"It could well pave the road toward a government-centered society..."
This is the goal of liberals, secular humanists, and socialists.
Only the State will control things. Like George Orwell's 1984.
Posted on 03/03/2009 4:36:09 AM PST by IrishMike
Indeed, much better to force people unto the public dole that way Dhimmicrats psychotic hatred of Religion can be satisfied.
There are limits to what people can contribute. Previously, you could deduct these contributions from your income, thereby reducing your tax outlay; once this passes, if you continue to contribute at the same level, you will be paying taxes on that amount, just as if you hadn’t contributed it but still owned it, and it’s simply a fact of economic life that there’s only so much money to go around: you can’t afford to give it away and pay taxes on it at the same time. And this will affect not only religious charities, but charitable institutions and funds of all kinds.
It is definitely an attack planned to get everything out of the hands of individuals and non-government players, and cede every single aspect of our lives to the government.
Barry is doing a frontal assault on one hand (removal of conscience clause so that religiously connected hospitals or health care professionals will be forced to carry out government population and end of life policies) and trying to starve the churches out, on the other.
It’s interesting that he sees the church as the only real enemy.
The Government is a Jealous God.
from the article
....’It is religion that serves as the catalyst for many people to engage in good works. This is the reason behind such organizations as the Salvation Army, Catholic Charities, and the many assistance organizations of all faiths that exist everywhere in the United States. These organizations survive largely on donations of time, food, merchandise, and, of course, money. Without donations many would be in serious trouble or may even cease to exist’....
The Government is a Jealous God.
.
.
.
.
To liberals - government is itself religion.
Religion is competition for liberal policy.
Just from the title came the thought “And Nancy thinks she is such a GOOD CATHOLIC!” (GAG’m MOI)
Ping!
After being in fundraising for a number of years, I will argue that love for any one cause or faith is what drives giving moreso than tax deductions. At the major gift level and year-end it's an issue, but smaller amounts, no. The vast majority of people out there don't make enough for their gifts to make any difference at tax time.
Onward, Christian soldiers, marching as to war,And no Swords and Lances this time ;-)
with the cross of Jesus going on before.
Christ, the royal Master, leads against the foe;
forward into battle see his banners go!Refrain:
Onward, Christian soldiers, marching as to war,
with the cross of Jesus going on before.
None of this reflects the nature of my post. If Christians give so that they can get a tax deduction, then they are being generous for the wrong reasons. Real generosity will exist regardless of the taxation landscape.
Real generosity will exist regardless of the taxation landscape.
.
.
.
.
Very true.
Our government is not historically secular. Non-sectarian, but not secular. Our founding documents and philosophy pre-suppose, at least in general terms, a Christian world-view.
Just a couple of comments. First, it might sound like I am quibbling but this sentence bothered me: “In effect, the government is subsidizing these organizations by reducing the taxes paid by people who contribute to them.” The reason it bothered me is that underlying it is an assumption that the government owns the rights to the money unless it magnanimously exempts one party or another. It makes the “subsidized” party a beggar of the government. That mentality is what makes us sheeple too often in the face of government usurpation. We need to think of the government as the beggar, forcing it to justify taking the money in the first place, not the other way around. I am not indicting this writer, just noting how easily we fall into accepting the government’s point of view.
Second, my husband and I give generously to our church and a few other organizations, mainly the Boy Scouts and local charities. We are not wealthy like the Obamas and such giving entails sacrifice on our part. Whether or not we get a tax exemption will not make a difference in our giving but if our cost of living goes up significantly that might make some difference. We do not aggressively itemize our in-kind contributions, preferring just to claim monetary support, but if Obama pursues charities and limits the tax deduction, while it exists, I am likely to join Hillary and Bill in valuing and itemizing every single item and minute of time contributed, thereby lessening our tax bite.
Third, I think it is time for charitable organizations to get together to do some public relations work and see if it can’t quantify the value of that charity work so people can see how shutting down charities will inevitably decrease benefits for most of Obama’s constituencies who are on the public dole. I believe if those who benefit from private charity were to line up at the public trough, there would be a lot less to go around. I know churches and soup kitchens (often church-run), thrift stores, interfaith ministries, self-help organizations and such make a huge difference in public dependence.
Finally, whether this stance towards private charity happens under Obama or not, that is the trend and most churches and other charities ought to be preparing for the time when government declares its outright animosity towards them. If they can’t survive right now without tax exemption, they ought to be making plans to get independent of government control (due in large part to that attitude that tax exemption is subsidization).
Ha! Good luck to the Democrats on this one. If I recall correctly, the elimination of Christianity as a social force was also the Roman agenda when Christ was crucified.
As it stands, Christianity has survived and outlived every wacko political movement that’s tried to stifle its influence. Taking on an unstoppable force is a lousy political agenda.
SnakeDoc
"It could well pave the road toward a government-centered society..."
This is the goal of liberals, secular humanists, and socialists.
Only the State will control things. Like George Orwell's 1984.
Imagine what elections might look like if the pulpit were able to freely speak about largess, corruption, elections, political groups and their agendas! We may not have the current administration in office.
It has been my view that taking the tax exemption has been too heavy of a trade off for the church. We essentially sell the truth away for the lucre. Silence on political issues in return for a 501(c3). A compromise. Luke warm.
Yes, more revenue is collected because of the tax write off, but that does not make it right. Many will say that it is a necessary compromise, but I disagree. It is an entitlement perspective that allows it easy for believers to give. Yet where is it written that giving is easy...or was meant to be easy? God says it is a test...a test of Him and of His faithfulness (the ONLY thing the Bible tells us to test Him in!) and a test of ourselves and our faith in Him. Tests are never easy. They are meant to challenge us and to make us better. But where is the test when the government essentially says; “Hey, I'll make your testing easier. You compromise what you can say about me and I'll make it look like you're giving more money than you actually are.”? For, if I can “write off” (dismiss, excuse) my tithe, then I have watered it down. The government has essentially enabled me to cheat on God's test. All for the sake of the filthy lucre.
Do not let your right hand know what your left hand is doing. (it is supposed to be between He and me!)
“No one who puts his hand to the plow and looks back is fit for service in the kingdom of God.” (there is a cost for following God)
The leftists do NOT want to totally remove the 501(c)3 status, for fear that then then ere will be NO LIMIT on what can be preached from the pulpit.
The drop in donations to churches will only shift the benevolence ministry away form the church and put it upon the back of the local/county/state and fed government.
First, the churches will need to pay the basic bills like buildings, salaries, supplies and such. Then, only the money remaining will be available for benevolence ministries. This is where the cuts will be necessitated.
The amount of benevolence provided by the church is much larger than what can be easily seen, but when the county/state has to start feeding, housing, clothing and paying the bills of those that the church has to turn away, THEN it will be readily apparent.
Another thought...
I think this will be a purification for the church.
The white wash seplucres will be apparent for what they really are. The buildings of spiritually dead men.
Reference...
The financial aspect...
Robert Schuller's Crystal Cathedral Ministry Crumbling
The spiritually dead aspect...
Man kills himself at Crystal Cathedral
..and those are mere examples.
My point is that it is not simply the deduction, but the result of not getting it that will effectively leave them without enough money to contribute.
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.