Isn't it about time churches in this country start paying some damn taxes?

[cboy4]

THEY ARE SO POLITICAL --
---------------------------------
In an interview with The Associated Press on Thursday, Richard Land said that exit polls showed about 84 percent of Southern Baptists voted for Bush in 2004. The Iraq war hasn't significantly eroded that support, he said, despite recent polls that show Republicans losing ground with moderate evangelicals.

"I'm not ready to throw in the towel on Iraq yet," said Land, president of the Washington, D.C.-based Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission, the Southern Baptist Convention's public policy arm.

"I still think Iraq is one of the more noble things we've done." :wtf:
---------------------------------

Don't wanna preach love and peace and tolerance as a religious institution??.......then get out your checkbooks and start paying your fair share (how about footing the bill for the caskets of all of the dead U.S. service members?)

I'm sick of it.

[AX10]

1. YES!

[MindPilot]

2. Absofreakinlutely. They are in the business of selling "salvation."

At the very least they should pay property taxes because they use the services, police, fire, roads, etc that those taxes pay for.

Excluding religious institutions from taxes is essentially placing a surcharge on the taxes of the non-religious.

[The_Casual_Observer]

3. Most of the churches are nothing more than political action committees

for the republicans anymore.

[foreigncorrespondent]

4. I reckon they should be...

...paying taxes here in Australia as well. Especially when you got religious groups like the Brethren who don't even vote come election times (a crime in Australia BTW which they get away with) yet getting so involved with politics here they get private meetings with the Prime Minister.

[stepnw1f]

5. The Emperor Will Decide on That (nt)

[Journeyman]

6. Eh...you really need to read more...

Rather than working so hard to draw them into the process, better to work as hard to push them out.

[cboy4]

9. I do read more.....and what does it mean to push them out?

Maybe you can explain.

[Journeyman]

13. It's called the concept of separation. . .

and what you propose (taxation) opens the door wide for participation. Whereas those who desire to "push them out" (do research on the concept of disestablishmentarianism) seek to diminish their involvement. As I said, do some more reading. Start with Thomas Jefferson's "Virginia Statute for Religious Freedom" and work from there. No one ever said it would be easy to get them out...but it's so much harder when their invited in.

[cboy4]

18. I understand your point, but why are Falwell and Robertson and that

psychopath Fred Phelps' Westboro Baptist Fake Church in Kansas and some of the others exempt?

They've already kicked open the door wide "for participation."

I'm already brilliant, as I'm sure you know ;), but I'll definitely check out your reading suggestion!

I don't want to invite them in, but for those who invite themselves, I think they should have to pay.

Thanks for the reply!

[bryant69]

7. No they shouldn't, unless they engage in partisan politics

But I recognize that this view is in the minority here.

Bryant
Check it out --> http://politicalcomment.blogspot.com

[JerseygirlCT]

22. I agree. Until the day when our government helps every

needy person in the country, religious institutions fill a read need.

When they engage in truly partisan politics there should be repercussions. (Fairly distributed, not just targeted at anti-war sermons.)

But I think the tax=exempt status is a reflection that the religious institutions are doing work that the gov't won't do but ought to do.

[cynatnite]

8. No, and here's why...

PASADENA, Calif. - A liberal church that has been threatened with the loss of its tax-exempt status over an anti-war sermon delivered just days before the 2004 presidential election said Thursday it will fight an IRS order to turn over documents on the matter.

"We're going to put it in their court and in a court of law so that we can get an adjudication to some very fundamental issue here that we see as an intolerable infringement of rights," Bob Long, senior warden of All Saints Church, told The Associated Press.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060922/ap_on_re_us/religion_irs_16

Liberal churches, synagogues, temples and other religious groups will be tossed in as well.

[ikojo]

21. As they should be. Religion in the US is a

BUSINESS and it should be taxed as a BUSINESS. Why should MY taxes go to underwriting the partisan political activities of Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson? They want to play in the political arena let them pay like everyone else.

Many religious institutions (INCLUDING synagogues and temples) sit on some prime real estate, why shouldn't they have to pay property taxes? Do they not receive police and fire protection just as the other businesses in the same municipalities? Pay up priest, rabbi, pastor, imam!

[mcscajun]

10. It's Way PAST Time, IMHO.

Not because Southern Baptists voted for Bush, but because of the rise of mega-churches, which are far less about religion than they are about business. And yes, because some pastors ARE using their pulpits to proclaim what political positions their parishoners should take, and because some churches ARE handing out voting guides, and otherwise rallying their flock to take certain political actions.

I don't care what the size or denomination, if they're politicking, or investing in real estate, opening video operations, etc., they should be taxed. Period. End of story.

[and-justice-for-all]

11. Theocracy is NOT an American value.

[tammywammy]

12. No

The separation of church and state applies both ways. Keep religion out of government and keep government out of religion.

And, why punish all religious institutions for the actions of a minority? I've never been to a church that preached any politics or told me who I should vote for, etc.

If a church engages in such activity, then they should lose their status as tax-exempt. There's a process for it, and if there needs to be more enforcement of this, then so be it.

[VeggieTart]

14. I think that's what we're saying

If churches want to get into politics, let them pay the taxes. If a liberal church is being hounded by the IRS for preaching against war--and were they being partisan or just saying war is wrong?--then a conservative church should get equal treatment for preaching against progressive members of Congress.

[tammywammy]

17. I agree with what you're saying

But, there are many on DU that would like to tax all religious institutions, which I strongly disagree with.

[Swamp Rat]

15. Yes, including billions of back taxes

If they want to influence our politics, then they are no longer "tax exempt religious institutions."

[Arugula Latte]

16. YES. Tax those f'ing institutions!

:grr:

Goddamn religious institutions (pun intended)...They get away with murder.

[LostInAnomie]

19. I'd be scared of the results.

Can you imagine the effect it would have on our political system if candidates could claim that they have the support of the Southern Baptists, Catholics, etc. It would honestly turn into people seeking papal blessings for their candidacy, or claiming that they are the party of God.

I understand that for the most part this already happens, but not in an overt and legally protected way. I fear wedding God and politics any more than we already do. Taxing churches would cause more problems than it would solve.

[bluedogyellowdog]

20. Absolutely

Churches are businesses and should be taxed just like any other business. Also, their own teachings require it. "Render unto Ceasar what is Ceasar's..."

[KharmaTrain]

23. Many Offer Services That Would Be Cut If They Had To Pay Taxes

There are many churches that operate soup kitchens and day care for the poor and assist in problems with the homeless and battered women. Taking money paid for taxes would come out of these services and hurt the most disadvantaged.

While I detest churches being used for politics...isn't that what religion is? There'll always be preaching from the pulpit...either overtly or in "code"...so there'll never really be a way to clamp down on the Dobsons and Falwells.

Instead of taxing, I'd be in favor of large fines...charging a mega-church that violated laws by actively working for a candidate, but I think it is part of free speech if a preacher wants to support or even endorse a candidate...the parishoners have the option of ignoring this message or go to another church. It's another thing when the local GOOP turns a chruch into a campaign operation.

[cboy4]

24. I don't disagree with what you say -- I just feel some of these churches

which are politically active should have to pay up some how, some way.

The government should not be subsidizing Jerry Falwell, Pat Robertson and ESPECIALLY creatures like this guy: