Someone please explain to me

[zbdent]

exactly where in this statement does it say that Churches shouldn't have to pay taxes?

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances."

Or am I looking at the wrong part of the Constitution?

[SharonRB]

1. I doubt it's in the Constitution

It's part of the tax code, would be my guess.

[sinkingfeeling]

2. Not in the Constitution. Try tax law.

[ewagner]

3. By implication

taxation is regulation or "prohibiting free exercise thereof"...if you consider the power to tax is the power to destroy, you can see the implication.

[zbdent]

4. Ah, but the literalists always point out

"It doesn't say freedom from religion . . . so I can force it down your throat!"

Won't hold water.

And don't they tax newspapers? "The Press"?

[RedG1]

5. If churches don't have to pay taxes...

...they also can't call the fire department when they catch fire. I'll use the fire department... you can pray for rain.
.....Bill Maher's New Rules

[Mist]

6. A quote from Gore Vidal:

“The tax exemptions for the revenues of all the churches from the Baptists to the equally absurd—and mischievous—Scientologists must be removed.
“ The original gentlemen’s agreement between Church and State was that We the People (the State) will in no way help or hinder any religion while, absently, observing that as religion is “a good thing,” the little church on Elm Street won’t have to pay a property tax. No one envisaged that the most valuable real estate at the heart of most of our old cities would be tax-exempt, as churches and temples and orgone boxes increased their holdings and portfolios. The quo for this huge quid
was that religion would stay out of politics and not impose its superstitions on Us the People. The agreement broke down years ago. The scandalous career of the Reverend Presidential Candidate Pat Robertson is a paradigm."
From Perpetual War for Perpetual Peace, p.145

[Sam1]

7. Congress shall

make no law respecting an establishment of religion. It doesn't say except tax law! An interesting question, did any of the states tax churches before the passage of the 13th, 14th, and 15th amendments?

[brianmckenna]

8. The govermment is abolishing free speech because of the internet

There is not much in the press about amendment e. The State has its hands full defending against the censorship by a State Judge of a website that supports amendment E.

Newspapers such as the Yankton Press and Dakotan will not print paid election ads supporting amendment E. The Judge runs the town of Yankton.

The Judges Order is illegal on 2 fronts. A Judge can not censor a political website and the one of the parties committed perjury. Not just a small lie but out right perjury. Claimed she never used her ex's social security number but his number appears on her credit report. The Judge ignored the proof of her credit report. The only way is could appear on her credit report is if she used it in a financial transaction. The Yankton Sheriff knows and even wrote a letter he knows of social security number fraud but it is not his problem.

The South Dakota Supreme Court wants a Grand to hear the case. Justice has a price.

Maybe he could right a bunk of no account checks using fake social security numbers as that is what judges favor in South Dakota

None of the U.S Senators or House of Rep wants to do anything as it is a hot potato best to stay away from.

goggle southdakotagov.info

[treestar]

9. The motive is probably based on the charity they do

non-religious non-profits can get tax-exempt status, too.

It's a sort of gentleman's agreement that if they make it easier for churches to take up the slack on social welfare, they will probably do it to some extent.

Not that they all do. But the older, traditional churches can do a lot of good. That alleviates the problems and makes it look like the government is doing a good job or that the argument that government not being involved has weight.