[Vision2020] Banned From Church

Sun Jan 20 00:14:30 PST 2008

Paul,

  Thanks for the civil discourse and response. I think the overall good of churches far out weights any good we would get in return by forcing some of them out to collect some taxes and the problems we would generate them. 

  The government doesn't give tax breaks to churches, it just doesn't tax them. The government is only entitled to take what the people allow them to take.  The people never gave authorization to take from churches. 

  There is this myth out there that the government has the inherent right to do what ever it wants to whomever it wants without the explicit permission of the people. It doesn't. And taking the position that the government has all authority to tax all things all it wants is a dangerous idea to hold in our minds. The government does things with the people's permission, not the other way around. 

  I agree with your concerns that some church leaders abuse their power and inject themselves into places in earthly matters that they should not. However, the flip side of that argument is that political organizations that strongly advocate for certain positions are also tax exempt. In other words, if the organization is called the Right Wing Conservative Political Party or the Church of Jesus, both are tax exempt organizations, so it doesn't matter if a church preaches religious or political values and endorses candidates, they are both tax exempt organizations in either situation. 

  I believe that free speech is the first right in the Bill of Rights for reason. It is because we as a people, in order to remain free, need to be free from government control and influence in our practice of politics and religion. Certainly, some will abuse that privilege. But I would rather have freedom of religion and freedom of assembly be abused by most, then controlled by the government. Once the government can tax our freedom of religious and political assembly, it is all the easier to do anything else the want. 

  The only time a church should be taxed is if it selling competitive services and products that the free market is also offering, then it should be required to pay the same taxes as their competitors. 

  To answer your question, of why churches are in downtown retail areas, is because many poor people that need the services of faith based organization live downtown, they don't have cars to drive out to houses in the suburbs. 

  Best,

  Donovan

Paul Rumelhart <godshatter at yahoo.com> wrote:
  Donovan,

Good points. I can see the value in not taxing
schools and soup kitchens and other charitable works. 
Instead of giving money to the community they give a
service instead.

I used to think that churches also provided a service
to the community. More often lately, though, I see
them preaching hatred towards homosexuals and the
willful ignorance of science and I see them
influencing national political elections. So giving
them a tax break so they can wield more political
influence or damn some other group to hell in the
media doesn't sit well with me. If it were the old
days when they preached about looking out for the poor
and down-trodden, I wouldn't have as much of a problem
with it.

However, I don't think our government should be in a
position to give tax breaks to religious institutions
because it should be neutral on the subject. If they
can prove they are a charitable organization, then
they should be able to qualify for tax relief that
way.

Why do we need churches in the retail center of the
town, anyway? Shouldn't they be located closer to
their congregations?

Paul

--- Donovan Arnold 
wrote:

> Paul,
> 
> I am not so certain you could tax churches that
> easily. First, few churches are simply churches,
> they are also community centers, donation centers,
> soup kitchens, homeless shelters, volunteer centers,
> support group meeting centers, child care centers,
> food banks, and schools. Those are all tax exempt
> to. So you have that mess to sort out.
> 
> Second, there is no clear system in establishing
> the "economic" value of a church. A church could be
> considered of enormous economic value if you
> threatened to desecrate their holy sanctuary by
> turning into a big box retail store if they don't
> pay X number of $$$. Most would pay whatever they
> had. 
> 
> It would unfairly force churches out of downtown
> areas where economic values are high and to relocate
> away from where they do society the most social
> good.
> 
> Why would anyone want to tax these good services
> to humanity out of existence?
> 
> Best,
> 
> Donovan 
> 
> 
> Paul Rumelhart wrote:
> The government shouldn't make any distinction
> based
> upon religion. It should just tax the property
> owners, whoever they are. 
> 
> In my opinion.
> 
> Paul
> 
> --- Donovan Arnold 
> wrote:
> 
> > Ken,
> > 
> > I think enforcing the law and maintaining social
> > order on the basis of what they paid in taxes
> would
> > be a detriment to society, and would most likely
> > promote and create a vigilante sort of justice to
> > save on government fees and taxes. It would also
> > create huge injustices in law enforcement. 
> > 
> > If you want to debate if churches should get a tax
> > break or not that would be an interesting debate. 
> > 
> > My personal objection with taxes being levied
> > against churches is that when a government can tax
> a
> > church, it is also being given the power to shut
> it
> > down at the same time , which is a violation of
> the
> > First Amendment rights. IMHO, the government gets
> > enough money as it is. It would be nice to have
> one
> > place inside our borders where its greedy fingers
> > don't get into your wallet.
> > 
> > The church goers pay taxes through the nose
> > already. Adding another tax for them to support
> > where the state is not suppose to be involved is
> not
> > called for in my opinion. 
> > 
> > Best Regards,
> > 
> > Donovan 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > Kenneth Marcy wrote:
> > On Saturday 19 January 2008 09:48, Tom Hansen
> > wrote:
> > > Cops arrest and handcuff little old lady banned
> > from church because she
> > > didn't like the pastor.
> > 
> > > On a quiet Sunday morning in June, as
> worshippers
> > settled into the pews at
> > > Allen Baptist Church in southwestern Michigan,
> > Pastor Jason Burrick 
> > > grabbed his cellphone and dialed 911. When a
> > dispatcher answered, the 
> > > preacher said a former congregant was in the
> > sanctuary. "And we need to, 
> > > um, have her out A.S.A.P."
> > > 
> > > Half an hour later, 71-year-old Karolyn Caskey,
> a
> > church member for nearly
> > > 50 years who had taught Sunday school and
> > regularly donated 10% of her
> > > pension, was led out by a state trooper and a
> > county sheriff's officer. 
> > > One held her purse and Bible. The other put her
> in
> > handcuffs. (Listen to 
> > > the 911 call)
> > 
> > Since when should the local property-tax-paying
> > residents be obligated to 
> > provide sergeant-at-arms services to
> > non-property-tax-paying congregations? 
> > Should income-tax-paying state residents be
> > obligated to pay for otherwise 
> > laudable inter-agency cooperation through such a
> > church-state veil of 
> > separation that is not penetrated by income taxes?
> > 
> > Should the local constabulary send a bill for a
> > service call to the pastor?
> > 
> > Yes, officers respond to lots of planned
> > organizational activities, but 
> > parade permits, for example, can have fees
> attached
> > to them that are 
> > collected in advance. Pastor Burrick knew in
> advance
> > that he didn't like 
> > his long-time parishioner, and should have made
> > arrangements to privately 
> > handle her appearance rather than ask the
> tax-payers
> > for assistance in a 
> > non-threatening, non-emergency, non-riot
> situation.
> > Absent such 
> > arrangements, or their feasibility, the pastor
> > deserves service charges.
> > 
> > 
> > Ken
> > 
> >
>
=======================================================
> > List services made available by First Step
> Internet,
> > 
> > serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
> 
> > http://www.fsr.net 
> > mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
> >
>
=======================================================
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > ---------------------------------
> > Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them
> > fast with Yahoo! Search.>
>
=======================================================
> > List services made available by First Step
> > Internet, 
> > serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
> 
> > 
> > http://www.fsr.net 
> > 
> > mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
> >
>
=======================================================
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ---------------------------------
> Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them
> fast with Yahoo! Search.

---------------------------------
Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile.  Try it now.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/vision2020/attachments/20080120/0e33470d/attachment-0001.html 