• 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!

Westboro Meets Its Match: Thousands Sign Retaliatory Petitions

Paschendale said:
Frankly, I see no reason why religious organizations should be exempt from taxes. Having to pay taxes clearly doesn't impact an organization's right to free speech. Corporations are people with the exact same rights to speech as you and I, remember? And we can speak just fine while paying taxes, and so can corporations. Why should a church or synagogue be any different? It's especially obvious that this rule is flawed since government approval of an organization as a religion is required to have this status. It's merely preferential treatment of some religious groups over others, and that is a violation of the first amendment. Treat all religions equally, and treat them exactly like everyone else. They should pay the exact same taxes as an equivalent secular organization.
Click to expand...

Does the Red Cross pay taxes?

Frankly, I think churches should receive federal funds.
 
TheDemSocialist said:
The "church" is a clear hate group...
Click to expand...

You're labeling it as such. Scientology is a hate group, and no one does anything about that. How many other churches can be said to be hate groups? Likely a good number. You're opening a can of worms best left closed. Tax-exempt status is either all or nothing, it cannot be used as a bargaining chip, it is not proper lever for government to exert torque. Once you start allowing government to monkey around with the tax-exempt status of churches, you've essentially destroyed the reason as to why they are tax-exempt in the first place.
 
ChrisL said:
The point is their tax exempt status, as they claim to be a "religious" organization when in reality they are a "hate" organization. IMO, they are NOT entitled to tax exempt status.
Click to expand...
And you would be correct in you presumption too. Take note: (see page 5 of 32 )

Tax Guide for Churches and Religious Organizations
(PDF)

All IRC section 501(c)(3) organizations, including churches
and religious organizations, must abide by certain rules:
■ their net earnings may not inure to any private
shareholder or individual,
■ they must not provide a substantial benefit to private
interests,
■ they must not devote a substantial part of their
activities to attempting to influence legislation,
■ they must not participate in, or intervene in, any
political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to)
any candidate for public office, and
■ the organization’s purposes and activities may not
be illegal or violate fundamental public policy.
Click to expand...

I have seen videos where the WBC has spoken out against candidates--Obama and Romney--and one knows that they have participated in violation of fundamental public policy numerous times; if anyone doesn't believe they haven't, I invite you to go watch a YouTube video on them being arrested for not maintaining their distance as warned to do numerous times thus finally being arrested.
 
tessaesque said:
I don't think any church should be 100% tax exempt. Exempt their charity works, certainly...but the rest of their income should be taxed.
Click to expand...

I don't think charity should be tax exempt.
 
Peter Grimm said:
Maybe not. It's really not that black and white. Browsing relevant supreme court decisions, it seems many of the judgements are subjective.

The one common thread running through the subjective judgements, however, is an appeal to common decency. It's an oft-used legal benchmark: What would a reasonable person do under XYZ circumstances?

This logic implies that we have some agreed-upon moral center.
Click to expand...

Ah, the reasonable man reference. Have not heard that since college law.
 
RLN said:
And you would be correct in you presumption too. Take note: (see page 5 of 32 )

Tax Guide for Churches and Religious Organizations
(PDF)



I have seen videos where the WBC has spoken out against candidates--Obama and Romney--and one knows that they have participated in violation of fundamental public policy numerous times; if anyone doesn't believe they haven't, I invite you to go watch a YouTube video on them being arrested for not maintaining their distance as warned to do numerous times thus finally being arrested.
Click to expand...

Well, that is quite interesting about the political references.

I would bet that their 'religious status' heightens enough fear to keep authorities from really taking them on for fear of other religions supporting them just out of fear for their own organizations.
 
SMTA said:
Well, that is quite interesting about the political references.

I would bet that their 'religious status' heightens enough fear to keep authorities from really taking them on for fear of other religions supporting them just out of fear for their own organizations.
Click to expand...
I'm sorry but I cant see that happening; I just don't see too many churches jumping on the bandwagon and agreeing with what they are doing. The orthodox spiritual, as well as social bearings would put too much pressure on churches that wouldn't want to logically be associated with Westboro.
 
RLN said:
I'm sorry but I cant see that happening; I just don't see too many churches jumping on the bandwagon and agreeing with what they are doing. The orthodox spiritual, as well as social bearings would put too much pressure on churches that wouldn't want to logically be associated with Westboro.
Click to expand...

No, I meant that others would protect their own religious status to ensure that it would not be challenged.

Association with their sick philosophy is not what I meant!
 
There's nothing illegal about forming or participating in the activities of a hate group.

Hatred is common and legal. A wide range of organizations, including many with large membership and massive funding -- like the Mormon church -- engage in activities which are clearly and appropriated identified as hateful and bigoted...without running afoul of the law.

I don't play favorites...much as with Paschendale above, I'm in favor of revoking the tax-exempt status of any and all religious organizations. Tax exemption is a rather obvious form of irrationally preferential treatment.

As for the socially beneficial actions of religious organizations, their members/adherents remain free to engage in them with or without the legal identity of specific formal religious affiliation attached.

So long as the WBC nutters remain within the constraints of speech laws (and most of the time they do), they should remain free to spout their vile nonsense.
 
Undermining the First Amendment may be what these asshats are ultimately all about. Obviously, they do not really believe in what they purport to believe or they wouldn't be making a such a bizarre mockery of their platform. Therefore, they have an ulterior motive, and I doubt that it is profiting off of lawsuits.



That being said, I have a plan:



 
Sig said:
Undermining the First Amendment may be what these asshats are ultimately all about. Obviously, they do not really believe in what they purport to believe or they wouldn't be making a such a bizarre mockery of their platform. Therefore, they have an ulterior motive, and I doubt that it is profiting off of lawsuits.
Click to expand...

That's an interesting take, but I find it a bit hard to believe.
 
RLN said:
And you would be correct in you presumption too. Take note: (see page 5 of 32 )

Tax Guide for Churches and Religious Organizations
(PDF)



I have seen videos where the WBC has spoken out against candidates--Obama and Romney--and one knows that they have participated in violation of fundamental public policy numerous times; if anyone doesn't believe they haven't, I invite you to go watch a YouTube video on them being arrested for not maintaining their distance as warned to do numerous times thus finally being arrested.
Click to expand...

Some really good points here. Unfortunately, I don't think their signs and protests meet up to the qualifications of lobbying for any particular candidate or against any particular candidate formally, so I don't think that would count.

Sadly, I didn't see anything where it says being a complete jackass should make them lose their tax exemption. :(
 
Ikari said:
You're labeling it as such. Scientology is a hate group, and no one does anything about that. How many other churches can be said to be hate groups? Likely a good number. You're opening a can of worms best left closed. Tax-exempt status is either all or nothing, it cannot be used as a bargaining chip, it is not proper lever for government to exert torque. Once you start allowing government to monkey around with the tax-exempt status of churches, you've essentially destroyed the reason as to why they are tax-exempt in the first place.
Click to expand...

I know you dislike Scientology immensely. I'm not too crazy about them myself, but I have yet to see any scientologists picketing funerals and holding signs full of hateful phrases. THAT is what separates this supposed "church" from the others. I wonder just what kind of charitable contributions they make to their communities.
 
Ikari said:
That's an interesting take, but I find it a bit hard to believe.
Click to expand...

They seem too over the top for me to buy that they mean it. The whole "God's happy when a soldier dies" because of homosexuals is just plain crazy.

Anyways, I agree with the spirit of this petition, but I don't support it at all. Free speech has to be upheld at all levels, we can make speech limited to popularity of said speech. After all, popular speech rarely needs protection.
 
ChrisL said:
I know you dislike Scientology immensely. I'm not too crazy about them myself, but I have yet to see any scientologists picketing funerals and holding signs full of hateful phrases. THAT is what separates this supposed "church" from the others. I wonder just what kind of charitable contributions they make to their communities.
Click to expand...

Real estate, Baby!

They own a huge chunk in Tampa, where they are headquartered.

Brother lives near there, and they cause no problems at all.

He still bitches when driving through Tampa, though - it is comical!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom