Board index › Topical Discussion › Politics, Philosophy, and Religion

Should churches pay taxes?

Page 7 of 9 [ 136 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9  Next

Previous topic | Next topic

beakybird
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 25 Dec 2012
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,789
Location: nj

29 Sep 2015, 6:02 pm

SilverStar wrote:
Peejay wrote:
I personally would be happy to pay more in tax

to get,,,, for example a better health service, better pension provision better mental health support, better schools, better Public transport system etc....
In our country I don`t think we pay enough in tax..... is this weird to want everyone to be better off?

Charitable status is akin to off shore banking for churches.



We pay enough in taxes. The problem, is that the money we send in, goes to the wrong places.


This. Ill pay more taxes, but it'd be largely unnecessary if the ones already collected were better spent.



beakybird
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 25 Dec 2012
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,789
Location: nj

29 Sep 2015, 6:09 pm

And churches should absolutely be taxed. On what they should be taxed is another question. However from the perspective of a former Christian who has some Biblical knowledge, any church that would object is a false church who's motivation is wealth.

Render to Caesar what is Caesars...



Edenthiel
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Sep 2014
Age: 57
Gender: Female
Posts: 2,820
Location: S.F Bay Area

29 Sep 2015, 11:18 pm

This has been an interesting conversation. My opinion: Considering just how much they take in and their net worth vs how much they actually spend on charity, *and* taking into consideration how much of their donations they funnel into political influence, I think very few churches even deserve the name "charity".

But that said, the question is moot, at least in the USA. The IRS has been unable to investigate churches for violations since 2007 or 2008. It was then that a Federal Judge ordered them to designate a specific person to authorize any church investigations. They neglected to do so. Eventually the story gained traction and just as it was climbing up to mainstream attention...Congress conjured up their "IRS is treating conservative non-profits unfairly" controversy to muddy the waters. The media got confused enough to ignore the other story completely. Meanwhile, priests, bishops and pastors overtly flaunted the law and began to run full page newspaper ads, post youtube vids and send out flyers telling their faithful that a vote for (in this case) Obama would, "risk their eternal soul". A lawsuit was finally brought against the IRS for not designating someone to sign off on church investigations; the IRS agreed to do so. Then, just as they were about to...the GOP Congress declared a Congressional investigation of the IRS on the matter, thus freezing all IRS investigations into tax law violations by churches. Congress then went home for six weeks to campaign. Upon returning, they slashed the IRS budget.


_________________
“For small creatures such as we the vastness is bearable only through love.”
―Carl Sagan


Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 49,142
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

30 Sep 2015, 2:06 am

Edenthiel wrote:
This has been an interesting conversation. My opinion: Considering just how much they take in and their net worth vs how much they actually spend on charity, *and* taking into consideration how much of their donations they funnel into political influence, I think very few churches even deserve the name "charity".

But that said, the question is moot, at least in the USA. The IRS has been unable to investigate churches for violations since 2007 or 2008. It was then that a Federal Judge ordered them to designate a specific person to authorize any church investigations. They neglected to do so. Eventually the story gained traction and just as it was climbing up to mainstream attention...Congress conjured up their "IRS is treating conservative non-profits unfairly" controversy to muddy the waters. The media got confused enough to ignore the other story completely. Meanwhile, priests, bishops and pastors overtly flaunted the law and began to run full page newspaper ads, post youtube vids and send out flyers telling their faithful that a vote for (in this case) Obama would, "risk their eternal soul". A lawsuit was finally brought against the IRS for not designating someone to sign off on church investigations; the IRS agreed to do so. Then, just as they were about to...the GOP Congress declared a Congressional investigation of the IRS on the matter, thus freezing all IRS investigations into tax law violations by churches. Congress then went home for six weeks to campaign. Upon returning, they slashed the IRS budget.


In all fairness, most mainline denominations avoid little political involvement, with the exception of promoting the civil rights movement back in the '60's, and such causes.


_________________
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


Edenthiel
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Sep 2014
Age: 57
Gender: Female
Posts: 2,820
Location: S.F Bay Area

30 Sep 2015, 2:28 am

Kraichgauer wrote:
Edenthiel wrote:
This has been an interesting conversation. My opinion: Considering just how much they take in and their net worth vs how much they actually spend on charity, *and* taking into consideration how much of their donations they funnel into political influence, I think very few churches even deserve the name "charity".

