you and others miss the point.
YOUR contention is it's "wrong" to disallow gays, and Christians say it's "wrong" to disallow our religious beliefs.
You can say, gays should be served in public restaurants, but a church building is NOT a public building.
It was purchased, maybe built, certainly maintained, by the congregation. it's PRIVATE property, and beyond you having ANY say in it's use.
Except churches are special...............They don't pay taxes...................Why is that, exactly ?............I mean, by their own admission, they feel free to hate some of the taxpayers who are paving the roads to them.....................
Churches are exempt from government control.
That means not having to pay tribute (tax).
We talking about paving the roads to the churches that their parishioners use every Sunday, not some cockamaney story about how the church is being threatened by not being free to torture and murder at will, like it used to do.......................
Bringing it down to the practical level, science should culminate in the practical... correct if in error, we classify a thing as to whether it belongs to one of three basic categories, animal, mineral or plant. Subtract animal and plant as being living ....that leaves exactly what (?) to somehow make the decisions? Pretty big decision, too, deciding to become a living thing.
Rocks, of the three, right? Again, certainly not plants/animals.
Granting there were plenty of opportunities for all this to occur, what's the actual science behind your theories? Both how, more importantly why? The science behind the why?
Another how. How did these minerals-come-alive figure out how to use solar energy so seamlessly, efficiently? Life needs energy, rocks don't even need to move, except maybe by gravity...why would it reproduce, what created the mechanism to do so, and again, why would it? Too much complexity of purpose, too rudimentary stage figuring it all out even, seems the best we can do now is only mimic nature's best examples.
All just came about, not only this big big life thing---from non life, but funny, everything, just coincidentally, was already magically in place, already here waiting to sustain that life once it decided to come into being somehow...because why? Just in that astronomical chance that life might come along, that had never come along before? What's the science behind that happening? And why? This wisdom to do this came from... where? Perhaps from "their" forefather minerals, grandfather rocks, handed that down [ way before the concept of hands ] to these new single celled whatevers that we surmise somehow occurred, on their own... .
Every aspect of it becomes just more and more and more absurd once you start putting it under the microscope...laughable at times. Reminds me of the cartoon of a wizened caricature, chubby Einstein in three peice suit type, proudly displaying a massive equation filling up one of those old room-long blackboards with marks, white chalk symbols covering every inch of it ... with one slight interruption... at the end of the equation... where it says in parenthesis ( and then a miracle happened) then the equals sign = Life.
So, my skepticism of your, if you actually believe in all that, deciding whether or not my "sky guy" or "sky gal" ...or whatever I may deduce to be our creator, this brain behind this whole shebang... is the lesser, well, I obviously have no faith in your perception proving itself to be the right one, so, we perceive things differently, I accept that you believe yours, yet certainly do not find yours to be any superior to mine as regards rigor of rationale. If I did, I would switch, weighing the best for society aspect in the baand other liquids etc. other sand other liquids etc. orts of lance of that decision as well.
The first amendment protecting freedom of religion, was intended to prevent folks with your mindset, from using government to control religions.
Deal with it.
The first amendment protecting freedom of religion, was intended to prevent folks with your mindset, from using government to control religions.
Deal with it.
The Constitution does not mandate tax exemptions for the Church.
There are limitations on freedom of religion: For instance we do not allow human sacrifice, which is a religious ritual. Monotheists just get in a tizzy when they too are labeled barbaric.............................
Nor did it mandate a tax on income originally. The exemption was founded on the first amendment...
Nor did it mandate a tax on income originally. The exemption was founded on the first amendment...
It is a conditional exemption. They have to give some of their right to freedom of speech.
It is a conditional exemption. They have to give some of their right to freedom of speech.
If I'm not mistaken, that is included in the first amendment...
If I'm not mistaken, that is included in the first amendment...
For tax paying entities. But when a Church accepts tax exemptions they also the rules of the exemption and that preferential treatment.
Churches do NOT have to have freedom of speech in their church.
Try expounding an atheist doctrine in any Christian church in the land, and discover how quickly you find yourself outside!
And YOU want economic sanctions against churches YOU deem politically incorrect.
It certainly SEEMS you wish you could cancel their tax exempt status as a means to force them to your "higher moral standard". It's NOT!
Are you seriously contending politically correct IS or SHOULD be a condition for tax exempt status?
Churches are not allowed to participate in electioneering.
Depends on what you mean by electioneering.
A minister MAY INDEED exhort the congregation to vote for principle.
A minister may run for office on a compatible to religion platform.
No body is allowed to engineer elections, if THAT is your meaning of electioneering?
Depends on what you mean by electioneering.
A minister MAY INDEED exhort the congregation to vote for principle.
A minister may run for office on a compatible to religion platform.
No body is allowed to engineer elections, if THAT is your meaning of electioneering?
It is in the tax code for 591 c3s
Political activity [edit]
Section 501(c)(3) organizations are absolutely prohibited from supporting political candidates, and are subject to limits on lobbying. They risk loss of tax exempt status if these rules are violated.[30][31]
Elections [edit]
Organizations described in section 501(c)(3) are prohibited from conducting political campaign activities to intervene in elections to public office.[32] The Internal Revenue Service website elaborates upon this prohibition as follows:
Under the Internal Revenue Code, all section 501(c)(3) organizations are absolutely prohibited from directly or indirectly participating in, or intervening in, any political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for elective public office. Contributions to political campaign funds or public statements of position (verbal or written) made on behalf of the organization in favor of or in opposition to any candidate for public office clearly violate the prohibition against political campaign activity. Violating this prohibition may result in denial or revocation of tax-exempt status and the imposition of certain excise taxes.
Certain activities or expenditures may not be prohibited depending on the facts and circumstances. For example, certain voter education activities (including presenting public forums and publishing voter education guides) conducted in a non-partisan manner do not constitute prohibited political campaign activity. In addition, other activities intended to encourage people to participate in the electoral process, such as voter registration and get-out-the-vote drives, would not be prohibited political campaign activity if conducted in a non-partisan manner.
On the other hand, voter education or registration activities with evidence of bias that (a) would favor one candidate over another; (b) oppose a candidate in some manner; or (c) have the effect of favoring a candidate or group of candidates, will constitute prohibited participation or intervention.
The Internal Revenue Service provides resources to exempt organizations and the public to help them understand the prohibition. As part of its examination program, the IRS also monitors whether organizations are complying with the prohibition.
Lobbying [edit]
In contrast to the absolute prohibition on political campaign interventions by all section 501(c)(3) organizations, public charities (but not private foundations) may conduct a limited amount of lobbying to influence legislation. Although the law states that "No substantial part..." of a public charity's activities can go to lobbying, charities with large budgets may lawfully expend a million dollars (under the "expenditure" test), or more (under the "substantial part" test) per year on lobbying.[33] To clarify the standard of the "substantial part" test, Congress enacted §501 (h) (called the Conable election after its author, Representative Barber Conable). The section establishes limits based on operating budget that a charity can use to determine if it meets the substantial test. This changes the prohibition against direct intervention in partisan contests only for lobbying. The organization is now presumed in compliance with the substantiality test if they work within the limits. The Conable Election requires a charity to file a declaration with the IRS and file a functional distribution of funds spreadsheet with their Form 990. IRS form 5768[34] is required to make the Conable election.
501(c) organization - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The first amendment protecting freedom of religion, was intended to prevent folks with your mindset, from using government to control religions.
Deal with it.
That is NOT a public endorsement, but a private one. Churches are private organizations.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?