(December 12, 2014 at 4:56 pm)Heywood Wrote: A business is one person or a coming together of multiple persons to engage in the exercise of commerce. A church is the coming together of people to engage in the exercise of religion. A church is not a business any more than a civil protest(people coming together to speak) is a business.

Unless a civil protest movement organization is a tax exempt organization it is taxed. So why not churches? If they are truly charitable or educational let them file as such.

(December 12, 2014 at 4:56 pm)Heywood Wrote: People are taxed as individuals, why then should we tax them again when they pool their resources together to engage in the exercise of religion?

First because individuals get to deduct contributions to churches (a thing I don't think should be allowed as it establishes religion) and therefore there is no double tax. And second because when other people pool their income for other purposes, we tax that income.

I ask for nothing more than equality.

(December 12, 2014 at 10:15 pm)Jenny A Wrote: First because individuals get to deduct contributions to churches (a thing I don't think should be allowed as it establishes religion) and therefore there is no double tax. And second because when other people pool their income for other purposes, we tax that income.

I ask for nothing more than equality.

We should get rid of tax deductions for donations to religious organizations and charities.

(December 12, 2014 at 3:51 pm)Heywood Wrote: religious services.

To convince me that it would be constitutional to tax churches you would need to show:

1)The tax would not impede the free exercise of religion.
or
2)The state has a compelling interest in taxing all persons equally(I'm figuring that a church is a person for purposes of law).

How about showing how a church being required to pay tax impedes on the free exercise of religion? Why do they get special treatment that no one else gets?

(December 12, 2014 at 11:11 pm)Thor Wrote: How about showing how a church being required to pay tax impedes on the free exercise of religion? Why do they get special treatment that no one else gets?

Who is actually being denied this treatment? Everyone is entitled to get together with other people and pool their resources to engage in the free exercise of religion. If you choose not too, that is a choice you are making.

(December 12, 2014 at 11:19 pm)Heywood Wrote: Who is actually being denied this treatment? Everyone is entitled to get together with other people and pool their resources to engage in the free exercise of religion. If you choose not too, that is a choice you are making.

You completely miss my point. No other organization, corporation, individual or group of people get the special tax exemptions that apply to churches. And most galling, churches do not have to file forms with the IRS that non-profits are required to submit.

(December 12, 2014 at 6:54 pm)Heywood Wrote: If we the people give our government the power to tax churches we are giving our government the power to obstruct their establishment. The power to tax churches is the power to make them so prohibitively expensive that people will not be able to readily come together, pool their resources, and exercise religion. The power to tax churches is the power to destroy them and I frankly do not want our government to have that much power. I would rather see a few rich televangelist than the government have this ability to destroy churches.

Do you have a problem with the government having the power to destroy individuals with the power to tax? Have you raised your voice against the income tax? Or property taxes? Why does an organization need protection while an individual doesn't?

And more to the point, why can't this god-thingy take care of his own? Why do they need secular support? Aren't the believers willing enough to see that their churches are supported? If believers cannot be bothered to support their own churches, why should they get tax exemptions which end up foisting more taxes upon nonbelievers? Corporations, who presumably don't reside under God's ægis, get along just fine without special exemptions, for the most part. I wonder how they manage that?

Oh, yeah, sound financial management.

If believers wish to get together and worship, no taxation will stop that.

(December 12, 2014 at 11:23 pm)Thor Wrote:

(December 12, 2014 at 11:19 pm)Heywood Wrote: Who is actually being denied this treatment? Everyone is entitled to get together with other people and pool their resources to engage in the free exercise of religion. If you choose not too, that is a choice you are making.

You completely miss my point. No other organization, corporation, individual or group of people get the special tax exemptions that apply to churches. And most galling, churches do not have to file forms with the IRS that non-profits are required to submit.

Other non religious organizations get tax exemptions so your claim there is clearly errant. The reason churches get tax exemption is because people are entitled to the free exercise of religion. They are entitled to this freedom even when they join together and pool their resources.

The power to tax is the power to destroy is a position the Supreme Court has taken for almost 200 years. You can study taxes and the their effects if you want but it is already well established that if you tax something you get less of it. In fact the government uses taxes to curb consumption of alcohol and tobacco. Taxing churches would lead to less churches. It would in effect be a governmental action which obstructs the free exercise of religion. When such obstruction is unnecessary....it is forbidden by the constitution.

Other non profits are required to fill out forms with the IRS presumably to document the fact that they are indeed not for profit. Should churches be required to document the fact that they are congregations of people pooling together their resources to engage in the exercise of religion? Well that is a completely different topic. Generally I don't think so because it is painfully obvious when people join together and pull their resources to engage in the free exercise of religion.

What kind of information would you like to see churches document? Should the pastors be required to send transcripts of their sermons to the IRS? People who donate are already required to list the name of the church they donate too if they deduct those donations from their taxes. Should churches be required to send list of their benefactors? Why? Just because other groups have to? Well to be frank....that is a silly reason.

(December 12, 2014 at 2:38 pm)Jenny A Wrote:

(December 12, 2014 at 1:29 pm)Godschild Wrote: What's not to understand, you and your kudo partners seem to agree the constitution doesn't call for the separation of church and state, all the other atheist believe it does.

That's not how you phrased it last night, and frankly, in the late evening what you said that made no sense to me whatsoever. That is the problem with bad syntax, it can make one difficult to understand.

Sure it is, the only thing I said different was, you and your kudo partners vs. the three of you.

Quote:But, as promised now that I do understand you, I will explain. Separation of Church and State is a short hand way of referring to what the First Amendment says about religion. But, parsing the the words "separation of church and state" doesn't lead to a very good analysis of the First Amendment because that not what it actual says.

I agree and always have, it doesn't call for the separation of church and state and, that's not what I've been arguing. I'm arguing taxation of the church under the misinterpreted First Amendment.

Quote:It does say:Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Quote:So Congress may not establish religion and Congress may not prohibit the exercise of religion. Which of those two requirements do you think taxing churches in the same manner that other institutions are taxed would violate? The Establishment Clause, or the Free Exercise Clause?

Taxes could prohibit many from forming churches. It takes a lot of money to start and run a church.

Quote:I argue that giving churches a tax break for money spent on providing religious services and promoting religion is establishing religion and therefore prohibited by the Establishment Clause. Tax breaks for actual education and charitable works given on the same basis as those given to other institutions is not prohibited.

I disagree, as the situation stands with the churches in this country, no taxing of the church.

Quote:Last time the Supreme Court looked at the issue they didn't agree with me about the Establishment Clause prohibiting tax breaks for money spent on religious services. But the Supreme Court has never to my knowledge said that such tax breaks are required under the Free Exercise Clause either. And the Court has struck down tax exemptions given to churches for property taxes on business property and general sales tax exemptions given to churches under the Establishment Clause.

As far as I know my state still allows general sales tax exemptions for churches. Now if a church runs a business, that business should be taxed, but not the church itself.

GC

(December 12, 2014 at 11:59 pm)Godschild Wrote: It takes a lot of money to start and run a church.

The Lord will provide. Leave the taxpayers alone.

(December 13, 2014 at 12:05 am)Parkers Tan Wrote:

(December 12, 2014 at 11:59 pm)Godschild Wrote: It takes a lot of money to start and run a church.

The Lord will provide. Leave the taxpayers alone.

The Lord does provide....the tax payers(really....only some like you) want their cut.