• 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!

Should we tax religious institutions?

Should we tax religious institutions?

  • yes

    Votes: 26 57.8%

  • no

    Votes: 19 42.2%
  • Total voters
    45
RabidAlpaca said:
Really? Because I still pay US taxes and vote, so I guess you can go **** yourself.

Your statement was just to be a dick and added zero value to this conversation, as usual.
Click to expand...

You want to tax the profits of a non-profit that by definition doesn't have any. You are located in Europe so you aren't actually here in our society. I acknowledged that you do pay taxes as a US citizen and thanked you for your contributions--contributions that I don't think you should have to make living outside the country.

As for your opinions of my contributions, find a beach somewhere and stomp around.
 
Cephus said:
No it can't. Nobody is stopping religion from operating how it wishes, but so long as religion uses public services, they ought to be obligated to pay for them, just like everyone else. Otherwise, the government is showing preferential treatment to religion, which is also unconstitutional.
Click to expand...

I am, so yes it can. The first amendment grants religion (and the press) special status.
 
Taxing the church across the board will be it's undoing. It opens the door to political action - something the church and charities would be well advised to avoid, and something the public has a vested interest in preventing. I do agree that there are churches who operate in direct conflict with private enterprise, and those operations should be taxed. I have personally built "Family Life Centers" which were nothing more than athletic centers and country clubs, complete with bulletin boards filled with business cards at elevators and other gathering places. That is hardly religious, charitable, or any other descriptive associated with either of those terms as we understand them. A church or a charity can certainly do that kind of thing. They should just pay taxes on it. Taxes on charitable activities, however, simply serves to assure that there will be less of it.
 
Most churches spend less than 5% of their budgets for charitable functions. Why should the new bowling alley in the local megachurch be built tax free?
 
jonny5 said:
Because govt had nothing to do with it?
Click to expand...

They don't take advantage of utilities and various other forms of infrastructure? Churches never utilize police of fire protection? If they want to build themselves their own country club then fine, but if they are not a charitable institution, then why should they enjoy the tax advantages of one?
 
SouthernDemocrat said:
They don't take advantage of utilities and various other forms of infrastructure? Churches never utilize police of fire protection? If they want to build themselves their own country club then fine, but if they are not a charitable institution, then why should they enjoy the tax advantages of one?
Click to expand...

You asked about building a bowling alley and paying taxes on the cost of that bowling alley. What do federal corporate taxes have to do with such a project?
 
jonny5 said:
You asked about building a bowling alley and paying taxes on the cost of that bowling alley. What do federal corporate taxes have to do with such a project?
Click to expand...

My point is that if a church doesn't devote a significant amount of its income to charitable functions, then they should not be treated as a charity. Why should a church be able to pay its pastors six figure salaries and build what amounts to a country club for its members on tax free income?
 
I believe the intent was to allow them to be tax free as long as they were apolitical.

They aren't.
 
SouthernDemocrat said:
My point is that if a church doesn't devote a significant amount of its income to charitable functions, then they should not be treated as a charity. Why should a church be able to pay its pastors six figure salaries and build what amounts to a country club for its members on tax free income?
Click to expand...

Several reasons

1. Because it has a specially protected right to practice religion
2. because organizations of people should not be taxed (its inefficient)
3. because the law doesnt specify how much money you have to spend on charity, only the purpose of the organization
4. because employees of these organizations DO pay taxes
5. because the purpose of taxation is not to judge what people spend their money on

I am for getting rid of this whole concept of tax exemption based on purpose, and replacing it with tax exemption for ALL organizations of people.
 
avatar said:
I believe the intent was to allow them to be tax free as long as they were apolitical.

They aren't.
Click to expand...

Actually the law says they cant be substantially invloved in political campaigns for office. They, and all 501c's can be as political as they want.
 
I voted, No, because the power to tax IS the power to destroy.
I think religious institutions should be treated like any other non profit organization.
 
DDD said:
It would be a lot better if they came up in the open and competed like the rest. Better than rogue works.
Click to expand...
It could backfire if they came out in the open and competed like the rest.Churches are very numerous and many of them have a lot of money. If you did a google map search on a large city in the US and church it would look like one of those very complicated connect the dot pictures.
 
jamesrage said:
It could backfire if they came out in the open and competed like the rest.Churches are very numerous and many of them have a lot of money. If you did a google map search on a large city in the US and church it would look like one of those very complicated connect the dot pictures.
Click to expand...

And they arent really competing. They dont sell or produce things generally. They exist off donations, and the donations are spent on prostelitizing, cemetaries, teachers, buildings, etc, tools they need to serve their religion. For the sake of argument, Im ignoring those megachurches that might very well just be money making schemes for the owners. Thats more the exception that the rule. Most 501c churches are local, exisiting almost entirely off donations, not revenue from selling things.
 
religious Institutions do a lot of charity work....For example St Vincent De Paul which is supported by the Catholic Church therefore they should be exempt from income taxes.
 
point1percent said:
Taxing the rich is a common theme these days, but there is no talk of taxing religion. Why is that? The Catholic Church has a combined wealth that is near impossible to calculate, but rest assured it makes Bill Gates look like just another poor guy. They pay no taxes but rake in billions. Where does all that money go? Do you really think it is making its way back to the people, especially the poor? And why does God need money? Surely anyone who can create a universe doesn't need money. Seems like organized religion is a goldmine that could be used to save the poor and the middle class.
Click to expand...

So why not leave the money with organized religion to use for the poor and middle class? And why should it be anybody else's business, most especially the federal government, what happens to the money that the religious voluntarily contribute to a religious organization?

