• Please keep all posts on the Rittenhouse verdict here: Rittenhouse Verdict. Note the moderator warnings in the thread. The thread will be heavily moderated with a zero tolerance policy for any baiting, flaming, trolling or other rule breaks. Stick to the topic and not the other posters. Thank you.
  • This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

The Johnson Amendment

DamnYankee

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 28, 2009
Messages
7,370
Reaction score
3,469
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
The Johnson Amendment refers to a change in the US Tax Code made in 1954 which prohibited tax-exempt organizations from endorsing or opposing political candidates.

There's an indication from DJT that he will work to get rid of the Johnson Amendment. What do you think? I believe it would be a very good idea since such an amendment is anti-free speech. And religious organizations ought to be able to keep their tax-exempt status.
 

blaxshep

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
May 22, 2012
Messages
16,875
Reaction score
7,666
Location
St. Petersburg
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
There's an indication from DJT that he will work to get rid of the Johnson Amendment. What do you think? I believe it would be a very good idea since such an amendment is anti-free speech. And religious organizations ought to be able to keep their tax-exempt status.

Religion is a business and if we are taxing businesses they should be taxed, then we wont need the Amendment any more.
 

Abbazorkzog

Zapatista Libertarian
Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 20, 2014
Messages
12,199
Reaction score
4,079
Location
#TrumpWasAnInsideJob
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Centrist
There's an indication from DJT that he will work to get rid of the Johnson Amendment. What do you think? I believe it would be a very good idea since such an amendment is anti-free speech. And religious organizations ought to be able to keep their tax-exempt status.

Agreed with everything except the bold.
 

DamnYankee

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 28, 2009
Messages
7,370
Reaction score
3,469
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
Religion is a business and if we are taxing businesses they should be taxed, then we wont need the Amendment any more.

Agreed with everything except the bold.

Okay. We have the left in this country crying about the "separation of church and state," how can we reconcile taxing churches, for example, all the while maintaining a separation?

And, what does it hurt for churches to exercise the 1st Amendment?
 

Crovax

DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 15, 2014
Messages
14,513
Reaction score
8,010
Location
South Texas
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
There's an indication from DJT that he will work to get rid of the Johnson Amendment. What do you think? I believe it would be a very good idea since such an amendment is anti-free speech. And religious organizations ought to be able to keep their tax-exempt status.

Churchs have been pushing this by speaking out and the IRS hasn't pushed back. I think they know that if ever challenged it would come out unconstitutional.
 

Ikari

Moderator
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 8, 2006
Messages
82,248
Reaction score
50,622
Location
Colorado
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Left
Okay. We have the left in this country crying about the "separation of church and state," how can we reconcile taxing churches, for example, all the while maintaining a separation?

And, what does it hurt for churches to exercise the 1st Amendment?

If they are preaching politics, then it's no longer separation of church and state.

They can give up their tax-exempt status and say as they like. Or they can keep getting gifts from the American Taxpayer, and keep it to religious discussions while at church.
 

Casper

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 14, 2015
Messages
26,734
Reaction score
11,514
Location
Elsewhere
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Independent
There's an indication from DJT that he will work to get rid of the Johnson Amendment. What do you think? I believe it would be a very good idea since such an amendment is anti-free speech. And religious organizations ought to be able to keep their tax-exempt status.

Disagree, if Religion wants the government out of their business then the Religions need to stay out of the Governments Business. There should be price to pay when you make choices. You want the a double Standard, plain and simple.
 

Crovax

DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 15, 2014
Messages
14,513
Reaction score
8,010
Location
South Texas
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
If they are preaching politics, then it's no longer separation of church and state.

They can give up their tax-exempt status and say as they like. Or they can keep getting gifts from the American Taxpayer, and keep it to religious discussions while at church.

None of what you said makes any sense. First off there is no such thing as speciation of church and state in the constitution. Nor would it matter since a church is a private organization.

In fact taxing churches be unconstitutional, as the SCOTUS has said "the power to tax involves the power to destroy". So clearly the power to tax churches would allow the government to destroy them and that clearly is unconstitutional.
 

blaxshep

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
May 22, 2012
Messages
16,875
Reaction score
7,666
Location
St. Petersburg
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
None of what you said makes any sense. First off there is no such thing as speciation of church and state in the constitution. Nor would it matter since a church is a private organization.

In fact taxing churches be unconstitutional, as the SCOTUS has said "the power to tax involves the power to destroy". So clearly the power to tax churches would allow the government to destroy them and that clearly is unconstitutional.

