I don’t know if Mr. Scancarelli is complaining about it, but no, you can’t endorse candidates from the pulpit and keep your tax exemption, and you shouldn’t be able to.
And it’s not aimed at religion. Secular non-profits can’t endorse candidates and keep their tax exemption, either.
And (of course) they aren’t prohibited from endorsing. They can’t endorse and be tax exempt. That’s not the same thing.
You know what’s really wrong? The fact that churches that endorse probably won’t lose their tax exemption, even though they should, simply because of the political fallout.
Unlike some people, I strongly favor a tax exemption for religious corporations. But it comes with some rules and responsibiities, and they should be enforced.
When churches are tax exempt, the government gets to define what is a “church”. When charity is tax deductible, the government defines what is “charity”. When marriage gets a tax break, the government defines what “marriage” is. When energy saving improvements get a tax deduction, the government defines what constitutes an “energy saving improvement” – and congress critters don’t know squat about that subject (except Thomas Massie).
Flat tax. No deductions except large standard deduction which applies to everyone rich or poor.
Just an observation here without taking sides. This is the first time I’ve really seen GA become noticeably political and look at the reaction from our gentle readers. Already, the tone here has changed.It doesn’t take long, does it?
I get so tired of hearing this self-righteous rant that “churches should be taxed.” Everyone looks at the less than 1% which are mega-churches, and which, by the way, are taxed for anything that is considered non-ministry.
On the other hand, let me tell you about the rural church I attend. It is composed of farmers, teachers, factory workers, and various other occupations, all of which pay sales tax, income tax, and all the other taxes you have heard about. The money we give has already been taxed once.
And then I hear how the community “misses out” on the tax revenue the churches would add. I now that, in our case, we have a small rural school in our district. All of the members pay the taxes that should go to that school. Of course, the church does not pay that one.
But I said “should.” Right now, over 50% of all the tax revenue the school should get is seized by the state and given to other districts. If our church paid taxes, it would go there, too. Our district misses nothing by not having the church members double-taxed.
I get so tired of hearing about churches needing to be taxed. I am a member of that church, and I pay my income tax, my 15% self-employment tax, sales tax, and all the other taxes that go with being a citizen.
But I give to the church in spite of all those taxes. I would hate to see my money, after being taxed once, be taxed again when given in a free-will offering.
We do pay people’s medical bills, provide services for the community, and take care of people who have lost loved ones. We recently paid the deductible on a neighbor’s cataract surgery because he could not afford it. We sent money to missions and ministry projects all over the world.
Sorry you guys think we are so greedy and mercenary. Over 99% of all churches are like us, not the ones you always think about.
I’ve never understood why some people think that “hell” is a bad word. It isn’t anatomical, sexual, scatological, or blasphemous. I mean, the Bible says not to take God’s name in vein, but nothing about the devil’s or his domain.
So you think that violating the free speech rights of those religious leaders who do feel that they have viewpoints that they agree with in political office or political issues they may agree with or disagree with and stating such from the puilpit benefits who? It would appear that it is more your hatred of religion is what drives your attitude.
JD'Huntsville'AL almost 6 years ago
I’ve never heard of anyone censoring what’s said from a pulpit.
Johnny Q Premium Member almost 6 years ago
Something to do with taxes, I guess…
Dirty Dragon almost 6 years ago
Tax-exempt churches are upset that they aren’t supposed to openly take sides in the political process.
Even though no one ever enforces it…
rhtatro almost 6 years ago
Last line is morse code for SOS.
Ignatz Premium Member almost 6 years ago
I don’t know if Mr. Scancarelli is complaining about it, but no, you can’t endorse candidates from the pulpit and keep your tax exemption, and you shouldn’t be able to.
And it’s not aimed at religion. Secular non-profits can’t endorse candidates and keep their tax exemption, either.
And (of course) they aren’t prohibited from endorsing. They can’t endorse and be tax exempt. That’s not the same thing.
You know what’s really wrong? The fact that churches that endorse probably won’t lose their tax exemption, even though they should, simply because of the political fallout.
Unlike some people, I strongly favor a tax exemption for religious corporations. But it comes with some rules and responsibiities, and they should be enforced.
stuart almost 6 years ago
When churches are tax exempt, the government gets to define what is a “church”. When charity is tax deductible, the government defines what is “charity”. When marriage gets a tax break, the government defines what “marriage” is. When energy saving improvements get a tax deduction, the government defines what constitutes an “energy saving improvement” – and congress critters don’t know squat about that subject (except Thomas Massie).
Flat tax. No deductions except large standard deduction which applies to everyone rich or poor.
MJKesquire almost 6 years ago
Fill in the blanks!!
TracyFan 65 almost 6 years ago
Just an observation here without taking sides. This is the first time I’ve really seen GA become noticeably political and look at the reaction from our gentle readers. Already, the tone here has changed.It doesn’t take long, does it?
Night-Gaunt49[Bozo is Boffo] almost 6 years ago
Fine say what you like and pay the property taxes and take it off the burden of everyone else.
Night-Gaunt49[Bozo is Boffo] almost 6 years ago
Flat taxes are a scam that benefits the richer you are and penalizes those who are poorer.
Churches should pay Caesar aka govt for services and it is directed by Joshua/Jesus to do so!
Max Starman Jones almost 6 years ago
I get so tired of hearing this self-righteous rant that “churches should be taxed.” Everyone looks at the less than 1% which are mega-churches, and which, by the way, are taxed for anything that is considered non-ministry.
On the other hand, let me tell you about the rural church I attend. It is composed of farmers, teachers, factory workers, and various other occupations, all of which pay sales tax, income tax, and all the other taxes you have heard about. The money we give has already been taxed once.
And then I hear how the community “misses out” on the tax revenue the churches would add. I now that, in our case, we have a small rural school in our district. All of the members pay the taxes that should go to that school. Of course, the church does not pay that one.
But I said “should.” Right now, over 50% of all the tax revenue the school should get is seized by the state and given to other districts. If our church paid taxes, it would go there, too. Our district misses nothing by not having the church members double-taxed.
I get so tired of hearing about churches needing to be taxed. I am a member of that church, and I pay my income tax, my 15% self-employment tax, sales tax, and all the other taxes that go with being a citizen.
But I give to the church in spite of all those taxes. I would hate to see my money, after being taxed once, be taxed again when given in a free-will offering.
We do pay people’s medical bills, provide services for the community, and take care of people who have lost loved ones. We recently paid the deductible on a neighbor’s cataract surgery because he could not afford it. We sent money to missions and ministry projects all over the world.
Sorry you guys think we are so greedy and mercenary. Over 99% of all churches are like us, not the ones you always think about.
kab2rb almost 6 years ago
Our Pastor when time to vote does not direct members who to vote for, yet will give what the candidate stands for.
Pedmar Premium Member almost 6 years ago
I’ve never understood why some people think that “hell” is a bad word. It isn’t anatomical, sexual, scatological, or blasphemous. I mean, the Bible says not to take God’s name in vein, but nothing about the devil’s or his domain.
heathcliff2 almost 6 years ago
Beware those who know what is best.
jbrobison almost 6 years ago
So you think that violating the free speech rights of those religious leaders who do feel that they have viewpoints that they agree with in political office or political issues they may agree with or disagree with and stating such from the puilpit benefits who? It would appear that it is more your hatred of religion is what drives your attitude.