There is no way that the federal government can tax religious organizations without violating provisions of the First Amendment at face value.
 
point1percent said:
Taxing the rich is a common theme these days, but there is no talk of taxing religion. Why is that? The Catholic Church has a combined wealth that is near impossible to calculate, but rest assured it makes Bill Gates look like just another poor guy. They pay no taxes but rake in billions. Where does all that money go? Do you really think it is making its way back to the people, especially the poor? And why does God need money? Surely anyone who can create a universe doesn't need money. Seems like organized religion is a goldmine that could be used to save the poor and the middle class.
Click to expand...

What would you tax? There is no income. It is just a large group of people pooling their money together. You could tax their property. I'm cool with that. What type of tax would the Catholic Church pay if it wasn't tax exempt?
 
point1percent said:
You speak like it hasn't happened yet. In fact, the cozy relationship between church and state is getting old and no longer brings much benefit, to the rich, to the right, or to the people in general, IMO. I'll be blunt and to the point. Maybe the people should stop putting their faith, and money, in organized religion and instead put their faith in their own abilities and take care of themselves for a change. Then, instead of giving their money to those shysters of organized religion, they could invest it in education and skills that make them more productive.
Click to expand...
The threat of revoking tax-exempt status is what keeps churches out of politics. Recall the Church at Pierce Creek in Binghamton, NY, which had placed an advertisement in USA Today and the Washington Times rebuking Bill Clinton four days before the 1992 presidential election.

Yes we're basically paying the church to stay out of politics by giving them various exemptions. It's expensive because it's worth it. Have a look at Catholic Church controlled Ireland and Brazil: Do you like their laws on abortion?
 
jamesrage said:
It could backfire if they came out in the open and competed like the rest.Churches are very numerous and many of them have a lot of money. If you did a google map search on a large city in the US and church it would look like one of those very complicated connect the dot pictures.
Click to expand...

That wealth is gathered with charity is it not? Can the money gathered from charity be used for political campaigns?
 
AlbqOwl said:
So why not leave the money with organized religion to use for the poor and middle class? And why should it be anybody else's business, most especially the federal government, what happens to the money that the religious voluntarily contribute to a religious organization?

There is no way that the federal government can tax religious organizations without violating provisions of the First Amendment at face value.
Click to expand...

Because that money does not end up in the hands of the poor and middle class. If organized religion were run as a charity I would have no problem, but the fact that it is a big business that does relatively little charity is a problem. I argue that they do just enough charity to keep up the appearance, that's it. If you don't believe that organized religion is just big business, ask yourself why the Vatican needs a bank. And don't get me started on that. The Vatican is more corrupt than the mafia it launders money for.


vasuderatorrent said:
What would you tax? There is no income. It is just a large group of people pooling their money together. You could tax their property. I'm cool with that. What type of tax would the Catholic Church pay if it wasn't tax exempt?
Click to expand...

Call it donations, or charity or anything you like, but it is income for that business. And not the only source, as people give them many other assets, like homes, property, stocks and bonds, and more. They use that income to buy influence and political control, with a small dose of charity to maintain the illusion.


Jerry said:
The threat of revoking tax-exempt status is what keeps churches out of politics. Recall the Church at Pierce Creek in Binghamton, NY, which had placed an advertisement in USA Today and the Washington Times rebuking Bill Clinton four days before the 1992 presidential election.

Yes we're basically paying the church to stay out of politics by giving them various exemptions. It's expensive because it's worth it. Have a look at Catholic Church controlled Ireland and Brazil: Do you like their laws on abortion?
Click to expand...

Last I saw organized religion is very active in politics. Just go to any political fundraiser, then hop over to Capitol Hill and watch all the religious lobbies walk by. And then there's the mother of all organized religion, the Catholic Church. Yeah, they keep their nose out of politics. The Italian govt. doesn't sneeze without asking the pope's blessing first.


What I think I sense is the stout conservatives here getting scared of cracking down on organized religion because it is a key source of votes. I make the argument that by carrying these two-faced nutjobs along for extra votes does more damage than it does good. It smears the image of the party. Instead of pandering to the religious, why can't we find someone who has a real pair of balls that outlines a new game plan to make this country great again without having to put all our faith in God and government to achieve that? Something everybody, including those on the left, can believe in?
 
DDD said:
That wealth is gathered with charity is it not? Can the money gathered from charity be used for political campaigns?
Click to expand...

Workers Unions,Gay,Lesbian & Tranny organizations, planned parenthood, Brady Campaign,NRA,GOA and other groups use their money to donate to and or promote candidates sympathetic to their causes. Why wouldn't churches do the same,especially if they had to pay taxes?
 
jonny5 said:
And they arent really competing. They dont sell or produce things generally. They exist off donations, and the donations are spent on prostelitizing, cemetaries, teachers, buildings, etc, tools they need to serve their religion.
Click to expand...

They might want to add promoting candidates sympathetic to their causes to that list.A candidate sympathetic to their cause could be one of the tools needed to serve their religion.

For the sake of argument, Im ignoring those megachurches that might very well just be money making schemes for the owners. Thats more the exception that the rule. Most 501c churches are local, exisiting almost entirely off donations, not revenue from selling things.
Click to expand...

That might be true with small non-denominational churches. However many of those churches are part of a larger organizations.
 
jamesrage said:
Workers Unions,Gay,Lesbian & Tranny organizations, planned parenthood, Brady Campaign,NRA,GOA and other groups use their money to donate to and or promote candidates sympathetic to their causes. Why wouldn't churches do the same,especially if they had to pay taxes?
Click to expand...

Was a question for I do not reside in USA.

If that is the case then rather then accumulating the donations they should spend it like the rest of us in campaigns. Rich or not it is time to treat them like any other political party that they have always been hiding in a rogue manner till today!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom