Churches and their Schools Next Target of the Left

American Thinker ^ | 6/30/15 | James Longstreet

[markomalley]

Federal involvement seems to be the exploited niche of the motivated Left. For it is the tax code and the special tax treatments carved into the most complicated compilation in the Western World that affords the activists their openings.

The gay marriage issue was essentially an equal treatment issue regarding Social Security benefits of surviving spouses, estate taxes, and joint tax returns. All the emotional scenery was fluff. It was about money and how the federal government, based on marital status, taxes some people one way and others another.

Next apparently on the docket are the churches. The same thread will be pulled on this one, tax treatment. The Left will push for the reasoning, perhaps from the Supreme Court, why churches have tax-exempt status. The SCOTUS will be up against the same type of equal treatment arguments. A majority of them may welcome the issue.

Add in the possibility of churches sticking to their beliefs on marriage and losing their tax-exempt status. The Federal government has tremendous power over the survival of the church or other houses of worship and just as in denying federal funds to states that do not “jump through the federal hoop” the tax status rug could get pulled.

[Alberta's Child]

Any church that relies on its tax-exempt status for its survival probably isn’t much of a church to begin with.

[plangent]

Consider this:

If the Feds (or a city, for that matter) force a church to implement a new ritual or penalize a church for not having a ritual of marriage for gays, there is every reason to think the primary defense is the 1st Amendment forbidding the establishment of religion.

But, then again, the courts seem less and less obligated to the Constitution.

[MNDude]

” Federal government has tremendous power over the survival of the church”

Nope

[1010RD]

It has already happened as regards adoptions. Even if the birth mother insists on a Catholic or Christian adoption. There is no free exercise of religion in America and hasn’t been for 150+ years. Unless you’re an Indian tribe that wants to get stoned.

[Alberta's Child]

A government would never take that approach. Instead, they would take the approach of disqualifying these religious organizations from receiving any government funding. This approach is not only reasonable, but it actually helps preserve the independence and integrity of the religious institution.

I would suggest that any religious organization that is forced to shut down under these conditions was never truly a religious organization at all.

[dfwgator]

When Carter established the Department of Education, the ultimate goal was Federal control of ALL education.

[Alberta's Child]

Adoption laws in most states are probably unenforceable in many ways. If an adoption is arranged quietly through a religious institution there's really no way the state to would even have to know about it.

The problem comes when "religious organizations" turn themselves into state-funded enterprises in order to get paid for their adoption services.

[markomalley]

Any church that relies on its tax-exempt status for its survival probably isn’t much of a church to begin with.

You say that (flippantly?), but really consider it a bit:

• Church property is generally considered exempt from property tax.
  
  My geographic parish church has about 5 acres of land in an incorporated town in Maryland. The city + county tax rate is 3.8%.
  • If they compute the value of the land, itself, it's about $2.2 million. (That's about $83K in taxes each year for the land, itself)
  • When you add in the value of the improvements on the land (a K-8 school, rectory, parish center, and the church itself), then you start talking about another $15 million, at least (they are just finishing a $3M parish center). If you have a particularly aggressive assessor, the value could end up skyrocketing (think about 150 year old stained glass, Italian marble high altar, marble statuary, and so on -- all of which are "improvements" that would be taxable). That could be another $500k - $600k in property tax on top of the $83K in tax on the land itself.
• They don't have that much profit each year for income tax purposes, but I wouldn't want to have to do their taxes. And then what with auditing? The way it works with the IRS is that you're guilty unless you can prove yourself innocent...
• And you'll note that I haven't even brought up any possible impact on giving TO the church (tithes, offerings, etc)

The point being that if the government wants to destroy that parish church, if it was taxable, the government could easily do so.

Maybe you ought to consider that a bit...

[1010RD]

Agreed, but the birth mothers must be reimbursed.

[markomalley]

It has already happened as regards adoptions. Even if the birth mother insists on a Catholic or Christian adoption. There is no free exercise of religion in America and hasn’t been for 150+ years. Unless you’re an Indian tribe that wants to get stoned.

There are a number of Catholic charitable adoption agencies that have been closed down because they won't place children with sodomites. (Off the top of my head, I can think of the agencies in Boston, Washington DC, and Southern Illinois...there may be more now)

[Alberta's Child]

Two things:

1. Local property taxes don't have to be governed by Federal law. A municipality could easily pass its own statute allowing that church property to remain tax exempt.

2. If your municipality doesn't get on board with this, then simply sell the church and open another one somewhere else that is more accommodating to religious groups like yours.

3. If all else fails, just sell all the property and hold your church services in a vacant barn outside of town that is owned by one of your church members. You can even move the Italian marble high altar there, if you'd like.

No offense, but if your church has a "$3M parish center" then I suspect it may have lost sight of its mission.

P.S. I predict that the legal/political landscape in the U.S. will eventually mirror the legal/political landscape in international diplomatic relations, with Catholic and Muslim organizations waging war on the same side against the diabolical governments of the fading West.

[kevslisababy]

There are/were several religious organizations that facilitated the illegals coming and staying.

