asbestosman wrote:No, I'm proposing that the government might step in and force citizens to pay more taxes to solve a huge problem for which voluntary charitable contributions seems insufficient. Charity isn't always able to provide for the poor. There simply aren't enough funds. Should government step in? Does Mosiah support this view? Would this backfire becase, as you mentioned, the church also finds other things more important at times?
I think the government should create an additional criteria for a religion to get tax breaks -- the government should set a bar requiring a certain amount of proven charity work in order for a sub-society (calling itself a religion) to be recognized as a useful and beneavolent appendage to the whole society. If they don't do enough charity, they can then pay the government a small tax to make up for it. Would that be fair?
"And yet another little spot is smoothed out of the echo chamber wall..." Bond
asbestosman wrote:No, I'm proposing that the government might step in and force citizens to pay more taxes to solve a huge problem for which voluntary charitable contributions seems insufficient. Charity isn't always able to provide for the poor. There simply aren't enough funds. Should government step in? Does Mosiah support this view? Would this backfire becase, as you mentioned, the church also finds other things more important at times?
I think the government should create an additional criteria for a religion to get tax breaks -- the government should set a bar requiring a certain amount of proven charity work in order for a sub-society (calling itself a religion) to be recognized as a useful and beneavolent appendage to the whole society. If they don't do enough charity, they can then pay the government a small tax to make up for it. Would that be fair?
I think only the charity portion of any operation by a tax-exempt organization should truly be tax exempt. Any religion has the right to exist as per the first amendment, the ability to avoid taxes should only be for those parts that actually contribute to charity. After all, that is why the exemption was created in the first place, if private parties are doing it, the government does not have to.
asbestosman wrote:No, I'm proposing that the government might step in and force citizens to pay more taxes to solve a huge problem for which voluntary charitable contributions seems insufficient. Charity isn't always able to provide for the poor. There simply aren't enough funds. Should government step in? Does Mosiah support this view? Would this backfire becase, as you mentioned, the church also finds other things more important at times?
I think the government should create an additional criteria for a religion to get tax breaks -- the government should set a bar requiring a certain amount of proven charity work in order for a sub-society (calling itself a religion) to be recognized as a useful and beneavolent appendage to the whole society. If they don't do enough charity, they can then pay the government a small tax to make up for it. Would that be fair?
I think only the charity portion of any operation by a tax-exempt organization should truly be tax exempt. Any religion has the right to exist as per the first amendment, the ability to avoid taxes should only be for those parts that actually contribute to charity. After all, that is why the exemption was created in the first place, if private parties are doing it, the government does not have to.
But then you run into the problem of defining what exactly constitutes "charity". Is it only monitery? Do man hours count? If so, the LDS church can deduct millions of volunteer hours by it's members with all the ward callings.
If there's one thing I've learned from this board, it's that consensual sex with multiple partners is okay unless God commands it. - Abman
I find this place to be hostile toward all brands of stupidity. That's why I like it. - Some Schmo
I'm fine with religions getting a tax break - but only if they make their financials public.
WK: "Joseph Smith asserted that the Book of Mormon peoples were the original inhabitants of the americas"
Will Schryver: "No, he didn’t." 3/19/08
Still waiting for Will to back this up...
asbestosman wrote:No, I'm proposing that the government might step in and force citizens to pay more taxes to solve a huge problem for which voluntary charitable contributions seems insufficient. Charity isn't always able to provide for the poor. There simply aren't enough funds. Should government step in? Does Mosiah support this view? Would this backfire becase, as you mentioned, the church also finds other things more important at times?
I think the government should create an additional criteria for a religion to get tax breaks -- the government should set a bar requiring a certain amount of proven charity work in order for a sub-society (calling itself a religion) to be recognized as a useful and beneavolent appendage to the whole society. If they don't do enough charity, they can then pay the government a small tax to make up for it. Would that be fair?
I think only the charity portion of any operation by a tax-exempt organization should truly be tax exempt. Any religion has the right to exist as per the first amendment, the ability to avoid taxes should only be for those parts that actually contribute to charity. After all, that is why the exemption was created in the first place, if private parties are doing it, the government does not have to.
But then you run into the problem of defining what exactly constitutes "charity". Is it only monitery? Do man hours count? If so, the LDS church can deduct millions of volunteer hours by it's members with all the ward callings.
Whatever money we spent codifying this into tax code would be saved in the revenue returned from all of the "non profit" organizations out there. Hell, IHC in Utah is not for profit, right?
The Dude wrote:I think the government should create an additional criteria for a religion to get tax breaks -- the government should set a bar requiring a certain amount of proven charity work in order for a sub-society (calling itself a religion) to be recognized as a useful and beneavolent appendage to the whole society. If they don't do enough charity, they can then pay the government a small tax to make up for it. Would that be fair?
Speaking of politics, I think it would be fair. Speaking from the Book of Mormon, I'm still not sure.
Maybe we could combine religion, politics, and Monty Python in extending the idea of a sin tax to taxing thingy
That's General Leo. He could be my friend if he weren't my enemy. eritis sicut dii I support NCMO