps - they must be kept isolated from the rest of Christian North America.

We can probably hold 4-5 million of them. not enough; but it is a start...

I imagine that atheists would want to work to pay for the expenses they create for staying in the camps, so that should be a mandatory option for them to choose.

Taxing Churches...

priceless

[edit on 23-6-2009 by Exuberant1]

This sounds like the ranting of a rabid Christian. But it comes from someone who recommends reading the Koran.

Talk about your wolf in sheep’s clothing.

Well I’m an atheist mostly because I’m aware of all the hell that has taken place on this planet because of religious fanatics on both sides of the fence.

But I’m also aware that I have always lived in a Christian country and I don’t have to become a Christian to prosper. That would not be the case if I lived in a Muslim controlled country.

Heck, you are ready to put me in FEMA camp for sharing my ideas. Or would that be an Ayatollah camp?

I have a feeling "now" that all the FEMA scare may have originated somewhere in the Middle East by people like you in sheep clothing.

Click here for more information.

Hard to say if they should be taxed or not, ones that run soup kitchens and operate on a tight budget are one thing, but these guys on television raking in the money are something else. I'd say after legitimate expenses are paid to run the church, taxed what's left over. If it's below a certain amount, leave it alone. There's no reason to have a lot at the end of the year anyway if it's going to the poor as intended.

Originally posted by Exuberant1

I don't share personal information on ATS - my beliefs are private.
-I could be a Free Mason for all you know... Or Shinto

I completely understand, you would prefer that everyone believe that your are a Christian that refer people to read the Karan?

Nice, I wonder how many people have fallen for that.

Originally posted by korath
Hard to say if they should be taxed or not, ones that run soup kitchens and operate on a tight budget are one thing, but these guys on television raking in the money are something else. I'd say after legitimate expenses are paid to run the church, taxed what's left over. If it's below a certain amount, leave it alone. There's no reason to have a lot at the end of the year anyway if it's going to the poor as intended.

Churches, Mosques, Synagogues and many Temples control huge amounts of money. They also own billions of dollars in real estate. Most of them pretend that they don't have money because if people knew how much they had, they would not donate money to them.

A regular business has overhead, employees, and product cost. On top of that, they have to pay real estate taxes, and somehow make a profit or go out of business.

Churches are a cash business with little expense compared to ordinary businesses.

Anyone can claim religious status, even you. So if you want to get out of paying taxes set up your own religion, even out of your house. Have a few friends over and play Nintendo and drink beer.

Religion is one segment of the economy that keeps growing even in bad economic times. Drive out to any suburb in America and see how many of them religious institutions are popping up all over the place.

The many thousands of "home made" religions remain out of sight and out of mind, but reaping millions if not billions of tax benefits too.

I'm not saying that's a bad thing. I'm saying they should pay their fair share on the money they take in, like the rest of us.

This is why drug legalization doesn't work:

www.washingtonpost.com...

www.justthinktwice.com...

According to a report released by the Marin Institute last summer, the total economic cost of alcohol use is $38 billion annually, with $8.3 billion shouldered by government agencies for health care treatment of alcohol-caused illnesses and injuries, crime costs, traffic incidents, and reduced worker productivity. The $1.5 billion in sale tax revenues from annual state alcoholic beverage purchases, along with more than $360 million in state excise taxes and industry fines and fees only cover a mere 22 percent of total government costs, and there’s every reason the public should expect the same result with legalizing marijuana.

www.sdnn.com...

The religions may be tax free, but the participants fund the churches. And what they do with their money is their decision.

I am not a fan of organized religion, I believe religion should be personal and conducted by the people, so I am not an all out supporter.

What I will say, is that I have bought cheap clothes and presents from the church. When my husband and I had a tradjedy, the mormon church quickly set us up with counselors at a reduced cost, free if we couldn't pay. And they didn't care that we were not mormon.

When we visited the UU church, being lonely and new to a city and lookign for people to meet, they quickly set us up with other couples our age.

When I was methodist, some of the happiest times I had was the youth groups(methodists are also the least preachy of the groups i think) who fed us and gave us snacks and constructive time together. volunteers came in to cook for us. We would have plays.

Churches are the ones who run the charity programs, the soup kitchens, the thrift stores. As far as I am concerned, they deserve the tax break.







