My tax rate today is partially determined by the deduction allowed for religious organizations.

[WCGreen]

Simple. What they do not pay in taxes via deduction of contribution has to be made up some way. Therefore, my taxes are a bit higher.

I get that. It is one of the “costs” of living in a free society. The wants and needs of people I do not support or even agree with are subsidized through higher taxes for me.

We are, if anything, overly forgiving when it comes to the goings on behind the cloak of religion.

As much as I would like it, I do not have a freedom from religion.

If I did, there would be no tax deduction for contributions to religious organizations.

Do not get me wrong. I know that the overwhelming number of religious folks out there do wonderful things for millions of people.

So I bite my tongue, especially now that I am older and not so quick to shoot off my mouth about how I feel about religion.

It is what a good citizen does in a society that protects the freedom of expression. Whether I agree with what people choose to do does not really matter.

Why?

Because we live in a free society that worships the idea of freedom.

So these attempts by some from the tax deductible supported industry of religion are to restrict choices of some people when it comes to their health concerns are an affront to any person who truly believes we live in a free society.

Especially when their main desired outcome is to demand less freedom of choice to other Americans.

Again, I have no problem with what anyone believes, who anyone people worship and how they do their worshiping.

What I expect from someone here in the 21st Century is that they recognize that they live in a dynamic free modern society that allows them great freedom to do as they please.

We go so far as to subsidize all of them from the poverty-cloistered nun to the billionaire televangelist. As long as they pretend that there is worshiping going on, we turn a blind eye.

All I am asking is that these people recognize my freedoms as well.

Beause, after all, we live in a free society.

And that simply means you have freedom and I have freedom.

I do not try to undermine your freedom to believe what you choice to believe.

All I ask is the same consideration from you.

Because, after all, we live in a free society.

[gopiscrap]

1. I agree no religious deductions

in fact I would say no deductions at all except the per person allowance which I would increas a bit.

[WCGreen]

2. It's social engeniering.

[CaliforniaPeggy]

3. So, we live in a free society...

And you and I get to pay for that freedom...

But there is a disconnect here. They are free to ram their choices down our throats, while we pay.


It's rather like smoking. Anyone's freedom to smoke ends where my lungs begin. They have no right to pollute my environment.

And the churches have no right to subsidize their points of view when those POV interfere with my life.

Where is our free society then?

[WCGreen]

5. The bottom line is they want to restrict the freedom of some people they don't agree with

and I am forced to subsidize their pursuit of religious freedom.

All I ask is that they, who enjoy the benefits from a free society, respect that other people have the same rights as well...

[NYC_SKP]

4. Agree, no religeous deducts, and none for marraige status, either.

Fuck that shit.

[LiberalFighter]

6. Don't forget the churches, etc that don't pay property or sales taxes.

Even though roads are used by church goers so they can attend their place of worship or send their children to school. Even though they receive police and fire protection. Even though they receive free street lighting. Even though they benefit from drainage systems designed hopefully to keep their property from flooding. Even though local or state govt jurisdictions provide signage to help others locate their facility.

[joeglow3]

9. Don't forget churchs keep students out of public schools

This works out to about $150,000,000 in Omaha. Nice little savings to property tax owners.

[Major Nikon]

11. Which entitles them to exactly nothing

It's that same as a couple who has no kids is not entitled to a lower tax rate than someone who has 20. The public as a whole benefits from a public education system. As such the public as a whole is expected to pay for it. Whether you utilize it or not is irrelevant.

[Telly Savalas]

7. Your current tax rate is indpendent of the current tax rates of others

There has been no attempt to synchronize revenue and spending at the federal level since the Clinton Administration. The deduction to religious organizations is subsidized by the taxes of future generations, not us. Not to say that this timing issue negates your point.

[WCGreen]

8. The original intent was more what I was aiming at...

[Major Nikon]

13. It goes back farther than Clinton

I'm still paying the interest on Raygun's Cold War part II. One person's tax break is another person's burden. If the money spent was borrowed, that just means you get to pay it back with compounded interest and that interest starts accruing the day the money is borrowed. It doesn't get deferred to the next generation. The government pays interest on its debt before it pays anything else.

