• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Seriously consider before voting

Should churches be required to honor our constitution and follow the same laws for no

  • Total voters
    18
X Factor said:
Well I don't think the real issue for the OP is concern over the Constitution, but more she seems to have an ax to grind with religion. Just my opinion.
Click to expand...




Give that man a cigar, he hit the nail on the head.



groucho-marx.jpg
 
digsbe said:
Freedom of worship and religion is a Constitutional right. We honor the constitution by not taxing churches and other places of worship like mosques and synagogues. The church doesn't run the state and the state doesn't run or infringe upon the church. Giving the government power to tax churches is infringing upon a right to worship since churches and places of worship would have to pay taxes to provide a place for people to do so. The government could indirectly outlaw churches and public worship by taxing them to an unbearable level. Most churches have very very tight budgets and they are accountable to the congregants who typically have the ability to vote on financial issues or appoint deacons/elders to vote on them. It's an internal accountability, not an accountability to the government.

Now, if the "church" was actually a for profit business operating under the guise of a church to avoid taxation that is one thing.
Click to expand...

Do you equally oppose CCW permits? If go to curch taxation is taboo then so should keep and bear arms taxation. Why is it fair and just to allow property owned by a "church" to recieve public services yet be exempt from the taxation used to support those services?
 
X Factor said:
The wording of the poll is horrible, suggesting that a no vote mean you're anti-Constitution. If only one type church was made tax exempt, that would violate the Establishment Clause. If all churches are treated the same, there is no constitutional violation.
Click to expand...

That depends upon who gets to define what is a church. Can an atheist (or any other "believer") declare their home a church and thus be exempted from taxation? If my "church" fails to attract a significant congregation, is it then less of a "church"?
 
ttwtt78640 said:
Do you equally oppose CCW permits? If go to curch taxation is taboo then so should keep and bear arms taxation. Why is it fair and just to allow property owned by a "church" to recieve public services yet be exempt from the taxation used to support those services?
Click to expand...

Because churches are charitable organizations and charitable organizations should be able to receive tax exempt status. CCW permits have nothing to do with charity.
 
I see a lot of the replies to the OP as knee jerk attacks and twisting the issue to avoid the main point-

Should Churches have to account for the monies they receive as donations like other non profits?

I see many little churches, store fronts actually and i wonder why. I work with a few preachers supplying food for the needy and their congregations are tiny, one Church has 4 people attending who are not the immediate family.

Requiring an accounting won't infringe the 1st A, might embarrass a few preachers though... :peace
 
zstep18 said:
Because churches are charitable organizations and charitable organizations should be able to receive tax exempt status. CCW permits have nothing to do with charity.
Click to expand...

Nonsense. Secular charitable organizations must have open books showing the amounts they recieved and spent on charity - "churches" do not. If "churches" are simply "charitable organizations" then no special tax treatment would be needed for them.
 
This poll has to do with accountability. I have no axe to grind with any church. I do believe that many churches are charitable and many are not ... just simply places of gatherings and jobs for those collecting funds.

My OP was about open books and accountability and churches that believe they are non profit could file and be tax exempt and those who are simply gathering places for the preacher to have a place to spout or simply have his "flock" support him should have to account for the money.

Should Westboro not have to account? Should a mega church in my former city that operates like a country club and the preacher who uses the church as his income base and his ignorant "flock" to test out his claim of knowing prophecy be exempt from opening his books?

Should a mosque that might be recruiting?

Yes ... there is church right in front of my window that operates as we all imagine a church might and they would be tax exempt due to their charitable status and their internal operations.

To give blind tax exempt status under the guise of religion is a violation and unconstitutional and it is subsidizing religion and a violation of separation of church and state.
 
Here is a SCOTUS case and some numbers to consider.

"The religiously used real estate of the churches today constitutes a vast domain," Douglas warned " Their assets total over $141 billion and their annual income at least $22 billion. Id., at 232. And the extent to which they are feeding from the public trough in a variety of forms is alarming. Id., c. 10."

http://ffrf.org/faq/state-church/item/12601-tax-exemption-of-churches
 
I would think so.....but, as usual, no vote.
This requires much more discussion and study....a "quick vote" based on emotion is not good./ One may say that I am "NOT" pro religion/church......but, in the interest of fair play.....lets talk this o'er.
 
How exactly are churches not "honoring our Constitution"?
 
Goshin said:
A tax exemption is not a subsidy.



The reason churches are usually tax-exempt is because they often engage in charitable aid, and are a protected institution, as in "the power to tax is the power to destroy".
Click to expand...
A tax exemption is a "break", similar to a subsidy.
The power to tax could well be the power to destroy, IMO, this is NOT the case in our nation.
 
ttwtt78640 said:
Do you equally oppose CCW permits? If go to curch taxation is taboo then so should keep and bear arms taxation. Why is it fair and just to allow property owned by a "church" to recieve public services yet be exempt from the taxation used to support those services?
Click to expand...

I oppose charging a fee for them. I have nothing wrong with requiring permits and registration, but charging a fee should be removed.

Then again, CCW is a strawman argument. Gun registration and tax exemption from churches are not equatable.

Like I said before though, honoring our Constitution is to not restrict freedom of worship and religion. The church doesn't run the state, we hear that constantly. The opposite is also true, the state does not run the church and among that is the state not taxing the church. Some people are so mouth foaming adamant about keeping religion out of the government (which typically includes keeping religious morals out of social issues which is another improper restriction of rights, but that's for another thread). The government has no business in religion and worship, period. The Constitution forbids it.
 
Last edited:
The only legitimate reason I can see for not taxing churches is religious bias, which would conflict with the First Amendment. If the wrong people don't like a particular church or religion, they can paper-**** it into extinction. The IRS needs to be downsized, not given more power.
 
Harry Guerrilla said:
While I get what you mean, I don't believe most churches follow the mega church model.
Those that unjustly enrich themselves, usually get caught, some way or another.
Click to expand...

Would not the Vatican be the prime example ?
Have they been "caught" ?
 
Surtr said:
The only legitimate reason I can see for not taxing churches is religious bias, which would conflict with the First Amendment. If the wrong people don't like a particular church or religion, they can paper-**** it into extinction. The IRS needs to be downsized, not given more power.
Click to expand...

If a Church supports a gov'ts war the gov'ts will support the Church. I think organized religion has caused more wars than any other historical reason. Sunnis and Shiites. Jews and Muslims. Christians and heathens. Hindus and Sikhs. The list is long. No tax exemptions for any church building over $40,000 in value.
 
Goshin said:
Really? Odd. In my entire county, I can only think of one actual "mega-church"... but there are hundreds of small churches that get by on a shoestring budget and would probably go under if they had to pay corporate tax rates.

As for charity, every single soup kitchen and homeless shelter I've ever seen in my area is funded and run by a local church.
Click to expand...
"Go under" ??
As I see it, with all their good works, their "profit" would be zero...times a tax rate of 50%....the tax would be zero.....no one is going under.
 
DaveFagan said:
If a Church supports a gov'ts war the gov'ts will support the Church. I think organized religion has caused more wars than any other historical reason. Sunnis and Shiites. Jews and Muslims. Christians and heathens. Hindus and Sikhs. The list is long. No tax exemptions for any church building over $40,000 in value.
Click to expand...

This is exactly what I'm talking about. If some anti-religious jackass gets elected into the right office, they'll tax churches to death the first chance they get. Congress shall make no law favoring or prohibiting the free exercise of any religion. That means the church is protected from such acts, as it should be.
 
Consider a mega church with a building that rivals a country club and the pastor preaching his israel prophecy and has a few charitable side shows run by earnest naive members.

Yet ... he enjoys his flock adoration, the women, the 7 million dollar property, the "christian" cruises paid for and tax free. He is nice looking, loves the stage and charismatic and his wife (formerly his babysitter) sells her base trinkets and crafts through the church.

There is no front for terrorism or nothing on the sick level of Westboro ... just simple narcissism and greed. Why would this be tax exempt with closed books?