But that said, the question is moot, at least in the USA. The IRS has been unable to investigate churches for violations since 2007 or 2008. It was then that a Federal Judge ordered them to designate a specific person to authorize any church investigations. They neglected to do so. Eventually the story gained traction and just as it was climbing up to mainstream attention...Congress conjured up their "IRS is treating conservative non-profits unfairly" controversy to muddy the waters. The media got confused enough to ignore the other story completely. Meanwhile, priests, bishops and pastors overtly flaunted the law and began to run full page newspaper ads, post youtube vids and send out flyers telling their faithful that a vote for (in this case) Obama would, "risk their eternal soul". A lawsuit was finally brought against the IRS for not designating someone to sign off on church investigations; the IRS agreed to do so. Then, just as they were about to...the GOP Congress declared a Congressional investigation of the IRS on the matter, thus freezing all IRS investigations into tax law violations by churches. Congress then went home for six weeks to campaign. Upon returning, they slashed the IRS budget.


In all fairness, most mainline denominations avoid little political involvement, with the exception of promoting the civil rights movement back in the '60's, and such causes.


Then who do you figure has been heading up the religious anti-LGBT movement, outside of the Catholics & Southern Baptists? Seems to me there are a fair number who have learned there's money to be made by getting people riled up...


_________________
“For small creatures such as we the vastness is bearable only through love.”
―Carl Sagan


Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 49,142
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

30 Sep 2015, 3:24 am

Edenthiel wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
Edenthiel wrote:
This has been an interesting conversation. My opinion: Considering just how much they take in and their net worth vs how much they actually spend on charity, *and* taking into consideration how much of their donations they funnel into political influence, I think very few churches even deserve the name "charity".

But that said, the question is moot, at least in the USA. The IRS has been unable to investigate churches for violations since 2007 or 2008. It was then that a Federal Judge ordered them to designate a specific person to authorize any church investigations. They neglected to do so. Eventually the story gained traction and just as it was climbing up to mainstream attention...Congress conjured up their "IRS is treating conservative non-profits unfairly" controversy to muddy the waters. The media got confused enough to ignore the other story completely. Meanwhile, priests, bishops and pastors overtly flaunted the law and began to run full page newspaper ads, post youtube vids and send out flyers telling their faithful that a vote for (in this case) Obama would, "risk their eternal soul". A lawsuit was finally brought against the IRS for not designating someone to sign off on church investigations; the IRS agreed to do so. Then, just as they were about to...the GOP Congress declared a Congressional investigation of the IRS on the matter, thus freezing all IRS investigations into tax law violations by churches. Congress then went home for six weeks to campaign. Upon returning, they slashed the IRS budget.


In all fairness, most mainline denominations avoid little political involvement, with the exception of promoting the civil rights movement back in the '60's, and such causes.


Then who do you figure has been heading up the religious anti-LGBT movement, outside of the Catholics & Southern Baptists? Seems to me there are a fair number who have learned there's money to be made by getting people riled up...


There are plenty of Baptists and Catholics out there to spread the manure. And I'm sorry to say, my own Lutheran Church Missouri Synod (which can aptly be called a "conservative mainline church) has jumped on the homophobic bandwagon - something that pisses me off to no end.


_________________
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


eric76
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 31 Aug 2012
Gender: Male
Posts: 10,660
Location: In the heart of the dust bowl

30 Sep 2015, 3:56 am

Kraichgauer wrote:
There are plenty of Baptists and Catholics out there to spread the manure. And I'm sorry to say, my own Lutheran Church Missouri Synod (which can aptly be called a "conservative mainline church) has jumped on the homophobic bandwagon - something that pisses me off to no end.


There's always ELCA.



Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 49,142
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

30 Sep 2015, 5:16 am

eric76 wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
There are plenty of Baptists and Catholics out there to spread the manure. And I'm sorry to say, my own Lutheran Church Missouri Synod (which can aptly be called a "conservative mainline church) has jumped on the homophobic bandwagon - something that pisses me off to no end.


There's always ELCA.


The problem with that is, my home congregation has done so much for my family and me, I don't see myself bailing on people who might as well be my family. That, and the ELCA's leaders seems so intent on ecumenical unity that they apparently are willing to achieve this through compromising away Lutheran theology, and I like my Lutheran theology. Besides, Missouri Synod Lutherans in my home region of the Pacific Northwest are not nearly as conservative as they are in the Midwest, where the church leadership tends to be centered.


_________________
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


eric76
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 31 Aug 2012
Gender: Male
Posts: 10,660
Location: In the heart of the dust bowl

30 Sep 2015, 5:27 am

Kraichgauer wrote:
eric76 wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
There are plenty of Baptists and Catholics out there to spread the manure. And I'm sorry to say, my own Lutheran Church Missouri Synod (which can aptly be called a "conservative mainline church) has jumped on the homophobic bandwagon - something that pisses me off to no end.


There's always ELCA.


The problem with that is, my home congregation has done so much for my family and me, I don't see myself bailing on people who might as well be my family. That, and the ELCA's leaders seems so intent on ecumenical unity that they apparently are willing to achieve this through compromising away Lutheran theology, and I like my Lutheran theology. Besides, Missouri Synod Lutherans in my home region of the Pacific Northwest are not nearly as conservative as they are in the Midwest, where the church leadership tends to be centered.


My mother always wanted to change to Missouri Synod.

Several years ago, there was an enormous vote at our local church to decide whether to stay in the ELCA or join the ALC. It was amazing that we had about 150 people vote when a typical Sunday now is about 20 to 30 people.

I've noticed that a number of locals now go to a different Lutheran church in a nearby town that is Missouri Synod. I've often wondered if that was because the ELCA won the vote.



glebel
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Jul 2015
Age: 63
Posts: 1,665
Location: Mountains of Southern California

30 Sep 2015, 10:21 am

eric76 wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
eric76 wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
There are plenty of Baptists and Catholics out there to spread the manure. And I'm sorry to say, my own Lutheran Church Missouri Synod (which can aptly be called a "conservative mainline church) has jumped on the homophobic bandwagon - something that pisses me off to no end.


There's always ELCA.


The problem with that is, my home congregation has done so much for my family and me, I don't see myself bailing on people who might as well be my family. That, and the ELCA's leaders seems so intent on ecumenical unity that they apparently are willing to achieve this through compromising away Lutheran theology, and I like my Lutheran theology. Besides, Missouri Synod Lutherans in my home region of the Pacific Northwest are not nearly as conservative as they are in the Midwest, where the church leadership tends to be centered.


My mother always wanted to change to Missouri Synod.

Several years ago, there was an enormous vote at our local church to decide whether to stay in the ELCA or join the ALC. It was amazing that we had about 150 people vote when a typical Sunday now is about 20 to 30 people.

I've noticed that a number of locals now go to a different Lutheran church in a nearby town that is Missouri Synod. I've often wondered if that was because the ELCA won the vote.

I'm sure that that is the case. My church was an ELCA congregation, and when they got into politics, we were the first church to leave ( we joined the AALC). If the vote would have gone differently, I certainly would have gone back to the LCMS, even though I don't much care for the national leadership. This would have entailed a 120 mile round trip, so it would have been a pain. However, seeing as how I know people in that congregation through Via De Christo, I could be comfortable there.
However, I would once again be in the position of having to explain to those Germans that you can be French and still be a Lutheran. :lol:


_________________
When everyone is losing their heads except you, maybe you don't understand the situation.


Chakravartin
Yellow-bellied Woodpecker
Yellow-bellied Woodpecker

Joined: 28 Sep 2015
Age: 28
Posts: 60
Location: United States

30 Sep 2015, 10:29 am

The question should be if secular and religious non-profit organizations should have to pay taxes, no they shouldn't.

If one has to pay taxes, then the other should too. If one doesn't, then the other should too.


_________________
Party Leader of Partido Sin Etiquetas.

Radical Centrist, Minarchist, Socialist, Transhumanist.


GnosticBishop
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 3 Nov 2014
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,686

30 Sep 2015, 10:30 am

Churches are not political!! !

http://www.newrepublic.com/blog/plank/1 ... -dare-you#

Are churches and mosques subject to government or are governments subject to a church or mosque?

I suggest that churches had better kowtow or be prepared to be dismantled if they choose to go against government.

Churches and mosques are just another corporate entity that can be crushed if they go against the law of the land which is government run and not run by a God.

Regards
DL



GnosticBishop
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 3 Nov 2014
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,686

30 Sep 2015, 10:34 am

Chakravartin wrote:
The question should be if secular and religious non-profit organizations should have to pay taxes, no they shouldn't.

If one has to pay taxes, then the other should too. If one doesn't, then the other should too.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fyy0ykPqZn0

http://www.tampabay.com/americas-worst-charities/

Thieves should be taxed.

Regards
DL



Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 49,142
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

30 Sep 2015, 1:56 pm

glebel wrote:
eric76 wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
eric76 wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
There are plenty of Baptists and Catholics out there to spread the manure. And I'm sorry to say, my own Lutheran Church Missouri Synod (which can aptly be called a "conservative mainline church) has jumped on the homophobic bandwagon - something that pisses me off to no end.


There's always ELCA.


The problem with that is, my home congregation has done so much for my family and me, I don't see myself bailing on people who might as well be my family. That, and the ELCA's leaders seems so intent on ecumenical unity that they apparently are willing to achieve this through compromising away Lutheran theology, and I like my Lutheran theology. Besides, Missouri Synod Lutherans in my home region of the Pacific Northwest are not nearly as conservative as they are in the Midwest, where the church leadership tends to be centered.


My mother always wanted to change to Missouri Synod.

Several years ago, there was an enormous vote at our local church to decide whether to stay in the ELCA or join the ALC. It was amazing that we had about 150 people vote when a typical Sunday now is about 20 to 30 people.

I've noticed that a number of locals now go to a different Lutheran church in a nearby town that is Missouri Synod. I've often wondered if that was because the ELCA won the vote.

I'm sure that that is the case. My church was an ELCA congregation, and when they got into politics, we were the first church to leave ( we joined the AALC). If the vote would have gone differently, I certainly would have gone back to the LCMS, even though I don't much care for the national leadership. This would have entailed a 120 mile round trip, so it would have been a pain. However, seeing as how I know people in that congregation through Via De Christo, I could be comfortable there.
However, I would once again be in the position of having to explain to those Germans that you can be French and still be a Lutheran. :lol:


May I ask, where in France did your people come from? I ask, because I had some people very far back in my line who came from Alsace, a German speaking area, but part of France, no less. Same applies to Lorraine. Or were they French speaking Lutherans?


_________________
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


Edenthiel
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Sep 2014
Age: 57
Gender: Female
Posts: 2,820
Location: S.F Bay Area

30 Sep 2015, 2:03 pm

Kraichgauer wrote:
There are plenty of Baptists and Catholics out there to spread the manure. And I'm sorry to say, my own Lutheran Church Missouri Synod (which can aptly be called a "conservative mainline church) has jumped on the homophobic bandwagon - something that pisses me off to no end.


Kraichgauer wrote:
The problem with that is, my home congregation has done so much for my family and me, I don't see myself bailing on people who might as well be my family. That, and the ELCA's leaders seems so intent on ecumenical unity that they apparently are willing to achieve this through compromising away Lutheran theology, and I like my Lutheran theology. Besides, Missouri Synod Lutherans in my home region of the Pacific Northwest are not nearly as conservative as they are in the Midwest, where the church leadership tends to be centered.


Clearly then, there actually *is* an end to your pissed off-edness, and it stops just short of jumping *off* the homophobic bandwagon.

Okay, that was clearly *not* said with the mature, adult demeanor I intended. I apologize. I just found out last night that my dad still goes to Church on Sunday and drops his envelope into the basket...all the while appearing to lament with us when the Pope says my daughter and I are mentally ill threats to humanity equal to nuclear weapons and my wife and I should not have been allowed to marry. And some of that money he gives them every week goes directly to the Church's efforts to make sure we do not have legal equality. Again, I apologize.

May I ask - since my Dad won't answer honestly - how does it work? How do people reconcile the two, please? I just don't understand, and it hurts.


_________________
“For small creatures such as we the vastness is bearable only through love.”
―Carl Sagan


Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 49,142
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

30 Sep 2015, 2:23 pm

Edenthiel wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
There are plenty of Baptists and Catholics out there to spread the manure. And I'm sorry to say, my own Lutheran Church Missouri Synod (which can aptly be called a "conservative mainline church) has jumped on the homophobic bandwagon - something that pisses me off to no end.


Kraichgauer wrote:
The problem with that is, my home congregation has done so much for my family and me, I don't see myself bailing on people who might as well be my family. That, and the ELCA's leaders seems so intent on ecumenical unity that they apparently are willing to achieve this through compromising away Lutheran theology, and I like my Lutheran theology. Besides, Missouri Synod Lutherans in my home region of the Pacific Northwest are not nearly as conservative as they are in the Midwest, where the church leadership tends to be centered.


Clearly then, there actually *is* an end to your pissed off-edness, and it stops just short of jumping *off* the homophobic bandwagon.

Okay, that was clearly *not* said with the mature, adult demeanor I intended. I apologize. I just found out last night that my dad still goes to Church on Sunday and drops his envelope into the basket...all the while appearing to lament with us when the Pope says my daughter and I are mentally ill threats to humanity equal to nuclear weapons and my wife and I should not have been allowed to marry. And some of that money he gives them every week goes directly to the Church's efforts to make sure we do not have legal equality. Again, I apologize.

May I ask - since my Dad won't answer honestly - how does it work? How do people reconcile the two, please? I just don't understand, and it hurts.


I don't know your dad, but maybe he sees himself as a member of his home congregation first, and a member of the larger church secondly, if at all. That's how I see myself. And yes, I am anti-homophobic - I make my opinions about homophobia well known in my church, despite that I am mostly disagreed with. Belonging to a church - especially if it entails a lifelong relationship, as in my case - is very much akin to belonging to a family, in that it's difficult to just cut your ties and walk away over a disagreement.
Wait a minute, you say the Pope says you can't marry, and are a threat to humanity? If we're talking about gay marriage here, then perhaps you should tell your dad that marriage is in fact a legal contract that doesn't need to be performed in a church to be real, let alone recognized by the government.


_________________
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer