• 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!

I'm starting to respect Beto (Re: Church and Tax Exempt Status)

Dans La Lune

Dans La Lune

Zionism is Antisemitism
DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 30, 2019
Messages
9,382
Reaction score
5,873
Location
Oceania, 1984
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Socialist
If Beto can trigger Ben Shapiro to this extent, I'm pretty happy with him by default. Although the reason I'm starting to respect him is because his campaign is going for broke, and as a result he's making some brilliant points that transgress traditional boundaries of politics. Should churches get tax exempt status if they engage in bigotry? Mind you, this doesn't infringe on anything a church has a right to say, freedom of religion, etc. They just don't get a special tax status for doing so. Anyone else starting to respect Beto? Also, what are your views on the point Beto is making?

 
That video title implies that Ben Shapiro was of sound mind to begin with.
 
Beto is a fool to propose (an EO?) applying government pressure on "icky" religious groups is consistent with the Constitutional requirement for allowing the free exercise of religion. Will Beto next decree that Catholics allow female priests and drop the celibacy requirement for priests or loose their tax exempt status? How about demanding that the Jewish and Muslims stop discriminating against pig farmers or else?
 
ttwtt78640 said:
Beto is a fool to propose (an EO?) applying government pressure on "icky" religious groups is consistent with the Constitutional requirement for allowing the free exercise of religion. Will Beto next decree that Catholics allow female priests and drop the celibacy requirement for priests or loose their tax exempt status? How about demanding that the Jewish and Muslims stop discriminating against pig farmers or else?
Click to expand...

Why should churches get tax exempt status if they don't comply with federally recognized non-discriminatory standards? Why should churches get tax exempt status to begin with? Why does the IRS have a say in determining viable religions? It's all ridiculous, and churches should come HAT IN HAND to the government if they want special status.
 
Dans La Lune said:
If Beto can trigger Ben Shapiro to this extent, I'm pretty happy with him by default. Although the reason I'm starting to respect him is because his campaign is going for broke, and as a result he's making some brilliant points that transgress traditional boundaries of politics. Should churches get tax exempt status if they engage in bigotry? Mind you, this doesn't infringe on anything a church has a right to say, freedom of religion, etc. They just don't get a special tax status for doing so. Anyone else starting to respect Beto? Also, what are your views on the point Beto is making?

Click to expand...


I trust you’d be consistent and support this regardless of whether it’s a church, synagogue or a mosque?
 
I'm kinda torn on it.
On one hand, I'd like churches to have no tax-exempt status, so this is a step in the right direction. I'm also always happy when bad things happen to homophobes, so this would be nice.
On the other hand, I'm not sure I like the precedent it sets.
 
How about we just end tax exemption laws for churches, period. It's beyond common knowledge that churches are tied to politics at the hip, given the overwhelming activisim among the religious which is quite obviously stoked from the pulpit and rome itself.

I tire of my tax dollars going to prop up rotten institutions of hate, fear, degredation, child abuse, and outright malice.
 
Dans La Lune said:
1) Why should churches get tax exempt status if they don't comply with federally recognized non-discriminatory standards? 2) Why should churches get tax exempt status to begin with? 3) Why does the IRS have a say in determining viable religions? It's all ridiculous, and churches should come HAT IN HAND to the government if they want special status.
Click to expand...

1) That is precisely what the 1A dictates - the federal government may not interfere with the free exercise of religion and the SCOTUS has extended that protection to the governments of the several states.

2) That is the law at both the federal and state levels. BTW, religious organizations are not the only non-profit organizations which get special tax treatment. Beto, even if miraculously elected POTUS, has no power to change laws.

3) Isn't that exactly what Beto is advocating? The IRS has a simple mission - to enforce compliance with the federal income tax code.
 
Obscurity said:
How about we just end tax exemption laws for churches, period. It's beyond common knowledge that churches are tied to politics at the hip, given the overwhelming activisim among the religious which is quite obviously stoked from the pulpit and rome itself.

I tire of my tax dollars going to prop up rotten institutions of hate, fear, degredation, child abuse, and outright malice.
Click to expand...

I mostly agree with the points you're making, but I disagree on some of them. A lot of Christian churches do do those things, but they don't apply for all of them. So should we give tax exempt status to churches that don't do those things? And why only churches? If we're going to apply it to churches, shouldn't we apply it to every religious institution?
 
S0mething said:
I mostly agree with the points you're making, but I disagree on some of them. A lot of Christian churches do do those things, but they don't apply for all of them. So should we give tax exempt status to churches that don't do those things? And why only churches? If we're going to apply it to churches, shouldn't we apply it to every religious institution?
Click to expand...

By churches I meant all religious institutions. If you're religious you get zero tax dollars, period. You get no exepmtions. Period.

The public should not be expected to bankroll the religious beliefs of people.
 
Dans La Lune said:
Mind you, this doesn't infringe on anything a church has a right to say, freedom of religion, etc. They just don't get a special tax status for doing so.
Click to expand...
Great point.

I think we should suspend the mortgage interest deduction and child tax credits of anyone that supports Beto's campaign or advocates his policies.

His supporters should certainly be free to espouse their views, but they shouldn't get special tax writeoffs for doing so.
 
What a dumb ****-and a warning to everyone that amphetamines and helium aren't a good mix. Tax the **** out of churches; they're a business like any other.
 
The loons will insist this is against religion; it isn't. The church does not have any moral authority to demand use of tax payer subsidized services, like they currently do. They should pay in, like the rest of us, period.
 
Obscurity said:
The loons will insist this is against religion; it isn't. The church does not have any moral authority to demand use of tax payer subsidized services, like they currently do. They should pay in, like the rest of us, period.
Click to expand...

This 'mega church', has an annual budget of $53 million.

America's Biggest Megachurches

According to Forbes these places have a total income of over $8 billion.
 
Taylor said:
Great point.

I think we should suspend the mortgage interest deduction and child tax credits of anyone that supports Beto's campaign or advocates his policies.

His supporters should certainly be free to espouse their views, but they shouldn't get special tax writeoffs for doing so.
Click to expand...

The question as stated and Beto's comments are a mess, but he says at the end is "infringe on the civil rights and human rights of citizens" or close.

Supporting someone isn't to infringe on anyone's rights. Obviously "opposing" SSM also infringes on no one's rights - it's an opinion. But a "whites only" school would infringe on someone's rights, and the question is whether a school with an all white policy should get a tax subsidy/tax exemption. Should a school that fires or has a policy not to hire gay people or those in a SSM get a tax subsidy? We went to a concert on Friday and it turned out it was to celebrate "Coming out" day, and the headliner got kicked out of college for being gay. Not for gay sex, or pre-marital sex or any act but that he was gay. Should that college enjoy tax subsidies?
 
snakestretcher said:
This 'mega church', has an annual budget of $53 million.

America's Biggest Megachurches

According to Forbes these places have a total income of over $8 billion.
Click to expand...

Yes, and it's completely obscene that they get tax subsidies and hand outs from the tax payers so a few preachers can buy jets and mansions.
 
JasperL said:
The question as stated and Beto's comments are a mess, but he says at the end is "infringe on the civil rights and human rights of citizens" or close.

Supporting someone isn't to infringe on anyone's rights. Obviously "opposing" SSM also infringes on no one's rights - it's an opinion. But a "whites only" school would infringe on someone's rights, and the question is whether a school with an all white policy should get a tax subsidy/tax exemption. Should a school that fires or has a policy not to hire gay people or those in a SSM get a tax subsidy? We went to a concert on Friday and it turned out it was to celebrate "Coming out" day, and the headliner got kicked out of college for being gay. Not for gay sex, or pre-marital sex or any act but that he was gay. Should that college enjoy tax subsidies?
Click to expand...
Are you saying that this student has a right to attend a private college?
 
ttwtt78640 said:
1) That is precisely what the 1A dictates - the federal government may not interfere with the free exercise of religion and the SCOTUS has extended that protection to the governments of the several states.

2) That is the law at both the federal and state levels. BTW, religious organizations are not the only non-profit organizations which get special tax treatment. Beto, even if miraculously elected POTUS, has no power to change laws.

3) Isn't that exactly what Beto is advocating? The IRS has a simple mission - to enforce compliance with the federal income tax code.
Click to expand...

1) Where in the 1A is there a tax carve-out for churches vs citizens?

2) Do you think Scientology or the Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster should be tax exempt?

3) See #2.
 
O'Rourke's comments are atrocious.

I would be fine with removing tax exempt status for all religious institutions. Many of them do excellent charity work, but the expenses for that can be claimed as charitable contributions without having a blanket exemption for religious institutions.

What Beto proposes is something different. He is proposing a test for whether a religious institution is "legitimate" or not. That is obviously and blatantly in conflict with the First Amendment.
 
So just WHEN do democrats want the so called separation of church and state??
 
Dans La Lune said:
If Beto can trigger Ben Shapiro to this extent, I'm pretty happy with him by default. Although the reason I'm starting to respect him is because his campaign is going for broke, and as a result he's making some brilliant points that transgress traditional boundaries of politics. Should churches get tax exempt status if they engage in bigotry? Mind you, this doesn't infringe on anything a church has a right to say, freedom of religion, etc. They just don't get a special tax status for doing so. Anyone else starting to respect Beto? Also, what are your views on the point Beto is making?

Click to expand...


Ignoring the Constitution is apparently a requisite to the kind of thinking that would support Beto, and underscores the radical elements that have created the New Democratic Party.
 
Another attack by Beeto Hussein Oroarke on the building blocks of the country.

dd.JPG

Family,
Community,
Self Defense,
Ad infinitum.

"Now that the election is over, waste management officials in Texas are worried about all those BETO yard signs littering the Lone Star State. They aren’t sure the state’s landfills can handle that much extra trash.

Manuel Flores, site manager for Texas Disposal Systems, thinks the state should sell the signs back to Hollywood celebrities. “They paid for most of those signs. Maybe we could sell them back for pennies on the dollar. Then it’s their problem.

We’re also looking at working a deal with some other states that may take them off our hands. If that doesn’t work, we could always load them on a barge and just shove it out into the Pacific.”

The BETO for Texas campaign spent untold millions on the yard eyesores, despite the state’s anti-littering “Don’t Mess With Texas” slogan.

If a deal can’t be worked out soon, Texas plans to charge the BETO campaign for whatever expensive method they have to use to restore beauty to Texas neighborhoods.

BETO was defeated in the midterm election by incumbent Senator Ted Cruz, despite the fact that Cruz doesn’t know how to skateboard."
 
Dans La Lune said:
1) Where in the 1A is there a tax carve-out for churches vs citizens?

2) Do you think Scientology or the Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster should be tax exempt?

3) See #2.
Click to expand...

1) What are churches other than a voluntary collection of people (citizens?) pooling their private (after tax) resources?

2) Yes, if they meet the qualifications of the federal income tax code.

3) Nice dodge.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom