Posted on 07/27/2006 8:20:43 AM PDT by xzins
Try reading and understanding the article first.
ONCE AGAIN - a tax exemption is offered to religious and non-religious organizations FOR CHARITABLE WORK - in recognition that such should not be taxed. HOWEVER, political organizations are taxed as is any other NON-CHARITABLE organization. Once a charitable organization gets involved in non-charitable work, be it politics or commerce, THEY WILL BE TAXED.
You are attempting to turn a tax exemption for good works into a Constitutional right. It is not. There is NOTHING in the Constitution that mandates tax breaks for charity. We as a society condone such. But other non-charitable organizations are TAXED on a LEVEL PLAYING FIELD.
In other words, you are taking the absurd position that equal treatment is infringement.
And because of that you can't deduct from from your tax returns.
The NRA isn't a tax deductable organiztion either are all the other orgs mentioned.
And that's the problem. Not everybody is able to make a donation to these organizations because they don't have the finances to do so.
Part of it is because they can't deduct it from their tax returns
Also, you seem to be taking me way out of context. I'm not saying being tax-exempt is a right for only a few people. If I want to be albe to dis cuss something I should be able to with out all these hackles put around me.
Some politicans put these shaclkes around these groups because they don't want to be told how to run their business which you know and I know is the people's business.
See my post #222. You are taking the absurd position that equal treatment is infringement, and warping the entire notion of tax breaks for charitable activities into a First Amendment Right when it is not.
What you are asking is for special treatment for religious groups to engage in political activity by allowing them to do such in a tax-exempt manner.
Baloney, I am demanding that no peaceful assembly of citizens or individual be taxed predicated on their exercise of the freedom of speech, per the first Amendment prohibition against Congress in that regard.
"Congress shall make no law" abridging the freedom of speech is clear and succinct. Tax law predicated on exercise of the freedom of speech is prohibited regardless of who is exercising such speech. Where such speech be in a church or any other venue is not the issue. The issue is the abridgment of the freedom of speech guaranteed under the 1st amendment.
Everyone else would still have to pay taxes on political donations.
Sorry, but "Congress shall make no law", that comprehends the freedom speech of everyone, including taxation of political donations to organizations and individuals using such funds in the exercise of political speech. Who makes such a donation or to who is irrelevant. The abridgment occurs in taxation predicated on restraint of speech.
End of story.
If I want to be albe to dis cuss something I should be able to with out all these hackles put around me.
Funny, I don't feel any hackles right now. The same tax rules apply to JimRob as any other non-charitable organization. We can discuss any political subject that JimRob deems worthy without government censorship. But somehow, tax equality is infringement? Infringement would be if JimRob were taxed at a HIGHER rate for running a political website, not an equal rate.
JimRob could also turn around and set up a charitable arm of FR that would not be engaged in political activity. And that could be tax-exempt. And he'd have to keep the politics out to keep it that way. But society deems he should not be taxed as to maximize the charitable work that group could do.
ONCE AGAIN - they are not being taxed for such. Instead, if they chose to be a charitable organization, they get a TAX BREAK in recognition of such. If they turn around and engage in commerce or political activity, THEY RETURN TO BEING TAXED EQUALLY.
ONCE AGAIN - they are not being taxed for such
Exemption is predicated on restraint of speech. If one exercises the right contemplated in the term "freedom of speech" and is thereby taxed because of being so engaged, that is being taxed for the exercise of a guaranteed right under the 1st amendment.
Sorry, but
Your rationalizations to the contrary do not hold water against the clear language of the 1st amendment.
"Congress shall make no law", that abrides the freedom of speech. No law, comprehends tax law as well.
If they turn around and engage in
commerceor political activity, THEY RETURN TO BEING TAXED EQUALLY.
Sorry, they may not be lawfully and constitutionally taxed predicated on political activity period.
"Congress shall make no law", that abrides the freedom of speech. No law, comprehends tax law as well.
The Bill of Rights forbids infriging on the right as it is just one of an open set of rights under free association, speech and the exercise of ideas.
"Once a charitable organization gets involved in non-charitable work, be it politics or commerce, THEY WILL BE TAXED."
As I said, politics is off limits. Commerce is handled under the Commerce Clause.
"you are taking the absurd position that equal treatment is infringement."
Infringement is infringement, whether it's equally applied, or not.
dirtboy - I think you're wasting time & bandwidth. He either totally doesn't get it or he refuses to believe it.
I agree. They take a charitable tax break and then act like it's a free speech infringement when it is taken away WHEN THE ORGANIZATION ENGAGES IN NON-CHARITABLE ACTIVITIES.
Well, by that absurd argument, political TV commercials should not be taxed as well.
But beyond that, you have the issue completely reversed. This is not a penalty for political activity - but a revocation of a charitable tax break for NON-CHARITABLE ACTIVITIES. If the organization engaged in commerce, they would lose their tax break as well. So the action is content-neutral.
The IRS does not need to be getting into the business of regulating what people can or cannot say.
You may not neccsarily agree with what some people say but does that justify laying down the heavy hand of the IRS on them? I don't think so.
And I can assure you if the Democrats win both houses of Congress and the White House I think you will see some conservative web sites taxed at a much higher rate.
That's not something I'm looking forward to.
Maybe we just ought to tax politicians then when they try to legislate issues related to morality.
That would eliminate the deficit overnight.
George Soros' gifts to God are exempt under the 1st Amendment. It isn't a matter of whether they should be.
Don't interfere with his Gift to God and say it's free.
Living in Ohio just north of that aforementioned river....
I resent that!
:>)
Well, by that
absurdargument, political TV commercials should not be taxed as well.
Correct.
But beyond that, you have the issue completely reversed. This is not a penalty for political activity - but a revocation of a charitable tax break for NON-CHARITABLE ACTIVITIES.
Wrong it is a revocation of a tax break for "NON-CHARITABLE ACTIVITIES." predicated on restraint (i.e. infringement) of freedom of speech.
If the organization engaged in commerce, they would lose their tax break as well.
Which would be a violation of the condition of "NON-CHARITABLE ACTIVITIES."
Freedom of speech is not a violation of the condition of "NON-CHARITABLE ACTIVITIES."
Freedom of speech is a guaranteed right under the first amendment that shall not be abridged by Congress.
What do you not understand about:
"Congress shall make no law", that abrides the freedom of speech. No law, comprehends tax law as well.
Once again, you are getting this backwards. The charitable tax exemption can also be removed if the organization turns into a commercial operation, for example. Or fails to meet basic functional criteria.
Political activity is just one subset of prohibited non-charitable actions. If a tax-exempt is caught doing any of those activities, they can lose their tax-exempt status. The law is not just about politics.
Guns in worship is a Virginia tradition. (Seriously.)
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.