HIDDEN TAX: US Families Pay an EXTRA $1,000 Per Year To SUPPORT RELIGION

[Segami]

"....It has been estimated that when church and clergy tax-exemptions are taken into account, the average family may pay up to $1,000 in extra taxes every year to make up for the lost revenue because of the church’s tax exemption and it includes sales taxes, inheritance taxes, income taxes, and personal taxes...."




:smoke: :smoke:


" When the Constitution’s framers wrote the Bill of Rights, they had a profound purpose for the first amendment’s prohibition on religion in government. Whether or not the framers knew that in the 21st Century the Religious Right would emerge as a real and present danger to America is unknown, but the threat is real and the government is complicit in aiding Dominionists in their takeover attempts. Republicans have assailed women since the start of the 112th Congress at the behest of religious groups, and in states and at the Federal level homophobes are pursuing legislation to deny gays equal rights guaranteed in the Constitution. Beyond supporting legislation to impose Christianity’s beliefs on the entire country, churches receive unconstitutional non-profit tax-exempt status and the clergy receive special tax cuts and privileges working Americans are forbidden from taking. For churches to keep their tax-exempt status they are forbidden from campaigning from the pulpit; however, a religious group is pushing the IRS to remove the prohibition on actively campaigning for legislation or candidates while still maintaining their non-profit status.





The recent special election to replace Anthony Weiner in New York is a prime example of religious interference in government, and actively campaigning by religious groups to defeat a candidate who voted for same-sex marriage in June. A group of 40 Orthodox rabbis sent a letter saying a vote for David Weprin, the Democratic candidate, was violating Jewish law. http://thenewcivilrightsmovement.com/rabbis-violate-irs-rules-by-campaigning-against-pro-equality-ny-democrat/politics/2011/09/09/26720 The problem is that religious law is not supported by the Constitution; something conservative Christians do not comprehend or they would not pass laws forbidding enforcement of Islam’s Sharia law. Two weeks ago in California, an evangelical preacher told his congregation that “the bible forbids Christians from voting for Socialist liberal-Democratic candidates or their anti-Christian agenda that attacks traditional marriage.” The Baptist preacher continued that “enemies of the gospel are actively persecuting advocates of traditional marriage and that if Democrats won elections, preachers would be imprisoned for upholding god’s view that homosexuality was an abomination.” The Southern Baptist Convention affiliate is exempt from federal, state, and county taxes because they are non-profit even though the pastoral staff tells its members how to vote. It is interesting that the preachers drive luxury cars and have no visible signs of support or income except for the money they fleece from the congregation. Nonprofit indeed.





A group of conservative Christian lawyers in the Alliance Defense Fund (ADF) is supporting California’s Prop 8 in federal court and they are pushing to force the IRS to stop the regulation prohibiting religious non-profits from campaigning. The senior legal counsel for ADF, Erik Stanley said that, “Pastors and churches shouldn’t live in fear of being punished or penalized by the government,” and that, “Keeping the gospel central to what is preached is not in conflict with addressing the subject of political candidates when warranted. These results show that the desire to keep the gospel central does not mean that pastors want the IRS to regulate their sermons under the threat of revoking their church’s tax-​exempt status.” Stanley is mistaken when he says addressing candidates is central to any particular gospel because there is no reference in the bible to political candidates or telling adherents how to vote. The IRS does not regulate sermons either; but to retain tax-exempt status, preachers cannot advocate for a political agenda or a candidate to their captive, frightened congregation.





In a survey conducted by ADF and Lifeway Research, 86% of pastors said they disagreed that; “The government should regulate sermons by revoking a church’s tax exemption if its pastor approves of or criticizes candidates based on the church’s moral beliefs or theology.” Whether the preachers agree with the IRS or not, one of the conditions of maintaining tax-exempt status is not campaigning from the pulpit or under cover of religious authority. No church should receive special tax exemption, but if they do they are expected to follow the rules. It is another instance of the Religious Right’s attempt at making their own set of rules that the government must follow. Besides imposing their religious beliefs on the entire population, they are leeches on the American taxpayers.





cont'



http://www.politicususa.com/en/hidden-church-tax



.

[no_hypocrisy]

1. And unpaid property taxes.

Thomas Road Baptist Church and Liberty University have been buying up parcels of Lynchburg, taking those plots off the tax books. The rest of residents of the city end up having to pay more for their municipal taxes to compensate for the missing revenue. And the city has to apply to the state and the federal government to pay for municipal services due to the lack of collected taxes from those Liberty properties.

[DURHAM D]

5. Same problem in Durham NC.

Duke University (Methodist) owns too much and does not pay property taxes. The rest of us pick up their tab.

[defendandprotect]

2. PLUS American taxpayers are now funding "faith-based" religious organizations --

most of them belong to the RCC --

Obama, btw, has INCREASED the subsidies going to them!!


Coincidental that W Bush began these subsidies just when the Pope needed the $$ the

most to pay off their pedophile priest lawsuits?

Remember when Catholics were in the streets protesting the selling off of church

property -- real estate, schools, churches -- to pay for these lawsuits?

Suddenly, everything became very quiet --

[hifiguy]

3. "TAX the CHURCHES;

TAX the BUSINESSES OWNED by the CHURCHES." - Frank Zappa

[gratuitous]

4. Define "politics"

What is a "political" activity that should subject a church to being taxed? At this time, direct endorsement of candidates by name is forbidden for any tax-exempt organization. Any other bright line prohibitions you care to name?

[PurityOfEssence]

6. Barack Obama has used religion in campaigning more than any Democrat I can think of

at a Presidential level.

He also expanded the Faith Based initiatives.

This is literally the reason I got a very bad taste in my mouth about him; the policies and political tactics galled me with time, but this specific issue is what sounded the alarm for me in late 2006. People should never forget the greasy "40 Days of Faith and Family" crusade in South Carolina in the fall of 2007, either.

Throughout the last few decades, the Republicans have become more and more faith-based, dragging their beliefs into campaigning, but at least the Democrats had some whiff of secularism. I fear that this is gone, and gone with it will be the concept that one can be elected or govern without the active invocation of religion. It will sweep away any concept that religion is to be kept out of government.

Religion plays for keeps, and it steadily encroaches more and more.

[msongs]

7. well at least he is not killing women and children, being that he is a good christian lol nt

[joeglow3]

8. Biased piece of shit

Our local Catholic school district educates 20,000 students. It is estimated the cost of educating those students (based on on what Omaha Public Schools spends per student) is $150,000,000 a year. That works out to $150 per person ($750 in savings for a family of 5).

Second, what do you tax? Every single dollar coming in the door? If so, can I not gift money to the church (i.e. get no deduction)? So you tax Gross receipts less expenses? If so, in many chruches this would not be much.

For the record, I think there are valid points for debate. However, the manner it which this is framed is full of half truths and serves to turn those with some ability to think away.

[struggle4progress]

9. The number cannot be right: the actual out-of-pocket cost to individual taxpayers from

a church property-tax exemption must be rather small. It may be, for example, that a church isn't billed to support the local fire station; but fires are rare events.