[Alberta's Child]

Those adoption agencies weren't shut down just because they refused to place children with sodomites. They were shut down because they refused to place their children with sodomites at the direction of the government agencies that gave them most of their funding.

In other words ... they relied too much on Caesar to render what they owed to God.

This Supreme Court ruling is going to have some very positive impacts, in the long run. First and foremost, it is going to force religious institutions to give up on their silly delusion that they could meet their obligations to God while accommodating themselves to a secular culture. It has never worked that way, and it never will.

[markomalley]

A municipality could easily pass its own statute allowing that church property to remain tax exempt.

Could. How many towns would?

If your municipality doesn't get on board with this, then simply sell the church and open another one somewhere else that is more accommodating to religious groups like yours.

So if you have a parish that has been in the same place for 150 years, they should just move. Sure thing. Right.

No offense, but if your church has a "$3M parish center" then I suspect it may have lost sight of its mission.

I, too, thought it was excessive -- but we'll see how it's actually used.

I predict that the legal/political landscape in the U.S. will eventually mirror the legal/political landscape in international diplomatic relations, with Catholic and Muslim organizations waging war on the same side against the diabolical governments of the fading West.

Huh?

First, in case you hadn't noticed, Muslims are busy trying to kill Catholics.

Second, I would predict, given the current state of the hierarchy, the majority of the Catholic hierarchy would be on the side of the "diabolical governments of the fading West." Despite how many times the Church has been slapped, they keep advocating for the very things that will try to destroy the Church. The very definition of "useful idiot."

(BTW, I comfort myself by noting how reactions were in the past when the Church was persecuted, such as with the revolutions in Mexico, Italy, France, Spain, Portugal, and so on, and have the belief that at some point in time they'll wake up...)

[Justa]

“3. If all else fails, just sell all the property and hold your church services in a vacant barn outside of town”

How ‘bout instead the government makes “no law respecting the establishment of religion or the free expression thereof? So no tax law applied. Is that too hard to understand?

[USS Alaska]

The Federal government has tremendous power over the survival of the church

Over a church, maybe, but over The Church, the feds have zero power, since it's been here for 2015 years, seen the persecution by and fall of Rome, been outlawed by the king of england, been protested by a wayward German bishop named martin luther, been in countless attacks from the peaceful mooselimb mob and is now under attack from the latest fools that think that globull warming is a signal from their god, mother giha.

The Church has survived and will survive the feds and their bullship tax bribes.

The churches that recognize queer marriages as valid are doomed anyway and if they take tax exempt status from the feds for "marrying two or three or ten queers, pedophiles, dog lovers or what ever comes next, are not Christian Churches and damnation await the fools, so have at it.

[Alberta's Child]

How many towns would?

Any town with enough responsible, upright citizens who value their religious freedom enough to elect leaders who reflect their values.

So if you have a parish that has been in the same place for 150 years, they should just move. Sure thing. Right.

Read the New Testament. Read Matthew 10:14-15 in particular. The admonition from Christ Himself was stark ... even frightening, in fact:

And whosoever shall not receive you, nor hear your words: going forth out of that house or city shake off the dust from your feet. Amen I say to you, it shall be more tolerable for the land of Sodom and Gomorrah in the day of judgment, than for that city.

First, in case you hadn't noticed, Muslims are busy trying to kill Catholics.

Actually, this is being done by the Islamic factions that have assumed power in countries where Islamic governments that left their Catholics alone have been toppled by the U.S. and its allies. It's pretty embarrassing to come to the realization that the Ayatollah Khomenei was right all along when he called the United States of America "the Great Satan," isn't it?

[markomalley]

…They were shut down because they refused to place their children with sodomites at the direction of the government agencies that gave them most of their funding.

No. They were shut down because laws were changed mandating that they do so and they refused. See here for the example from DC. See here for Boston. Had they accepted nothing from the government, they still would have been required to do.

This Supreme Court ruling is going to have some very positive impacts, in the long run.

I agree, but not for the reason that you give. I believe that it will require the Church to go underground and will result in the formal apostasy of lukewarm "Christians." The Catholic Church has a lot of experience with this, hopefully our Protestant "separated brethren" do as well.

As for myself, I'm figuring out where in my house to dig out a priest hole. I have a feeling that it will be needed at some point before too long.

[xzins]

It depends on what you mean by ‘tax exempt’. If we’re talking the charitable donation deduction, then you are correct. If you’re talking about the government taxing already taxed money being given to God, then you’re talking about a 1st amendment violation, the government is NOT allowing ‘free exercise’. Any amount they take would be ‘limited exercise.’

Now, fwiw, most churches in America are under 100 people in attendance. Their expenses are real, everything from literature for programs, Sunday School, Vacation Bible School, TO salaries for staff. (Let me assure you, pastors pay MORE than their share of income taxes.)

So, taking away the deductibility of the membership’s charitable donations would be little noticed. (But it would require the IRS to register every church in America.)

Violating the 1st amendment to try to tax offerings to God would hurt smaller churches.