Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Experts Warn Houses of Worship at Risk After Court Ruling
Christianity Today ^ | 6/27/05 | Yogita Patel

Posted on 06/28/2005 7:37:31 AM PDT by rhema

Religious institutions may be more vulnerable to takeover through eminent domain after Thursday's (June 23) Supreme Court ruling that gives local governments greater power to seize properties for private economic development, according to some religious and civil rights advocacy groups.

Churches, mosques, synagogues and other nonprofit religious entities are considered especially at threat because they generate no tax revenue for cities, while developments like hotels or shopping malls are seen to be economic boons for urban renewal projects.

"Because all houses of worship are tax-exempt, they will continue to be attractive targets for seizure by revenue-hungry local governments," said Jared Leland, media and legal counsel of The Becket Fund for Religious Liberty.

The Becket Fund is a nonprofit, interfaith legal organization that advocates for the free expression of religion.

The Becket Fund, Southern Christian Leadership Conference, the Rutherford Institute and many other groups filed friend-of-the-court briefs in support of seven residents of New London, Conn., who were fighting the city's decision to raze their homes to allow private developers to build a commercial complex.

Leland warned that taking land and property strictly for economic interests is a dangerous slippery slope, and said religious organizations threatened by this decision offer communities services and aid that are immeasurable by monetary standards.

"Religion is something that may not have an economic impact on communities, but does have a tremendous social impact on communities." Leland said. "Religious institutions should be welcomed and protected in the land-use matter."

John Whitehead, president of the Rutherford Institute, said public furor may protect some religious institutions from takeovers, but warned they still will be vulnerable.

"If push comes to shove, churches, synagogues and anyone who they don't consider tax-generating entities will come under this," Whitehead said.

(Excerpt) Read more at christianitytoday.com ...


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: churches; eminentdomain; kelo; scotus
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-71 last
To: Hermann the Cherusker
Well, we know what's happening to our other rights -- I imagine this one will go down, too. I am so disgusted with the way things are going in this country.

Carolyn

61 posted on 06/29/2005 5:32:52 AM PDT by CDHart (The world has become a lunatic asylum and the lunatics are in charge.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

To: hunter112
Maybe this is a good reason to start taxing church properties. If they generate tax revenue, the same as any other entity, it will be harder to make a case that there will be a public benefit by seizing them for taxable development.

Kind of mixed feelings on this issue...

I'm an evangelical pastor. Of course, our church enjoys the "subsidy" of no property taxes on our buildings. Of course, we feel we provide services and positive benefits for our community.

But on the other hand, if we paid our "fair share," no one could tell us to shut up, we could have a real voice in the affairs of the community, etc.

It is absolutely true...whoever pays the band gets to call the tune.

62 posted on 06/29/2005 5:39:26 AM PDT by Ulysses ("Most of us go through life thinking we're Superman. Superman goes through life being Clark Kent!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: Happy2BMe
Thanks for the ping.

I hope this seriously backfires on not just Justice Souter, but the rest of them too...


63 posted on 06/29/2005 6:41:23 AM PDT by USF (I see your Jihad and raise you a Crusade ™ © ®)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 58 | View Replies]

To: USF

Wonder is Souter is paid up on his property taxes?


64 posted on 06/29/2005 7:33:20 AM PDT by Happy2BMe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 63 | View Replies]

To: rhema

Private schools would also be affected in this fashion.


65 posted on 06/29/2005 7:41:29 AM PDT by RonF
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Happy2BMe

Thanks for the ping!


66 posted on 06/29/2005 7:47:39 AM PDT by Alamo-Girl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 58 | View Replies]

To: maryz

I hope someone is investigating too. I wonder if Mayor Menino has worked out a behind the scenes deal with Saudi monied interests. This move is tooo blatant, IMHO. Nope, hadn't heard about it. Thanks for posting.


67 posted on 06/29/2005 8:23:58 AM PDT by Alia
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies]

To: Alia; maryz

Blatant, but then that hasn't stopped the House of Saud.


68 posted on 06/29/2005 9:13:06 AM PDT by Siobhan ("Whenever you come to save Rome, make all the noise you want." -- Pius XII)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 67 | View Replies]

To: rhema

I attended a town hall meeting conducted by my local state representative (PA), and I was surprised by the opinions expressed at this meeting against tax-exempt properties who expect to benefit from municipal services. Ex: "If churches won't pay taxes, tell them the fire truck isn't coming."


69 posted on 06/29/2005 9:14:34 AM PDT by Ciexyz (Let us always remember, the Lord is in control.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ulysses
dear pastor, you are mistaken on this issue, our not paying taxes is not a subsidy any more than and money you do not give to the government is a subsidy.

The reason the government does not tax the church is because, at an earlier time, people understood that the church was not under the authority of the government, ....while you individually are, the church is not....but alas that was a long time ago before we began to see everything/one as an entity subservient to government.

70 posted on 06/29/2005 10:59:03 AM PDT by reflecting (I'm reading what all of you are saying)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 62 | View Replies]

To: reflecting

If the Church were spending the revenue it does not pay in taxes to help God's Children, that would be a good reason to keep the exemption. When the Church is spending the money creating political uproar, encouraging people to march in the streets demanding that the Government "Feed My Sheep" (not at all what Jesus commanded), buying up prime real estate and traveling the world to conferences denouncing Israel, I think it becomes harder to justify letting them have a free ride.

Remember the saying "He no play-a da game, he no make-a da rules"? If the Church won't join the community in carrying the taxation cross, why should it be allowed to sit back in air conditioned comfort and demand that the proletariat carry that cross?


71 posted on 06/30/2005 4:29:25 AM PDT by KateatRFM
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 70 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-71 last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson