Right. Mussolini decided to give the Vatican it's kingdom back. We should all get behind that? Wasn't he nicknamed "Hitler's pope" at the time?
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Trump Vows to ‘Destroy’ Law Banning Political Activity by Churches
- Thread starter Sunstone
- Start date
Right. Mussolini decided to give the Vatican it's kingdom back. We should all get behind that? Wasn't he nicknamed "Hitler's pope" at the time?
There's also needing to remember that "religious" does not equal "right wing conservative Christian." If contributions opened up, we'd be seeing them from progressive sources as much as conservative ones.
It's all in the implementation.
I'd prefer that churches pay appropriate taxes, & freely speak their minds.
Would this be the result under Trump?
I hope so....but I'm wary.
Shadow Wolf
Certified People sTabber
It should not be forgotten what the Mormon church did in California, and that was to see that a group of American citizens were stripped of their rights for no other reason than their religious dogma.
The Kilted Heathen
Crow FreyjasmaðR
Well. It would be good if churches got taxed, but I doubt it. They're just getting more and more room to make non-Christian lives in America that much more stressful - first his vow to "protect Christian rights" and now this. Religion has no place in politics.
BSM1
What? Me worry?
Once again I believe you and I will find common ground on this one. Religion, IMHO, belongs in the Meeting House, not the State House. If you wish to be a political entity, pay for it. Fundamentalists, in my experience, pose a particular danger to stability because they seem to have no wish for the truth, they simply want to be right.
Here in the states that is what 'Non profit' is. If you register as 'Non profit' you call yourself a charity, so you do not get taxed. Most churches register as non-profit businesses.
Maintain tax-exempt status and get to actively contribute/campaign? No.
At this point, CHURCHES don't have to even register with the IRS or file papers of incorporation. However, churches do have to create subsidiary non-profit organizations subject to filing requirements if they accept donations to provide many social services, such as running a food pantry, providing daycare, etc.
If it is to be recognized that churches can participate in the political process, then they should be subject to the same requirements and restrictions as any other organization.
I agree with @Quintessence that campaign financing needs reform...to me, ending the recognition of a right for ORGANIZATIONS to contribute without limits needs to end--but there still needs to be limits on individual contributions as well.
My position hasn't about churches and all other 501(c) organizations and the like hasn't changed much over the years.
I think they ALL should be taxed. And, they should be allowed to do political work.
Organizations likes churches and foundations, etc. may do good work -- and may also be a way for having a lifestyle of the mega rich, by having the Foundation or the Church pay for things that simply don't go through a personal income tax return.
Individuals and businesses operate while also paying taxes. Churches and other types of non-profit could deduct direct charitable outlays, as expenses. I'm not exactly sure how I'd structure it, but I think it could be done so as not to harm the beneficial behavior of these groups any more than necessary.
I think they ALL should be taxed. And, they should be allowed to do political work.
Organizations likes churches and foundations, etc. may do good work -- and may also be a way for having a lifestyle of the mega rich, by having the Foundation or the Church pay for things that simply don't go through a personal income tax return.
Individuals and businesses operate while also paying taxes. Churches and other types of non-profit could deduct direct charitable outlays, as expenses. I'm not exactly sure how I'd structure it, but I think it could be done so as not to harm the beneficial behavior of these groups any more than necessary.
Kilgore Trout
Misanthropic Humanist
Let them freely speak their minds and express their opinions about anything and everything.
Let them pay fair and appropriate taxes comparable to other organizations of similar holdings and income.
Problem solved. Fair and square.
Religion has & will continue to have a major presence in politics.
It's like the whack-a-mole game....restrict it in one way, & it will pop up in another.
If churches are banned from political speech by the threat of loss of special tax exemption,
the individual members still have their voice.
The simplest & most 1st Amendment friendly approach is to let them speak freely.
And the fairest & most 1st Amendment compliant tax policy is that they pay taxes
for the services they use like everyone else.
Edit....
I see that I just channeled Kilgore.
But I win cuz I used far more words to say the same thing.
Kuzcotopia
If you can read this, you are as lucky as I am.
There's also needing to remember that "religious" does not equal "right wing conservative Christian." If contributions opened up, we'd be seeing them from progressive sources as much as conservative ones.
It's not just contributions, it's endorsements. . . And the degree of political discourse offered by the majority US religion outweighs any other.
Trump won white evangelicals by 81%. This is a calculated move to keep that support. You have to think of this as less of a principaled stance and more of pleasing a specific constituency favorable to his administration at the expense of others.
And it will be at the expense of others.
Kuzcotopia
If you can read this, you are as lucky as I am.
Also, do we know for sure that Trump plans to abolish the tax-expect status? Maybe pro arguments here seem to assume that. Just saying.
I don't know if you were referring to my post, or not. But just in case you were...I don't think he's said anything about abolishing tax exempt status. From what I gather here, it seems he's talking about allowing churches with tax exempt status to participate in politics without losing that status -- since participation in politics will affect tax-exempt status at this time.
I was expressing my personal opinion that I think tax exempt status should go away, because I think it allows for huge amounts of money that really aren't being spent on charities to be laundered through a "non-profit". I think this happens across all types of non-profits, not just churches. I just favor applying the same rules to everyone.
If your not ready for that, you're certainly not ready for this;
Evangelical Jerry Falwell Jr. to head Trump education task force
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-falwell-idUSKBN15G5F4
Things most dear to these types, their bibles and their guns.
Kuzcotopia
If you can read this, you are as lucky as I am.
I agree with you, in principal.
But this is why we should all disagree with this latest Trump initiative, in practice.
Terrywoodenpic
Oldest Heretic
Church ministers do join political organisations in the UK and have become members of parliament.
Bishops and leaders of other religions also sit in the house of Lords. And can become members of parliament.
Charity legislation is not in anyway linked to religious affiliation. Though religious organisations must comply with charity law to benifit from tax benefits.
Untaxed church money can not be used for any purpose that is not connected to charity.
So church money is not spent on politics.
Bishops and leaders of other religions also sit in the house of Lords. And can become members of parliament.
Charity legislation is not in anyway linked to religious affiliation. Though religious organisations must comply with charity law to benifit from tax benefits.
Untaxed church money can not be used for any purpose that is not connected to charity.
So church money is not spent on politics.
Last edited:
Neo Deist
Th.D. & D.Div. h.c.
Religion is already in politics. You won't carry white, Christian males unless you proclaim that you are a Christian, or religious in some form or fashion that resonates with them. Associations of Pastors will lobby Congress on various issues. Churches hold voting stations. Campaigners are often church volunteers. The list goes on and on.
I can't imagine why you think this is even possible.
Trump has a bunch of debts to pay, from evangelical Christians to Putin. This is just a downpayment.
You actually have hope that Trump will impose taxes on Christian clubs, given the sort of people who voted for him?
Tom
Its time for you to start wearing your brown pants.