Should Tax Dollars Go To Religious Causes?

If Trumpers refuse to support universal healthcare, then the rest of us should demand that tax dollars stop going towards their religious causes. This would also mean requiring churches to pay taxes like any other business.

 

1. I think more money should go to specific religious causes, they are more efficient than government.

2. sure, tax them, please tax them, especially the property, religious institutions are hoarding huge amounts of cash and property. huge.

I have no idea what any of that has to do with universal healthcare or trump.

 

So you'd support your tax dollars going to your local mosque?

 

sure, and Presbyterians too! and I did say specific causes say homeless shelters education food banks, etc. (many etc.)

I don't want to donate so they can just build a bigger Church.

But in my opinion there are established religious causes that actually do a tremendous amount of good and they do it more effectively than the government does, why not give them a boost where they can relieve pressure on the govt.

 

If they are doing so much good then they should have no problem getting donations....

 

they do and they collect a lot of free manpower through volunteers as well, that's how they do as much as they do. Although I wish the church itself would kick in more since IMO they are spending a much larger % through donations than through their own reserves <which is worthy of some criticism in itself.

short version of a long story but a catholic charities guy that spoke a couple years back at Kiwanis gave some excellent real world examples of where the gov't fails by funding agencies and departments directly or through grants or appropriations that ends up being redundant in almost every way to existing organizations and the vast majority of funds disappear in administration and overhead, <which we suck at.

In the end they could have done just as much good with 30% of the money spent could have by working directly to organizations that already have the admin/overhead up and running, along with having a number of volunteers (much cheaper) they just need more money to expand and help more people.

Not saying its the answer to everything but targeting specific organizations, religious or otherwise for funding likely makes more sense in a lot of situations. Common sense doesn't' always apply and/or is restricted by laws.

Again, I have no love for the church in general, for any denomination. But that doesn't' mean they can't be more efficient than gov't in some areas. I make donations to specific organizations but not directly to the church, had a falling out 25 years ago (over money) and I haven't been back except as a guest for weddings/funerals.

I'd be thrilled if we taxed their income, taxed their property, tax their wealth.

 

No, because I may not agree with their ideals, ideas, or "morals"...kinda like not spending tax dollars on abortions

 

Republicans are against spending money on contraceptives and abortion, yet they don't blink when it's spent on Viagra.

 

That's because more Republicans NEED Viagra....

 

Who would get to decide which specific churches? Not Congress per the 1st Amendment. ("Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion … )

That could lead to many, many sham churches doing token good works for the money. It would require another bureaucracy to oversee and manage the undertaking.

Good thought, but not too practical.

 

What tax dollars go to churches?

 

Yes we have issues with our current laws and I believe that's hurting the opportunity, and for better for worse when government organizations set up separate and redundant assistance programs there are going to be shady organizations and people as well as tons of waste spent on the bureaucracy rather than the people it's designed to help.

One thing I do realize is that the tax-free status of religious organizations leads to a lack of accountability. That is why I want to text them partially for accountability but also because they can afford it, "fair share" and all that jazz.

just tossing in my 2c.

 

By not paying taxes, they're taking.

 

totally agree with this

http://rationalrevolution.net/articles/history_of_the_separation_of_chu.htm

"When a religion is good, I conceive it will support itself; and when it does not support itself, and God does not take care to support it so that its professors are obliged to call for help of the civil power, 'tis a sign, I apprehend, of its being a bad one.
- Benjamin Franklin: in letter to Richard Price, October 9, 1780"

 

If the churches already exist Congress is not establishing any religion. That clause prohibits Congress from creating a Church, like the Church of England. Too many people don't seem to understand what the Constitution and the Founders intended with so many of our amendments...

 

a lot, this is just one church, how many church's in this country?

and this was only from 2003 to 2008

"Bush's Faith-Based Initiative Gave Obama's Former Church $1.5 Million"

http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article...itiative-gave-obamas-former-church-15-million

"Trinity United Church of Christ in Chicago, Ill. – where Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama worshipped for two decades – has received more than $1.5 million in federal tax money since 2003 through the Office of Faith-Based and Community Initiatives"

 

The Constitution was also designed to be fluid and open to interpretation.

But you should know that the Founding Fathers envisioned America to be a secular nation. They tolerated religion, and they understood the political importance of kowtowing to it, but America is not religious.

 

That's utterly untrue, the Constitution set forth our rights, it is not fluid, but it is changeable, through the amendment process. You seem really confused about this. Our rights are not open to interpretation nor are they fluid...

 

Keeping your money is not taking.

 

Churches should get tax relief on all charitable work, but be taxed like any other business on any money they keep.

 

Oh. So can I stop paying taxes, then? I'll still benefit from your tax dollars, so is that ok? I'll still use government services and be protected by police and drive on public roads, correct?

If a church is on fire, they call 911 and the fire trucks come. And who pays for it?

 

From my point of view religious organizations are cleaning up when it comes to taxes and have no accountability. They receive all the benefits that our tax dollars provide but don't contribute directly.

Yes they may do good things on the side but so do I and that doesn't give me tax-free status.

 

The tax dollars that pay for infrastructure,( roads to the church), courts, military/police/fire fighters that protect churches, etc.

 

("Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion … )

Like other ambiguous items in the constitution, an establishment of religion can mean a church or temple. Please don't tell me that wasn't what the Founding Father had in mind. We only have the Constitution to tell us that .. a document that required 26 Amendments.

 

There is absolutely nothing ambiguous about that. Only those who are confused or trying to confuse the issue could see it in such a way. Its cut and dry, like the 2nd, and liberals and gun grabbers have been trying to obscure that as well. Its not going to work. You could start by reading some history, the Federalist Papers, and other items, there is a wealth of information out there. If you choose not to, its because you don't seek the truth, you seek to mislead and obscure the Founders' intent...