Billions of dollars and properties are tax exempt with closed books under the guise of churches.

If they truly are a complete charitable organization they would qualify by filing the same as any other not for profit.

It is unconstitutional and gives a bias. Why should a non religious based organization have to file and open their books and any church just get a blind faith pass.
 
Dion said:
Consider a mega church with a building that rivals a country club and the pastor preaching his israel prophecy and has a few charitable side shows run by earnest naive members.

Yet ... he enjoys his flock adoration, the women, the 7 million dollar property, the "christian" cruises paid for and tax free. He is nice looking, loves the stage and charismatic and his wife (formerly his babysitter) sells her base trinkets and crafts through the church.

There is no front for terrorism or nothing on the sick level of Westboro ... just simple narcissism and greed. Why would this be tax exempt with closed books?

Billions of dollars and properties are tax exempt with closed books under the guise of churches.

If they truly are a complete charitable organization they would qualify by filing the same as any other not for profit.

It is unconstitutional and gives a bias. Why should a non religious based organization have to file and open their books and any church just get a blind faith pass.
Click to expand...

If they truly are a charitable organization, they wouldn't be able to afford the mega churches. They're supposed to spend their funds proselytizing and aiding the less fortunate, ergo they should be broke all the time.
 
The First Amendment (Amendment I) to the United States Constitution is part of the Bill of Rights. The amendment prohibits the making of any law respecting an establishment of religion, impeding the free exercise of religion, abridging the freedom of speech, infringing on the freedom of the press, interfering with the right to peaceably assemble or prohibiting the petitioning for a governmental redress of grievances.
Click to expand...

Is the blind faith closed book automatic tax exempt status for churches v. another charitable organization that must file and open their books to be tax exempt unconstitutional?

Should Westboro or the more common narcissistic "flock" church business model or any random belief in supernatural that forms a religion not have to abide by not for profit open book and filing to have the privilege other charitable organizations do not. should my tax dollars be subsidizing their business or beliefs?

I have no issue with a legitimate religious organization that is charitable filing and being granted tax exempt status.

I pay a lot in taxes ... why should the non charitable groups operating as churches benefit from our expensive city services and infrastructure in which they comfortably reside?
 
Dion said:
It is unconstitutional and gives a bias. Why should a non religious based organization have to file and open their books and any church just get a blind faith pass.
Click to expand...

It would be unconstitutional to tax one church because the pastor looks nice and you don't like his wife, while not taxing some other church because you don't percieve that guy as a rich douchebag. It is a religious organization, because it's a church.

Without specific examples of what you're talking about, your argument is invalid. On Fairmont pkwy there are two megachurches, and guess what? They're most definately religious organizations since every service provided is religious in nature. Whether you like the people who run it or not is entirely irrelevant.
 
DaveFagan said:
If they truly are a charitable organization, they wouldn't be able to afford the mega churches. They're supposed to spend their funds proselytizing and aiding the less fortunate, ergo they should be broke all the time.
Click to expand...

Would you like to see a link to one? They are very common.
 
Surtr said:
It would be unconstitutional to tax one church because the pastor looks nice and you don't like his wife, while not taxing some other church because you don't percieve that guy as a rich douchebag. It is a religious organization, because it's a church.

Without specific examples of what you're talking about, your argument is invalid. On Fairmont pkwy there are two megachurches, and guess what? They're most definately religious organizations since every service provided is religious in nature. Whether you like the people who run it or not is entirely irrelevant.
Click to expand...


My reference of taxing is based on charity not on who likes who. Your post is non sensical.
 
We are losing on jobs, we are losing on guns, we are losing on drones.....Hey, guys, let's go after churches :sinking::stooges
 
I think churches should be tax exempt only so far as their demonstrable charitable work. That ought not include the church building itself, supplies, etc. With so many churches ignoring the requirements that they be politically neutral and endorse no candidates, I see no reason why they shouldn't be taxed. If they want to play the political game, let them pay their damned entry fee like everyone else.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom