For the sake of the children, we must prevent the appearance of specialty boutiques in our town! (Trees And Things)

skeptic: Re: religious tax exemption

Fri, 5 Dec 2008 14:07:18 EST

Any specific religious organization (church, temple, synagogue, mosque, etc.) can be as charitable or as uncharitable as they choose, which again is part of the concept of freedom of religion; nobody dictates to them what they must do (except for God, of c

gerrymander: Re: religious tax exemption

Fri, 5 Dec 2008 11:17:27 EST

which are paid for by everybody else

The individual members of religious congregations are part of that "everybody else". So, in effect, you are proposing to tax them twice; once as individuals, and once again as a group.

However, there is

skeptic: religious tax exemption

Thu, 4 Dec 2008 11:48:27 EST
If the government taxes everybody bur religious or charitable groups, that is not value neutral, it means that these groups are valued more highly than everybody else. They still receive all government services, the protection of the police, fire dep

port1080: Re: Social fights

Tue, 2 Dec 2008 14:20:45 EST
When you get right down to it, what could be more separate than the refusal of government to be part of religious groups at all -- neither donate to, nor accept funds from them?
If churches were just begging to be taxed, then I'd say you have som

gerrymander: Re: Social fights

Tue, 2 Dec 2008 14:17:21 EST
I think it's interesting that you define the value neutral position of government's role to be that of imposing taxation. When you get right down to it, what could be more separate than the refusal of government to be part of religious groups at all -- nei

gerrymander: Re: For the sake of the children, we must prevent

Tue, 2 Dec 2008 14:00:45 EST
Therefore they should be taxed just the same as any corporation.
They are, under the articles of incorporation of 501(c)(3) entities -- which allows them to spend up to 20% of their budget on political causes (save for forbidding contributions to

Dyolf Knip: Re: For the sake of the children, we must prevent

Tue, 2 Dec 2008 12:59:08 EST
So just use more lube.

port1080: Re: Social fights

Tue, 2 Dec 2008 08:56:52 EST
In Canada political donations are tax deducted up to a certain percentage. I'm surprised that this is not true in the USA.
Nope, not tax deductible. Indeed, supporting my original point, I actually found on Mars.

Lou: You already know this

Mon, 1 Dec 2008 16:39:59 EST
YRAAD

port1080: Re: Social fights

Mon, 1 Dec 2008 16:02:59 EST
As much as I disagree with the AFA's stance I think it is foolish to start limiting religious freedoms by taking away tax status.
I'm not sure how I feel about this. In the US we have a lot of Constitutionally guaranteed freedoms and rights

Steve Urkel: Re: Social fights

Mon, 1 Dec 2008 14:58:03 EST
Educating the public about the homo-menace isn't lobbying.

JimmyHavok: Re: Social fights

Mon, 1 Dec 2008 14:50:41 EST
The exempt purposes set forth in section 501(c)(3) are charitable, religious, educational, scientific, literary, testing for public safety, fostering national or international amateur sports competition, and preventing cruelty to children or animals.

shane: Re: Social fights

Mon, 1 Dec 2008 14:45:40 EST
There is precedent for cutting government funding for having the wrong social or political agenda - Bush blocked funding for anyone supporting abortion, and probably other things that he disagrees with. I think he also probably blocked tax except sta

Steve Urkel: Re: Social fights

Mon, 1 Dec 2008 14:08:34 EST
From the write-up: "Is the AFA within their rights as a non-profit, tax-exempt organization to campaign for changes in laws that reflect their particular religious preferences?"
Yes. Why wouldn't they be?
"While the US Constitution guarantees freedom

meyotch: Social fights

Mon, 1 Dec 2008 12:20:58 EST
Mr. 157,
Thanks for the comment. I was really trying to post a provocative piece that used the same rhetorical approach as the AFA materials referenced. That is, they make vague mentions of some sort of looming evil and leave the main messag

pO157: Re: For the sake of the children, we must prevent

Mon, 1 Dec 2008 08:35:30 EST
Does the AFA think that homosexuals should be denied the ability to run for public office?
This is ridiculous. How could anybody believe that gays have no right to be in office? They have done so for years/decades/centuries. Some of our