[edit on 23-6-2009 by nixie_nox]

Originally posted by nixie_nox
This is why drug legalization doesn't work:

www.washingtonpost.com...¬Found=true

www.justthinktwice.com...

According to a report released by the Marin Institute last summer, the total economic cost of alcohol use is $38 billion annually, with $8.3 billion shouldered by government agencies for health care treatment of alcohol-caused illnesses and injuries, crime costs, traffic incidents, and reduced worker productivity. The $1.5 billion in sale tax revenues from annual state alcoholic beverage purchases, along with more than $360 million in state excise taxes and industry fines and fees only cover a mere 22 percent of total government costs, and there’s every reason the public should expect the same result with legalizing marijuana.

www.sdnn.com...

That's is making the assumption that drug use is not going on because it is against the law.

The fact is people that want to do or abuse drugs are doing it regardless of the laws. Billions of dollars worth of drugs are being consumed by Americans every single day. All those things you mentioned have been happing for decades and will continue to happen. The drug laws have not stopped any of it.

Drugs are easy to get, anyone can get them. The drug laws are a farce and have not even dented drug use.

It's safe to say that everyone knows someone or many someone’s that abuse drugs.

Right now the drug lords are making a fortune, why shouldn't the government get that money instead?

Sure, the Government will only waste that money as they do with most of the money they collect. But it's better than letting the criminals get rich. Or do you disagree?

Originally posted by nixie_nox
The religions may be tax free, but the participants fund the churches. And what they do with their money is their decision.

I am not a fan of organized religion, I believe religion should be personal and conducted by the people, so I am not an all out supporter.

What I will say, is that I have bought cheap clothes and presents from the church. When my husband and I had a tradjedy, the mormon church quickly set us up with counselors at a reduced cost, free if we couldn't pay. And they didn't care that we were not mormon.

When we visited the UU church, being lonely and new to a city and lookign for people to meet, they quickly set us up with other couples our age.

When I was methodist, some of the happiest times I had was the youth groups(methodists are also the least preachy of the groups i think) who fed us and gave us snacks and constructive time together. volunteers came in to cook for us. We would have plays.

Churches are the ones who run the charity programs, the soup kitchens, the thrift stores. As far as I am concerned, they deserve the tax break.

[edit on 23-6-2009 by nixie_nox]

Some people believe that I'm attacking the Christian churches. The fact is Christian churches are a small part of all the religious institutions we have in America.

Like I mentioned earlier anyone can set up a church, even in your basement, and instantly become a non-profit business. There are hundreds of thousands such churches in America. They don't do any charitable work for anyone but themselves.

Other religious institutions are set up here to collect money from their members all over America and sent to countries that don't like America, but they love America's money.

There are good churches, but there are many that are not good at all, and they are the ones that are making most of the money and taking out of the country every single day.

Since we can't discriminate again individual religious entities we have to treat them all the same.

With the economy the way it is shouldn't we tax the millions of acres of land that the big three religions, Islamic, christian and Judaism, own free and clear from property taxes?

Touchy subject, taxing a religious organization.
Before I get into why this is a bad idea and some solutions lets go back into the history of where and why the Seperation of church and State came out.
The concept came out during the Presidency of Thomas Jefferson. Thomas Jefferson, saw the abuse of political power on the part of the church in Europe and how such would influence the government and how governments would use the church to further its goals. It was not a pretty picture, and it came down to a baptist church in a state asking for his opinion. In a letter, he stated that there needed to be a wall of seperation between the religious and the politcal as to prevent several things, one being discrimination and from any church weilding political power, to gets its policies in place. Thus setting up that wall.
You see if you tax a religious organization and allow it to be a religious organizaion, then they would have the right to exercise political power, could you deal with having to live under a set of religious laws? Are there any groups that would either bennifit from or end up being discriminated against if that happened? I can think of quiet a few that would.
So taxing a church would be a bad idea, as I would not want to hand them that kind of power.
Now I would say that any church where the minister, has broken the law or gets involved in the policital process, they should be taxed and that church disbanded. It would end abuse on the part of the clergy towards the children, the abuse of authority, and any church from using the pulpit to get into politics. And the remaining would not only pick up on a congregation, but the ministers and those in charge would ensure that they do not cross those lines.

There are many categories under the IRS (like in most countries) which allows exemptions from tax - not just Churches and Religious Institutions - There are Non-profit Organizations, Charities, Political Organizations and Private Foundations, and then these have their sub divisions which are also tax exempt or have substantial tax benefits attached to them.
Thats why people with money and knowhow set them up - no tax or very little.

Originally posted by sdcigarpig
You see if you tax a religious organization and allow it to be a religious organizaion, then they would have the right to exercise political power, could you deal with having to live under a set of religious laws? Are there any groups that would either bennifit from or end up being discriminated against if that happened? I can think of quiet a few that would.
So taxing a church would be a bad idea, as I would not want to hand them that kind of power.

I wondered about that - thanks for explaination - I read that in the IRS Tax Guide for Churches and Religious Organizations. Theres a quite a long description of what the IRS translate as Lobbying. There is a list on page 5 which is headed Jepodizing Tax Exept Status and it lists these things:

■
their net earnings may not inure to any private shareholder or individual,
■
they must not provide a substantial benefit to private interests,
■
they must not devote a substantial part of their activities to attempting to influence legislation,
■
they must not participate in, or intervene in, any political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for public office, and
■
the organization’s purposes and activities may not be illegal or violate fundamental public policy.

Source: www.irs.gov...

you can see that Churches and Religious Institutions choose their words carefully when speaking on public and open matters - what they can do though is get others to do it for them so as not to jepordize their status.

Smigs

Originally posted by gdeed


The constitution protects these religious institution so that needs to be changed.

Sorry you lost me there. The Constitution needs to be changed? I would say you are wrong. Our Constitution has stood the test of time for longer than any of us have lived and you want to change it? The only thing that needs to be changed is the politicians we have in D.C. now.




As for the money that goes into churches well let me explain the money going into my church.

The first small portion goes of course to pay the salary of my Pastor who does not really make that much but it is a rather small church. After that a large amount goes to pay the expenses of the church. Then there is a little that goes to ministries we support and then what is left goes into savings and is used for things that the church might want to do (youth outings and such).


But I think we need to leave the Constitution alone. Any time I hear someone thinking it needs to be changed I sort of stop listening to them. They remind me of Bush saying it is just a G.D. piece of paper. Or someone who thinks it is an outdated piece of paper. Neither of which is true.

The Constitution should be respected as it is the founding ideas of what our country is. If you do not like the Constitution you might want to look into going elsewhere to live.

Raist

Originally posted by sdcigarpig
Touchy subject, taxing a religious organization.
Before I get into why this is a bad idea and some solutions lets go back into the history of where and why the Seperation of church and State came out.
The concept came out during the Presidency of Thomas Jefferson. Thomas Jefferson, saw the abuse of political power on the part of the church in Europe and how such would influence the government and how governments would use the church to further its goals. It was not a pretty picture, and it came down to a baptist church in a state asking for his opinion. In a letter, he stated that there needed to be a wall of seperation between the religious and the politcal as to prevent several things, one being discrimination and from any church weilding political power, to gets its policies in place. Thus setting up that wall.
You see if you tax a religious organization and allow it to be a religious organizaion, then they would have the right to exercise political power, could you deal with having to live under a set of religious laws? Are there any groups that would either bennifit from or end up being discriminated against if that happened? I can think of quiet a few that would.
So taxing a church would be a bad idea, as I would not want to hand them that kind of power.
Now I would say that any church where the minister, has broken the law or gets involved in the policital process, they should be taxed and that church disbanded. It would end abuse on the part of the clergy towards the children, the abuse of authority, and any church from using the pulpit to get into politics. And the remaining would not only pick up on a congregation, but the ministers and those in charge would ensure that they do not cross those lines.

I think we all know that religion is an important part of politics because voters who belong to a religouse institution vote their beliefs. Cristianity is a power behind abortion and gay issues. Isreal would be doomed without Judaism in america. Islam is a growing power in politics and eventually will out do the others concerning the direction of political expenency. When we talk about religion in america everyone assumes we are talking about christians, which is absurd. Islam is the new silent majority but silent not for long.

[edit on 4-5-2010 by gdeed]