as far as i see it; it's as simple as many Churches can and do discriminate on which people they will or will not allow to come into their church. and many Churches do bring in a profit.
most other non-profits are open to anyone that needs their services in their community and have policies against discrimination and turning people away.
There are plenty of non profits who cater to specific "clients" and who do not allow others to participate in what they offer. Plus, when you "join" a church, you are chosing to follow their ideology. If you cannot or do not want to, then find another church. It's really quite simple.
"When you're climbing to the top, you'd better know the way back down" MSB
as far as i see it; it's as simple as many Churches can and do discriminate on which people they will or will not allow to come into their church. and many Churches do bring in a profit.
most other non-profits are open to anyone that needs their services in their community and have policies against discrimination and turning people away.
What world do you live in? You think I can walk into any non-profit and get their services?
The only people we should try to get even with...
...are those who've helped us.
Right 'round the corner could be bigger than ourselves.
I think to some, it is seen that those churches that rake in the millions from the unsuspecting from those evangelical televangelicals... are basically a bunch of dirty crooks getting a free ride.
What does that have to do with anything?
Maybe the humane society is raking in millions from the unsuspecting....
The only people we should try to get even with...
...are those who've helped us.
Right 'round the corner could be bigger than ourselves.
Maybe the humane society is raking in millions from the unsuspecting....
I said, "I think to some..."
I guess now that I have to think about it for those with analytical thinking challenges, I would look at it like this:
How is it that a religion is given exempt status to begin with? If I decided to found a church and I was its pastor what hurdles might I find in getting that exemption status? Why would I or would I not be given status. Are some religions more valid of exemption than others? I suspect that if my church was into worshipping Satan, that would be so. Why are some religions more valid than others?
Why do you want the government to have more money?
Or better yet, why do you want churches to pay taxes. Just for spite?
i don't, but if everyone else is getting taxed, i don't see why churches get an exemption.
i want them to pay tax partly for spite, partly becos they are a money-making institution, and mainly becos of their political activism which by default should disqualify them from tax breaks.
i don't, but if everyone else is getting taxed, i don't see why churches get an exemption.
i want them to pay tax partly for spite, partly becos they are a money-making institution, and mainly becos of their political activism which by default should disqualify them from tax breaks.
Not all churches participate in political activism.
The only people we should try to get even with...
...are those who've helped us.
Right 'round the corner could be bigger than ourselves.
NFP's and churches both waste their share of money (i.e., recent Red Cross and United Way scandals). Most of you want to tax churches out of spite. Because a church is against abortion it should be taxed, but NFP's that support abortion are totally fine. Hypocrites.
It is kinda sad that you all form your opinions about churches based on the few individuals you see on television. Most churches are small, have small budgets, but have a great impact on their communities. They probably get more done with less money than the big NFP's because they don't have the huge overhead (and high salaries).
NFP's and churches both waste their share of money (i.e., recent Red Cross and United Way scandals). Most of you want to tax churches out of spite. Because a church is against abortion it should be taxed, but NFP's that support abortion are totally fine. Hypocrites.
It is kinda sad that you all form your opinions about churches based on the few individuals you see on television. Most churches are small, have small budgets, but have a great impact on their communities. They probably get more done with less money than the big NFP's because they don't have the huge overhead (and high salaries).
NFP's tend to support whatever the customer wants. if they want the child, they will help them find services. churches do this too. the problem is churches ONLY do this, they refuse any education or contraception to prevent this problem, and they browbeat vulnerable people into seeing things their way. offering a choice of services to needy citizens should not be taxed. offering a political sermon or moral blackmail for only one service based on a private interest in the matter should.
NFP's and churches both waste their share of money (i.e., recent Red Cross and United Way scandals). Most of you want to tax churches out of spite. Because a church is against abortion it should be taxed, but NFP's that support abortion are totally fine. Hypocrites.
It is kinda sad that you all form your opinions about churches based on the few individuals you see on television. Most churches are small, have small budgets, but have a great impact on their communities. They probably get more done with less money than the big NFP's because they don't have the huge overhead (and high salaries).
That's why I am in favor of a minimum income level before taxes kick in... for both churches and non-profits. Maybe even exemptions for charity work, but the money that goes through those huge mega churches and huge non-profits should be taxed.
I am originally from Pittsburgh, and one of the reasons that the city is in so much financial trouble is that a lot of the prime real estate has been gobbled up by UPMC (University of Pgh Medical Center). They are considered a non-profit, but I don't understand how with the amount of money they rake in.
Are the payrolls of NFP companies and churches taxed?
My whole life
was like a picture
of a sunny day
“We can complain because rose bushes have thorns, or rejoice because thorn bushes have roses.”
― Abraham Lincoln
Aside from property tax, I'm not sure what you expect to extract from a church. The vast majority of churches are effectively NPFs and wouldn't pay any income or profit tax anyway.
As someone who is opposed to taxation and religion, I found this question somewhat entertaining. But I really have to wonder about the motivation of someone who wants to tax a church. Seems pretty petty.
Aside from property tax, I'm not sure what you expect to extract from a church. The vast majority of churches are effectively NPFs and wouldn't pay any income or profit tax anyway.
As someone who is opposed to taxation and religion, I found this question somewhat entertaining. But I really have to wonder about the motivation of someone who wants to tax a church. Seems pretty petty.
it is petty. it's just more politically expedient than advocating burning churches and running the believers into the ocean
it is petty. it's just more politically expedient than advocating burning churches and running the believers into the ocean
I suppose. What an insipid mindset.
Churches, despite spreading a lot of ridiculous philosophical baloney, are often involved in laudable community outreach efforts and have served in social support functions long before it was trendy for government to do this. And at least they did it with a measurable level of accountability.
I'm all for treating people equally, and I do see some injustice in not taxing profit-taking churches. But if the entire purpose of taxation is to foster a sense of community support, aren't these people already doing enough??? I would argue that churches are not net consumers of social services but rather net providers. You're just going to end up taxing homeless shelters, schools and food banks out of existence. Is this really what we've come to?
i think to solve this problem of public whoring of beliefs is to make it so that in order to build a church it can only be done if in the same block or within a certain distance there will be a TEMPLE, a CHURCH, a MOSQUE, a PAGAN SUN HUT, and a POPEYES..so you would have to go to great lengths...
i think to solve this problem of public whoring of beliefs is to make it so that in order to build a church it can only be done if in the same block or within a certain distance there will be a TEMPLE, a CHURCH, a MOSQUE, a PAGAN SUN HUT, and a POPEYES..so you would have to go to great lengths...
Wouldn't that be a "public whoring of beliefs" as well?
Enforcing your plan. It just seemed silly to me to identify "public whoring of beliefs" as a problem as you proposed enforcing your own beliefs on others.
Enforcing your plan. It just seemed silly to me to identify "public whoring of beliefs" as a problem as you proposed enforcing your own beliefs on others.
ya because having religions close together would cause problems right????
im not enforcing my own beliefs...im driving for acceptance which seems to be lacking in this sect of the world.
ya because having religions close together would cause problems right????
Probably. I don't really care.
im not enforcing my own beliefs...im driving for acceptance which seems to be lacking in this sect of the world.
Huh? You're "driving for acceptance" by forcing others onto each other and probably away from you? This makes no sense. If acceptance is actually your thing, why don't you try just accepting others, regardless of how much they accept you or others around you? That would be enforcing your own beliefs (or at least the beliefs you claim) onto their appropriate object: you. "Acceptance" and forcing others to adhere to your beliefs and standards are not synonymous. That's a game that is best left to the fundamentalists.
Huh? You're "driving for acceptance" by forcing others onto each other and probably away from you? This makes no sense. If acceptance is actually your thing, why don't you try just accepting others, regardless of how much they accept you or others around you? That would be enforcing your own beliefs (or at least the beliefs you claim) onto their appropriate object: you. "Acceptance" and forcing others to adhere to your beliefs and standards are not synonymous. That's a game that is best left to the fundamentalists.
digest this. Religion has been the roots of war throughout history. SO YES IM DRIVING FOR ACCEPTANCE.
round these motherfuckers up and let them work it out and stay the fuck away from the peaceful no affiliated with bullshit...good, peaceful citizens in all countries including the U.S. , present day IRAN, the Koreas, Nazi Germany, all time Mexico.. all of us.
charge them as much as you can..sanction the religions as much as you can.. you want freedom of religion?? lose the holier than thou attitude and any actions or agressions your cult as a whole or in part makes towards the other religions of the world will be made in taxes and destruction of a false foundation towards your own cult beliefs.
digest this. Religion has been the roots of war throughout history. SO YES IM DRIVING FOR ACCEPTANCE.
Hehe...no. Intolerance and violence have been the roots of war throughout history. Religion, politics, money, and a whole host of other things are just convenient excuses. And to hide behind an anti-war philosophy while intolerantly proposing to force people into their "appropriate place" at the point of a gun puts you shoulder to shoulder with the war-making excusers of yesterday.
round these motherfuckers up and let them work it out and stay the fuck away from the peaceful no affiliated with bullshit...good, peaceful citizens in all countries including the U.S. , present day IRAN, the Koreas, Nazi Germany, all time Mexico.. all of us.
Hehe...you certainly are all about "acceptance", aren't you?
charge them as much as you can..sanction the religions as much as you can.. you want freedom of religion?? lose the holier than thou attitude and any actions or agressions your cult as a whole or in part makes towards the other religions of the world will be made in taxes and destruction of a false foundation towards your own cult beliefs.
Hehe...no. Intolerance and violence have been the roots of war throughout history. Religion, politics, money, and a whole host of other things are just convenient excuses. And to hide behind an anti-war philosophy while intolerantly proposing to force people into their "appropriate place" at the point of a gun puts you shoulder to shoulder with the war-making excusers of yesterday.
Hehe...you certainly are all about "acceptance", aren't you?
Hehehehe....saddle up, Custer.
youre having a hard time with this acceptance idea...
I DO NOT ACCEPT WAR.
any of those who have hands or money or sway in the cause of these wars are guilty.
WE THE PEOPLE CONTINUE TO ACCEPT THE ACTIONS OF THESE RELIGIONS.
I think a church's not for profit/charitable work should be tax free. There's no reason that a church's not for profit/charitable work should be treated any differently than Greenpeace or the Red Cross. I also believe churches should be able to participate in the democratic process to the same extent that other not for profit/charitable organizations do.
I wouldn't mind seeing them pay a small amount of tax based on the religious services offered as a percent of all services offered. This gets tricky as any "profit" a church service makes is just pumped directly into their not for profit/charitable work.
But then again, I'm a heretic. I think union dues should be taxed, unions should be fully taxed and that a striking worker should not be able to scab him/herself out for hire any more than the employer can bring in scab employees.
“One good thing about music,
when it hits you, you feel to pain.
So brutalize me with music.”
~ Bob Marley
Comments
What world do you live in? You think I can walk into any non-profit and get their services?
...are those who've helped us.
Right 'round the corner could be bigger than ourselves.
What does that have to do with anything?
Maybe the humane society is raking in millions from the unsuspecting....
...are those who've helped us.
Right 'round the corner could be bigger than ourselves.
Many of them do stay out of politics altogether.
...are those who've helped us.
Right 'round the corner could be bigger than ourselves.
yes, becos the conservatives would be pissed and asking why churches don't get taxed.
I said, "I think to some..."
I guess now that I have to think about it for those with analytical thinking challenges, I would look at it like this:
How is it that a religion is given exempt status to begin with? If I decided to found a church and I was its pastor what hurdles might I find in getting that exemption status? Why would I or would I not be given status. Are some religions more valid of exemption than others? I suspect that if my church was into worshipping Satan, that would be so. Why are some religions more valid than others?
all posts by ©gue_barium are protected under US copyright law and are not to be reproduced, exchanged or sold
except by express written permission of ©gue_barium, the author.
i don't, but if everyone else is getting taxed, i don't see why churches get an exemption.
i want them to pay tax partly for spite, partly becos they are a money-making institution, and mainly becos of their political activism which by default should disqualify them from tax breaks.
Also we're paying their taxes. With all that cash changing hands who can say where the money is going. Note the recent televangelist scandal.
Not all churches participate in political activism.
...are those who've helped us.
Right 'round the corner could be bigger than ourselves.
enough do. or get serious about rescinding tax breaks that preach politics.
It is kinda sad that you all form your opinions about churches based on the few individuals you see on television. Most churches are small, have small budgets, but have a great impact on their communities. They probably get more done with less money than the big NFP's because they don't have the huge overhead (and high salaries).
NFP's tend to support whatever the customer wants. if they want the child, they will help them find services. churches do this too. the problem is churches ONLY do this, they refuse any education or contraception to prevent this problem, and they browbeat vulnerable people into seeing things their way. offering a choice of services to needy citizens should not be taxed. offering a political sermon or moral blackmail for only one service based on a private interest in the matter should.
That's why I am in favor of a minimum income level before taxes kick in... for both churches and non-profits. Maybe even exemptions for charity work, but the money that goes through those huge mega churches and huge non-profits should be taxed.
I am originally from Pittsburgh, and one of the reasons that the city is in so much financial trouble is that a lot of the prime real estate has been gobbled up by UPMC (University of Pgh Medical Center). They are considered a non-profit, but I don't understand how with the amount of money they rake in.
Are the payrolls of NFP companies and churches taxed?
was like a picture
of a sunny day
“We can complain because rose bushes have thorns, or rejoice because thorn bushes have roses.”
― Abraham Lincoln
As someone who is opposed to taxation and religion, I found this question somewhat entertaining. But I really have to wonder about the motivation of someone who wants to tax a church. Seems pretty petty.
it is petty. it's just more politically expedient than advocating burning churches and running the believers into the ocean
I suppose. What an insipid mindset.
Churches, despite spreading a lot of ridiculous philosophical baloney, are often involved in laudable community outreach efforts and have served in social support functions long before it was trendy for government to do this. And at least they did it with a measurable level of accountability.
I'm all for treating people equally, and I do see some injustice in not taxing profit-taking churches. But if the entire purpose of taxation is to foster a sense of community support, aren't these people already doing enough??? I would argue that churches are not net consumers of social services but rather net providers. You're just going to end up taxing homeless shelters, schools and food banks out of existence. Is this really what we've come to?
i think to solve this problem of public whoring of beliefs is to make it so that in order to build a church it can only be done if in the same block or within a certain distance there will be a TEMPLE, a CHURCH, a MOSQUE, a PAGAN SUN HUT, and a POPEYES..so you would have to go to great lengths...
Wouldn't that be a "public whoring of beliefs" as well?
what would be??
Enforcing your plan. It just seemed silly to me to identify "public whoring of beliefs" as a problem as you proposed enforcing your own beliefs on others.
ya because having religions close together would cause problems right????
im not enforcing my own beliefs...im driving for acceptance which seems to be lacking in this sect of the world.
Probably. I don't really care.
Huh? You're "driving for acceptance" by forcing others onto each other and probably away from you? This makes no sense. If acceptance is actually your thing, why don't you try just accepting others, regardless of how much they accept you or others around you? That would be enforcing your own beliefs (or at least the beliefs you claim) onto their appropriate object: you. "Acceptance" and forcing others to adhere to your beliefs and standards are not synonymous. That's a game that is best left to the fundamentalists.
digest this. Religion has been the roots of war throughout history. SO YES IM DRIVING FOR ACCEPTANCE.
round these motherfuckers up and let them work it out and stay the fuck away from the peaceful no affiliated with bullshit...good, peaceful citizens in all countries including the U.S. , present day IRAN, the Koreas, Nazi Germany, all time Mexico.. all of us.
charge them as much as you can..sanction the religions as much as you can.. you want freedom of religion?? lose the holier than thou attitude and any actions or agressions your cult as a whole or in part makes towards the other religions of the world will be made in taxes and destruction of a false foundation towards your own cult beliefs.
stop the killing
OF COURSE THEY SHOULD BE TAXED
Hehe...no. Intolerance and violence have been the roots of war throughout history. Religion, politics, money, and a whole host of other things are just convenient excuses. And to hide behind an anti-war philosophy while intolerantly proposing to force people into their "appropriate place" at the point of a gun puts you shoulder to shoulder with the war-making excusers of yesterday.
Hehe...you certainly are all about "acceptance", aren't you?
Hehehehe....saddle up, Custer.
youre having a hard time with this acceptance idea...
I DO NOT ACCEPT WAR.
any of those who have hands or money or sway in the cause of these wars are guilty.
WE THE PEOPLE CONTINUE TO ACCEPT THE ACTIONS OF THESE RELIGIONS.
im saying.. No more..
its time to teach the babies acceptance..
thats what im driving at FARFROMGLORIFIED
ACCEPTANCE
you used the word INTOLERANCE.
intolerance is a synonym to unacceptance
you have proved my entire concept.
so why argue with someone who agrees with you... we are peaceful ...are we not?
I wouldn't mind seeing them pay a small amount of tax based on the religious services offered as a percent of all services offered. This gets tricky as any "profit" a church service makes is just pumped directly into their not for profit/charitable work.
But then again, I'm a heretic. I think union dues should be taxed, unions should be fully taxed and that a striking worker should not be able to scab him/herself out for hire any more than the employer can bring in scab employees.
when it hits you, you feel to pain.
So brutalize me with music.”
~ Bob Marley
Very much so, yes.
No -- I've demonstrated your hypocrisy.
I'm quite peaceful, yes. Are you?
"round these motherfuckers up" -macgyver06
Why don't you go back and read your own words, macgyver06. Ask yourself how tolerant you actually are, and how much you're just pretending to be.
what is your motivation here??
i will state again... for the third time..lol (am i writing in english?)
i do not tolerate war and killing.
so yes.. maybe its time we got these religions together and sat them down... and told them no more.
your little paragraph about me pretending to be peaceful is insulting..
so i ask again.. Whats the motivation behind it???
are you not?