Posted on 09/15/2015 8:28:27 AM PDT by C19fan
That’s the way it is in MA, though in Boston, at least, some of the huge nonprofits (very profitable universities) do make some sort of voluntary payment.
”Establishment of religion” refers to government taxation to financially support a particular religion - in the context of the framing of the Constitution, essentially the denominations of Christianity. Oh yes, and Judaism (is the way they might put it). Note that there were established churches in various states, and that the First Amendment specifically refers to Congress - the federal government. Established church laws remained on the books in one or two states even after the Civil War era. To claim that a church, in and of itself, is “an establishment of religion” under the First Amendment is to claim that “the free exercise thereof” clause has no meaning at all.In reality the government hires ministers. In the military, they are known as “chaplains.” They can matter a lot to the military. The ink wasn’t even dry on the First Amendment when Congress voted to support evangelizing the “Indians.” Not taxing churches is hardly inconsistent with America tradition. In a congenial letter which Jefferson rightly expected to be well received, Jefferson spoke of “a wall of separation” between church and state. He meant, not that Christians influenced by their churches should not influence government, but that government should/could not influence church doctrine. The latter is a clear and present danger in the (selective) outrage of Democrats if Republicans solicit support in churches.
My question is when these bigots who detest people of faith finally take away the tax exempt status in churches and churches are then allegedly free to preach and pick candidates from the pulpit and they are not politically correct then what? Out right censorship, pastors submitting sermons for government approval? It’s coming...
Why are we still subsidizing Atheism as the State Religion in Public Schools?
Your definition of establishment of religion has no Constitutional basis. If it was valid they would have been taxing Churches since the 16th was passed. So stop trying to force regulation of religion under a fictional definition of Establishment.
Even ministers have to pay personal income tax. It is the income of the church, not that of the minister, that is tax exempt.
You would think that a Congress that passed the First Amendment would steer clear of christianizing the Indians. You would be wrong. But then, you would think that they would steer clear of an “Alien and Sedition” act. And you would be wrong there, too.
The reasons churches are tax exempt is that our founding father’s understood their place. They didn’t view themselves as above God, that they should tax God.
Why is this clown going after the religious tax exemption?
-— Why is this clown going after the religious tax exemption? -—
Religions generally have a positive impact on society. OTOH, Mohammedanism doesn’t. And taxing churches might sober up a lot of liberal priests and ministers.
I suspect that the motivation, though, is simply Marxism.
Of all the dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity, religion and morality are indispensable supports. In vain would that man claim the tribute of patriotism, who should labor to subvert these great pillars of human happiness, these firmest props of the duties of men and citizens. The mere politician, equally with the pious man, ought to respect and to cherish them. A volume could not trace all their connections with private and public felicity. Let it simply be asked: Where is the security for property, for reputation, for life, if the sense of religious obligation desert the oaths which are the instruments of investigation in courts of justice ? And let us with caution indulge the supposition that morality can be maintained without religion. Whatever may be conceded to the influence of refined education on minds of peculiar structure, reason and experience both forbid us to expect that national morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principle.It is substantially true that virtue or morality is a necessary spring of popular government. The rule, indeed, extends with more or less force to every species of free government. Who that is a sincere friend to it can look with indifference upon attempts to shake the foundation of the fabric?
I believe Ronald Reagan mentioned it in his “A time for choosing” speech.
Not on the dole, huh?!
Your Tax Dollars At Work: Liberal religious organizations make amnesty pay
http://capitalresearch.org/2014/10/your-tax-dollars-at-work-liberal-religious-organizations-make-amnesty-pay/
EXCLUSIVE: HHS Bankrolled Catholic and Baptist Church from 2010 to 2013 to Prepare for Obama’s 2014 Invasion!
http://libertynews.com/2014/07/exclusive-hhs-bankrolled-catholic-and-baptist-church-from-2010-to-2013-to-prepare-for-obamas-2014-invasion/
Amounts awarded by the federal government to these 9 contractors since 2008 are shown in the table
http://capitalresearch.org/wp-content/uploads/Table2.jpg
I am glad we agree that tax exemption is not a subsidy.
The examples you provide are subsidies.
I do honestly think churches should also be able to receive subsidies for secular goals.
If the government is trying to feed people or care for the poor and religious organizations are effective at doing this, I am fine with the subsidies.
In fact, I think it is highly suspect that only secular organizations can accomplish these things.
If the federal government wants to withdraw from such humanistic endeavors then I think that can be consistent. But if secular groups can get fed checks for humanitarian activity— so can churches.
To do otherwise is to turn the first amendment inside out. The Establishments or religions were co-mingled state/church agents within the colonies.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