[gratuitous]

10. Let's see . . .

My church sits on property valued at about a million dollars. Being in Portland, that's about $30,000 annually in property taxes "lost" to the public coffers. We also run an annual budget of about $60,000. That would be an additional $21,000 in taxes annually if we assume to all the congregants pay taxes at the highest rate, and nobody in the congregation gave a dime to other non-profit organizations.* Naturally, we'd want to deduct from that $51,000 annual "loss" to the public coffers the payroll taxes the church pays for our pastor's salary. Let's knock it down to $45,000 annually that your free society is being cheated out of and that so affronts you.

So, what possible benefit does this little corner of the world get for that $45,000 that all you freedom-lovers are missing? Well, for starters, we train and certify disaster relief workers to provide emergency child care in the aftermath of hurricanes, floods, earthquakes and other disasters that surely don't happen anywhere near you. These volunteers train on their own time and their own dime, and travel to disaster areas to care for children while their parents negotiate through the various relief agencies to secure aid.

We also provide a large part of our land as a community garden, tending two garden plots to provide wholesome organic produce to the local food bank, and providing another 18 plots for other people in the community to grow their own food. Don't worry, the rest of the people in the neighborhood will surely give over part of their lots for their neighbors to come in and garden, right? After all, there's money missing from our tax revenues! We must have the revenues from all you money-grubbing billionaire televangelists! Or, ordinary people, but what's the difference?

Oh yeah, did I mention that we give over our basement area to the Day Center for the homeless family shelter agency? Musta slipped my mind while I was restricting your choices. And we exact the princely sum of one dollar per year from the agency for the permanent use of that tax-free space. So, who's stepping up to provide space, heat, and light for 15 or so of your homeless neighbors? Oh, and don't forget that a lot of them are looking for jobs, so they'll need computers and internet access. We don't want their choices restricted, either. So, who's door is open for them? By the way, some of your things might go missing, but that's just part of a free society, isn't it?

There's also the meeting space that we provide free of charge to the Bhutanese refugee group. They're pretty quiet, though. You don't mind giving up your house for one Saturday a month to accommodate them, do you? I mean, that $45,000 you're doing without just leaves a gaping hole in what you can do in your own community, right? Oops, I almost forgot about the transgendered group that finds safety and welcome in our church building twice a month. Well, you free societals are more than willing to cover that slack, aren't you?

Unless there some benefit to your free society from this industry of religion. But that can't possibly be, can it?

*Oh wait, you meant to include all non-profit giving, didn't you? I mean, why just stop at churches . . . unless there's some other motive to this post. But I'm positive it isn't anything as uninteresting as garden variety prejudice, because our faultless DU juries have decided it isn't somehow.

[Major Nikon]

12. So why does Kenneth Copeland get tax breaks on his airport and fleet of multi-million $ aircraft?

Are you going to tell me that Kenneth Copeland (who owns an 18,000 sq ft mansion which sits beside his airport) deserves millions in tax benefits because he is feeding that many hungry people and contributing to disaster preparedness, sheltering the homeless, and helping out refugees? He does none of those things, yet he still is entitled to the exact same tax break for the exact same reason as your church.

You also assume that all the people who are working to do all these great things wouldn't be doing those things if the church didn't exist. I find that a pretty poor assumption.

I'm all for giving churches tax breaks to the extent that they provide a service to the community. But giving tax breaks to churches simply because they are churches is ridiculous. There are all sorts of non-profit organizations out there who don't get tax breaks for their property and employee salaries. The only difference between them and most churches is they don't get together once per week and sing to entities envisioned by sheep herders 3,000 yrs ago. Jesus paid his taxes and didn't have a problem with it. If Christian churches really wanted to follow his lead, they should too.

[WCGreen]

14. If you actually read and understand what I wrote....

You would get the fact that I DO NOT begrudge the tax breaks given to people who DONATE to the church of whatever affiliation that might be.

I actually said nothing about all the other tax breaks that you decided to bring into the conversation.

I was making the point that religious communities do not want to cover birth control with their hospital plan.

To me it is simply this; you cannot have it both ways.

If you are going to enjoy the fruits of money that is donated tax-free, you should take the consequence of what that society has deemed as responsible health care.

We live in a free society.

If they want to live outside the law, separate themselves from the health care then they do not respect the health then they need to lose their tax deduction for donations.

I think I was pretty clear that I am not a religious person but I also said that the people in the religious business also live in a greater society called the USA.

We give a lot of leeway to religious organizations.

Is it really too hard to ask them to comply with the law of the land.

Hey, it's simple. The people who are covered while working for the Church do not have to use the benefit.

Remember, I never said they should have their deduction taken away. I was merely pointing out that they cannot have it both ways.