obama Accused Of Religious Bigotry

[IronWing]

Do you really want to empower the government with broad power to decide which non-profits are "worthy".

The government already has that power. It is a duty of the IRS to ferret out faux non-profits.

My take on it: Abolish the corporate income tax entirely. Tax the owners' profits. This ends the whole non-profit, for-profit split. If churches aren't returning a profit to an owner then no income taxes would be owed. Next: tax church property as we would any other property. Currently some states do, some states don't. If states want to provide property tax breaks to do-good organizations that's fine. For churches (and all other social organizations) just separate out the property used for charity activities from social club activities (preaching, singing, book club, etc.) and provide the break on the property where charitable works are carried out. Treats everybody on an equal basis with no preference for or discrimination against religiously based charities or churches.

 

[piasabird]

I think we should limit what we allow to be a charity. If they actually feed or cloth or provide shelter for the less fortunate that is a charity, everything else is just blowing in the wind political activision.

 

[piasabird]

Corporations dont pay taxes, why should churches? I believe in separation of church and state. More specifically, I believe in keeping government out of religion. Churches are run off of donations so it is like the parishoners are stock holders. Maybe they should tax bingo halls because they are casinos. I refuse to even buy a lottery ticket because it is gambling. I also dont buy raffle tickets.

 

[zinfamous]

A person is not a not-for-profit industry.

Do you really want to empower the government with broad power to decide which non-profits are "worthy".

Do you not see how that could easily backfire?

EDIT: And do you not see how your wanting to take away non-profit status from Churches makes you a religious bigot?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_Rights_Campaign

As an example. HRC is a non-profit organization that has nothing to do with "soup kitchens". Should we revoke their non-profit status too?

actually, I don't mind churches keeping their tax-free status, provided they keep their mitts and BS out of public education, politics, and anything that involves them trying to legislate their asshatery. Any church that takes any kind of political stance, should be revoked of tax free status, immediately.

I mean, it kind of threatens their reliability anyway, right? Whose to believe the rednecks in church wanting to enact legislation when they are already puppets of the government?

 

[nehalem256]

actually, I don't mind churches keeping their tax-free status, provided they keep their mitts and BS out of public education, politics, and anything that involves them trying to legislate their asshatery. Any church that takes any kind of political stance, should be revoked of tax free status, immediately.

So do you feel the same thing about say the Human Rights Campaign? Should they also have their non-profit status revoked for taking political stances?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_Rights_Campaign

 

[Retro Rob]

So do you feel the same thing about say the Human Rights Campaign? Should they also have their non-profit status revoked for taking political stances?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_Rights_Campaign

Last I read, religious tax stauts was conditional: they were not to be political period - not even discussing cadidates or voting with their members.

As far as I am concerned, I'd go as far to say they haven't lived up to that, and there could have been some sort of deal with religion and government early in this country's history; you can be tax-exempt as long as you strive to keep the masses at peace with each other.

Utter fail by them.

 

[umbrella39]

Ban altroll

 

[Lemon law]

Tell me something new, because at least a few thousand times a day, Obama is accused of being a bigot, a commie, a Kenyan, insert your favorite, and is even often accused of having supernatural God like powers as the Antichrist.

In short, why should I get excited at another idiot tossing about poorly reasoned accusations from highly dubious people.

 

[Incorruptible]

So do you feel the same thing about say the Human Rights Campaign? Should they also have their non-profit status revoked for taking political stances?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_Rights_Campaign

Good point, How come there is so much hypocrisy? Many people want to take away the tax-exempt status from Churches but what about media matters which is essentially a political organization and other similar ones, Why aren't there calls to tax them?

 

[MooseNSquirrel]

Yeah because all non-profits are food banks (or similar programs)

Sounds to me like you are engaging in anti-religion bigotry. How tolerant of you.

And you are intellectualy lazy if you equate campaigning against preferantial tax treatment for churches and religious bigotry.

Churches get better tax treatment than other non-profits.

http://atheism.about.com/od/churchestaxexemptions/a/churchexemption.htm

 

[nehalem256]

And you are intellectualy lazy if you equate campaigning against preferantial tax treatment for churches and religious bigotry.

You want to remove preferential tax treatment for churches but not other non-profits. This is religious bigotry.

Imagine the uproar by the left if Republicans tried to end preferential tax treatment for say Planned Parenthood.

Churches get better tax treatment than other non-profits.

http://atheism.about.com/od/churchestaxexemptions/a/churchexemption.htm

Your own article says there are 3 ways in which Church's get preferential tax treatment.

Two of these it makes clear are available to other non-profits.

The third, tax-free commercial enterprises, it says is the least easy to defend, but then it does not detail this at all.

 

[Lemon law]

Or we can ask the King Henry the eighth question on religious non profits. Because in nearly every nation on earth, churches allowed to claim tax exempt status are allowed to accumulate a vast amount of national wealth over time and then take those properties off the tax roles. Making certain churches, especially on the East coast into the biggest slum land lords in the nation. Which it why it was such a win win for King Henry to nationalize the wealth of the English Catholic church in the late 16'th century.

As current US churches are now perhaps the biggest abusers of tax exempt status as they blur the lines of a church and a business.

Or we can again cite the Statement Jesus Christ made so many years ago, Render to Caesar what is Caesar's, render to God what is God's. Which, IMHO should guide us in the tax exempt status debate today. As any church should be free to set the spiritual but not political rules for their members. But as soon as such a church enters the political debate and tells other how they should think and believe politically, and such a church has crossed the line, as such a church poobah should forfeit their tax exempt status along with anyone in the congregation foolish enough to follow them.

Its why our US founding fathers put the separation of church and States clause into our constitution.

 

[nehalem256]

As current US churches are now perhaps the biggest abusers of tax exempt status as they blur the lines of a church and a business.

Are you familiar with the term non-profit corporation?

Or we can again cite the Statement Jesus Christ made so many years ago, Render to Caesar what is Caesar's, render to God what is God's. Which, IMHO should guide us in the tax exempt status debate today. As any church should be free to set the spiritual but not political rules for their members. But as soon as such a church enters the political debate and tells other how they should think and believe politically, and such a church has crossed the line, as such a church poobah should forfeit their tax exempt status along with anyone in the congregation foolish enough to follow them.

And should other non-profits be similarly restricted?

EDIT: And additionally its seems pretty clear that Church's have an interest in moral teachings. How do you make a distinction between political and moral teachings?

Or do you just want to turn church's into essentially feel good social clubs?(if you want to eliminate moral teachings as well)

 

[HomerJS]

radical homosexual agenda...

allowing gay people to serve in the military.

I'm glad he backed out (pushed out) because he is nuts.

 

[Retro Rob]

If you are glad he backed or got "pushed" out (based on his homosexal views), you are by definition a bigot, to be honest, by your mindset.

Let us be honest about one thing - there is no "gay agenda", but LBGT members and their advocates in the past half century, have gained massive political power in this country and are influencing policy.

Not to say its a bad thing, but lets stop with this vitriol toward the religions for influencing policy when it's only a power shift. We are just shifting control from the right to the left.

 

[Retro Rob]

Or we can again cite the Statement Jesus Christ made so many years ago, Render to Caesar what is Caesar's, render to God what is God's. Which, IMHO should guide us in the tax exempt status debate today. As any church should be free to set the spiritual but not political rules for their members. But as soon as such a church enters the political debate and tells other how they should think and believe politically, and such a church has crossed the line, as such a church poobah should forfeit their tax exempt status along with anyone in the congregation foolish enough to follow them.

Its why our US founding fathers put the separation of church and States clause into our constitution.

... or we could disregard your flagrant misunderstanding of Jesus words. The only way they have to pay Ceasar's things to Creasar is if Ceasar asked for or required it.

If the gov't doesn't ask for the tax, then there is no requirement to render tax. The opposite is also true.


Thanks.

 

[Incorruptible]

If you are glad he backed or got "pushed" out (based on his homosexal views), you are by definition a bigot, to be honest, by your mindset.

Let us be honest about one thing - there is no "gay agenda", but LBGT members and their advocates in the past half century, have gained massive political power in this country and are influencing policy.

Not to say its a bad thing, but lets stop with this vitriol toward the religions for influencing policy when it's only a power shift. We are just shifting control from the right to the left.

Excellent point, The guy is actually intolerant. Your also arguing with an obama hack so there is no point engaging with him

 

[alzan]

If you are glad he backed or got "pushed" out (based on his homosexal views), you are by definition a bigot, to be honest, by your mindset.

Let us be honest about one thing - there is no "gay agenda", but LBGT members and their advocates in the past half century, have gained massive political power in this country and are influencing policy.

Not to say its a bad thing, but lets stop with this vitriol toward the religions for influencing policy when it's only a power shift. We are just shifting control from the right to the left.

Gained "massive" political power? Compared to their political power thiry years ago, probably. Compared to the religious right and other religious factions, not to mention business and other organizational lobbyists? Hardly. Their only "influence" towards policy is that they now have a voice at the table.

Don't worry, religion still has a major influence over policy at all government levels in this country. The power shift will continue at it's current snail's pace towards the center. The pendulum has for too long been tilted to the right and must be realigned.

 

[FerrelGeek]

Except atheists, the politically correct belief system.

Here's a suggestion, have all politicians be guilty of ethics violations that can be punishable up to and including impeachment if they pander to any religion.

Then they can all bitch and moan about how they are being mistreated equally and the rest of us won't have to give two shits about their feelings of being ignored while another group is given some form of platform because none of them will be getting one.

 

[nehalem256]

Except atheists, the politically correct belief system.

Isn't interesting how tolerant Leftys are. Imagine if Republicans started calling for impeachment of anyone who pandered to LGBT or single women?

 

[ivwshane]

Isn't interesting how tolerant Leftys are. Imagine if Republicans started calling for impeachment of anyone who pandered to LGBT or single women?

Um the righties call for an impeachment if a democrat president blows his nose wrong. But yeah, it's those intolerant lefties. /s

 

[zinfamous]

So do you feel the same thing about say the Human Rights Campaign? Should they also have their non-profit status revoked for taking political stances?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_Rights_Campaign

are they trying to shove their religious asshatery through legislation?

answer that question, first.

what is with these false-equivalencies?

 

[HomerJS]

If you are glad he backed or got "pushed" out (based on his homosexal views), you are by definition a bigot, to be honest, by your mindset.

Let us be honest about one thing - there is no "gay agenda", but LBGT members and their advocates in the past half century, have gained massive political power in this country and are influencing policy.

Not to say its a bad thing, but lets stop with this vitriol toward the religions for influencing policy when it's only a power shift. We are just shifting control from the right to the left.

Not tolerating bigots is not being a bigot, it's not tolerating ignorance.

 

[nehalem256]

are they trying to shove their religious asshatery through legislation?

answer that question, first.

what is with these false-equivalencies?

Lefties are absolutely trying to shove their own "asshatery" through legislation.

 

[Incorruptible]

Not tolerating bigots is not being a bigot, it's not tolerating ignorance.

Love the partisan hackery!

So saying people should die of cancer because they dont support gay marriage is tolerance?