Taxing the Church? - Page 2 - Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community

Boo · 01-25-2004, 09:38 PM

I say tax (and regulate) all businesslike activities that a church engages in.

IE: Bingo, Daycare, Books, moneys paid for use of facilities, and other for profit activities.

Don't tax: Donations, items donated with a value less than $500.

If it is really a religion issue, why must these churches be so extravagant. Some are near to Saddams palaces. If they are in that much money, they can pay their fair share.

crony · 01-26-2004, 04:27 PM

Wow, interesting responses. Some simply agree, some disagree, and some really took it to heart. Please let it be known that I was not attacking religion or those with religious beliefs. It was just an opinion that I happen to have.

Crony

Lebell · 01-26-2004, 04:39 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by crony
Wow, interesting responses. Some simply agree, some disagree, and some really took it to heart. Please let it be known that I was not attacking religion or those with religious beliefs. It was just an opinion that I happen to have.

Crony

Don't worry, it was a good topic.

Yes, some take it to heart which is why you don't discuss politics or religion at family get-togethers

fnaqzna · 01-27-2004, 08:59 PM

On the one hand, I think that it's a good thing for churches to not pay taxes.

On the other hand, I think that definition of what makes a church is a bit loose.

Hell... Anyone can be ordained... http://www.ulc.org/

nanofever · 01-27-2004, 09:09 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by fnaqzna
On the one hand, I think that it's a good thing for churches to not pay taxes.

On the other hand, I think that definition of what makes a church is a bit loose.

Hell... Anyone can be ordained... http://www.ulc.org/

I live in this freaking town and I didn't even know that the ULC was located here.

On the upside, I'm now a minister and as my first act of minister-ship I think I'm going to marry a nice gay couple.

Liquor Dealer · 01-28-2004, 09:34 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by wilbjammin
Alright, I will attempt to get back to the point. I'm functionally an atheist, and I don't see any reason for a church to pay taxes. As I understand it, churches aren't created as money-making operations. It is hard enough for some churches to keep up with rent and simple maintenance that taxes could realistically put a lot of churches either out of operation entirely, or turn churches to more capitalistic enterprises.

I will agree that the church itself and the property it sits on should not be taxed - Everything else they own should be taxed. There are billions of dollars worth of property that belong to churches that is strickly for profit. There are millions of acres of farm land that has been deeded to churches - churchs own all types of property - some of which produce tremendous profits.

skysooner · 01-28-2004, 10:22 AM

With taxation comes control. The US was set up on separation of church and state. They saw what had happened in England when the Anglican church was the mandated religion. Keep it the way it is.

Macheath · 01-28-2004, 10:49 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Liquor Dealer
I will agree that the church itself and the property it sits on should not be taxed - Everything else they own should be taxed. There are billions of dollars worth of property that belong to churches that is strickly for profit. There are millions of acres of farm land that has been deeded to churches - churchs own all types of property - some of which produce tremendous profits.

Religious leaders who make great profits from their teachings and live a life of unparalleled luxury and power are a disgrace to their religion. They're Judases. This is NOT a new phenomenon...

Quote:

http://press-pubs.uchicago.edu/founders/documents/amendI_religions64.html

"But besides the danger of a direct mixture of Religion & civil Government, there is an evil which ought to be guarded agst in the indefinite accumulation of property from the capacity of holding it in perpetuity by ecclesiastical corporations. The power of all corporations, ought to be limited in this respect. The growing wealth acquired by them never fails to be a source of abuses. A warning on this subject is emphatically given in the example of the various Charitable establishments in G. B. the management of which has been lately scrutinized. The excessive wealth of ecclesiastical Corporations and the misuse of it in many Countries of Europe has long been a topic of complaint. In some of them the Church has amassed half perhaps the property of the nation. When the reformation took place, an event promoted if not caused, by that disordered state of things, how enormous were the treasures of religious societies, and how gross the corruptions engendered by them; so enormous & so gross as to produce in the Cabinets & Councils of the Protestant states a disregard, of all the pleas of the interested party drawn from the sanctions of the law, and the sacredness of property held in religious trust. The history of England during the period of the reformation offers a sufficient illustration for the present purpose.

Are the U. S. duly awake to the tendency of the precedents they are establishing, in the multiplied incorporations of Religious Congregations with the faculty of acquiring & holding property real as well as personal? Do not many of these acts give this faculty, without limit either as to time or as to amount? And must not bodies, perpetual in their existence, and which may be always gaining without ever losing, speedily gain more than is useful, and in time more than is safe? Are there not already examples in the U. S. of ecclesiastical wealth equally beyond its object and the foresight of those who laid the foundation of it? In the U. S. there is a double motive for fixing limits in this case, because wealth may increase not only from additional gifts, but from exorbitant advances in the value of the primitive one. In grants of vacant lands, and of lands in the vicinity of growing towns & Cities the increase of value is often such as if foreseen, would essentially controul the liberality confirming them. The people of the U. S. owe their Independence & their liberty, to the wisdom of descrying in the minute tax of 3 pence on tea, the magnitude of the evil comprized in the precedent. Let them exert the same wisdom, in watching agst every evil lurking under plausible disguises, and growing up from small beginnings. Obsta principiis.
see the <a href="http://www.pastwords.net/pw220.html">Treatise of Father Paul on beneficiary matters...</a>" - James Madison

merkerguitars · 01-30-2004, 06:57 PM

Well if you look at it from two different aspects you could think totally different.....take for instance a small town with a church with about only 50 members top...yes not taxing them is great.....cause most likely they are having a rough time surviving (it costs alot to maintain a church) but if you look at a larger church that has alot of donation and support it may seem absurb (due to all the support they have and able to pull in alot of people). In any matter I don't think it's absurb in either aspect...they don't make money (granted some religions as a whole might have tons...but you can save money) and it doesn't cost anything to join a church plus they are providing service....food shelters and whatnot.....Farmers in my area get tax exemption is that wrong?....I don't think so either..

01-25-2004, 09:38 PM	#41 (permalink)
Boo Leave me alone! Location: Alaska, USA	I say tax (and regulate) all businesslike activities that a church engages in. IE: Bingo, Daycare, Books, moneys paid for use of facilities, and other for profit activities. Don't tax: Donations, items donated with a value less than $500. If it is really a religion issue, why must these churches be so extravagant. Some are near to Saddams palaces. If they are in that much money, they can pay their fair share. __________________ Back button again, I must be getting old.

01-30-2004, 06:57 PM	#49 (permalink)
merkerguitars Buffering......... Location: Wisconsin...	Well if you look at it from two different aspects you could think totally different.....take for instance a small town with a church with about only 50 members top...yes not taxing them is great.....cause most likely they are having a rough time surviving (it costs alot to maintain a church) but if you look at a larger church that has alot of donation and support it may seem absurb (due to all the support they have and able to pull in alot of people). In any matter I don't think it's absurb in either aspect...they don't make money (granted some religions as a whole might have tons...but you can save money) and it doesn't cost anything to join a church plus they are providing service....food shelters and whatnot.....Farmers in my area get tax exemption is that wrong?....I don't think so either.. __________________ Donate now! Ask me How! Please use the search function it is your friend. Look at my mustang please feel free to comment! http://www.tfproject.org/tfp/showthread.php?t=26985

01-26-2004, 04:27 PM	#42 (permalink)
crony Crazy Location: Clifton Park, NY	Wow, interesting responses. Some simply agree, some disagree, and some really took it to heart. Please let it be known that I was not attacking religion or those with religious beliefs. It was just an opinion that I happen to have. Crony

01-27-2004, 08:59 PM	#44 (permalink)
fnaqzna Meat Popsicle Location: Left Coast	On the one hand, I think that it's a good thing for churches to not pay taxes. On the other hand, I think that definition of what makes a church is a bit loose. Hell... Anyone can be ordained... http://www.ulc.org/

01-28-2004, 10:22 AM	#47 (permalink)
skysooner Registered User Location: Oklahoma	With taxation comes control. The US was set up on separation of church and state. They saw what had happened in England when the Anglican church was the mandated religion. Keep it the way it is.