Replies

So you accept the secular authority’s definition of “charity”?

Do you know the Biblical definition of “Charity”?

Here’s the UK’s definition:

The 13 descriptions of purposes listed in the Charities Act are:

(a) the prevention or relief of poverty

(b)the advancement of education

(d) the advancement of health or the saving of lives

(e) the advancement of citizenship or community development

(f) the advancement of the arts, culture, heritage or science

(g) the advancement of amateur sport

(h) the advancement of human rights, conflict resolution or reconciliation or the promotion of religious or racial harmony or equality and diversity

(i) the advancement of environmental protection or improvement

(j) the relief of those in need, by reason of youth, age, ill-health, disability, financial hardship or other disadvantage

(k) the advancement of animal welfare

(l) the promotion of the efficiency of the armed forces of the Crown, or of the efficiency of the police, fire and rescue services or ambulance services

(m) any other purposes currently recognised as charitable or which can be recognised as charitable by analogy to, or within the spirit of, purposes falling within (a) to (l) or any other purpose recognised as charitable under the law of England and Wales

The Charities Act does not define what each of these descriptions of purposes mean. However, it does provide some definitions, or partial definitions, for some of the descriptions. These are set out in Annex D.

https://www.charitycommission.gov.uk/detailed-guidance/registering-a-charity/what-makes-a-charity-cc4/part-3-about-the-descriptions-of-purposes/

Here’s the relevant portion of Annex D:

Annex D: Definitions in the Charities Act

Part 1

Meaning of “charity” and “charitable purpose”

CHAPTER 1

General

3 (1)

(m) any other purposes -

(i) that are not within paragraphs (a) to (l) but are recognised as charitable purposes by virtue of section 5 (recreational and similar trusts, etc.) or under the old law,

(ii) that may reasonably be regarded as analogous to, or within the spirit of, any purposes falling within any of paragraphs (a) to (l) or sub-paragraph (i), or

(iii) that may reasonably be regarded as analogous to, or within the spirit of, any purposes which have been recognised, under the law relating to charities in England and Wales, as falling within sub-paragraph (ii) or this sub-paragraph.

3 (2)In subsection (1) -

(a) in paragraph (c), “religion” includes -

(i) a religion which involves belief in more than one god, and

(ii) a religion which does not involve belief in a god,

Found here: https://www.charitycommission.gov.uk/detailed-guidance/registering-a-charity/what-makes-a-charity-cc4/annex-d-definitions-in-the-charities-act/

This fight is the smoke from a far off fire. Once it’s burning on your doorstep it will be too late. Religious liberty is to everyone’s benefit, even atheists... and Mormons.

I “accept” that if I am in another country, doing business in another country, that I am subject to their laws, authority and interpretation thereof...I’m sorry that the mormons think they’re special and deserve some special accommodation because of that.

I guess SLC should have hired better tax attorneys before building under those rules...

Kinda ironic though...America’s forefathers fled England in order to practice their religions freely and here we have the mormons going into England.

And then complaining that the Brits have some kind of audacity to actually enforce their own laws...notwithstanding that the Brits granted a very generous interpretation of their law and gave the mormons an 80% exemption to begin with.

In addition to this, they built the temple there knowing the rules, accepted the rules and then decided that instead of winning on the tax front, they want to make it a “human rights” issue and got their asses handed to them.

Mischaracterizing the use and purpose of the temple holds absolutely no influence with me...I’ve been in a few and know exactly what goes on in them...there is nothing “charitable” going on in the temple that benefits the general public.

Oh, and I’ve never said that mormons can’t practice their religion...unlike the numerous inferences being made on this thread...

Jesus Himself said, render unto Caesar that which is Caesar’s...I’m sorry to see that the mormons don’t want to follow that admonition and tried to squirm their way around it using the strawman of “human rights”.