Well that would mean all taxation is unconstitutional.
 

Crovax

DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 15, 2014
Messages
14,513
Reaction score
8,010
Location
South Texas
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Disagree, if Religion wants the government out of their business then the Religions need to stay out of the Governments Business. There should be price to pay when you make choices. You want the a double Standard, plain and simple.

There is a double standard. the people are protected from the govt, the govt gets no such protection from the people. It was designed that way.
 

Ikari

Moderator
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 8, 2006
Messages
82,248
Reaction score
50,622
Location
Colorado
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Left
None of what you said makes any sense. First off there is no such thing as speciation of church and state in the constitution.

I was replying to someone who brought it up

Nor would it matter since a church is a private organization.

Didn't say they weren't. that's 0 for 2 on being relevant.

In fact taxing churches be unconstitutional

Nothing in the Constitution says we cannot tax Churches.

as the SCOTUS has said "the power to tax involves the power to destroy".

Source?

So clearly the power to tax churches would allow the government to destroy them and that clearly is unconstitutional.

Slippery slope. Taxing a church does not mean that the government has destroyed a church.
 

DamnYankee

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 28, 2009
Messages
7,370
Reaction score
3,469
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
Disagree, if Religion wants the government out of their business then the Religions need to stay out of the Governments Business. There should be price to pay when you make choices. You want the a double Standard, plain and simple.

So, the 1st Amendment is a "double standard?"
 

Casper

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 14, 2015
Messages
26,734
Reaction score
11,514
Location
Elsewhere
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Independent
There is a double standard. the people are protected from the govt, the govt gets no such protection from the people. It was designed that way.

The Amendment is not about The People. Nice try.
 

DamnYankee

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 28, 2009
Messages
7,370
Reaction score
3,469
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
If they are preaching politics, then it's no longer separation of church and state.

They can give up their tax-exempt status and say as they like. Or they can keep getting gifts from the American Taxpayer, and keep it to religious discussions while at church.

So you as a leftist, don't believe in the 1st, or you do? I'm confused. You just argued how evil DJT was for being anti free speech and here you go with this position of yours.
 

Casper

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 14, 2015
Messages
26,734
Reaction score
11,514
Location
Elsewhere
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Independent
So, the 1st Amendment is a "double standard?"
A Church is not a Person. Want to play politics do not do it as a representative of the Church standing at the pulpit.
 

Casper

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 14, 2015
Messages
26,734
Reaction score
11,514
Location
Elsewhere
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Independent
No it's not, the govt is certainly within its right to destroy a lot of businesses.

And the Government would not be destroying any Churches.
 

DamnYankee

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 28, 2009
Messages
7,370
Reaction score
3,469
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
Churchs have been pushing this by speaking out and the IRS hasn't pushed back. I think they know that if ever challenged it would come out unconstitutional.

If what ever came out?
 

MrWonka

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 21, 2016
Messages
10,869
Reaction score
5,798
Location
Charleston, SC
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Left
There's an indication from DJT that he will work to get rid of the Johnson Amendment. What do you think? I believe it would be a very good idea since such an amendment is anti-free speech. And religious organizations ought to be able to keep their tax-exempt status.

That is simply idiotic. If you want influence over the direction of the country then pay ****ing taxes. They are allowed tax exempt status because the church is considered separate from the state.
 

Ikari

Moderator
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 8, 2006
Messages
82,248
Reaction score
50,622
Location
Colorado
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Left
So you as a leftist, don't believe in the 1st, or you do? I'm confused. You just argued how evil DJT was for being anti free speech and here you go with this position of yours.

Hahahah, this argument is as horrible as it is not thought out.

I don't believe in the 1st? No, I believe in it. But you are the one who brought up separation of Church and State, yes? How is it separate if you allow churches to play politics? A church is a captured audience, and the pastor can preach and instruct the congregation on how to vote.

Churches can do it, they just need to give up their government handouts. There are rules to getting paid by the government, this is one of them.
 

DamnYankee

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 28, 2009
Messages
7,370
Reaction score
3,469
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
A Church is not a Person. Want to play politics do not do it as a representative of the Church standing at the pulpit.

What about the right to free speech?
 

DamnYankee

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 28, 2009
Messages
7,370
Reaction score
3,469
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
That is simply idiotic. If you want influence over the direction of the country then pay ****ing taxes. They are allowed tax exempt status because the church is considered separate from the state.

Why are you so angry?
 

Crovax

DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 15, 2014
Messages
14,513
Reaction score
8,010
Location
South Texas
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
I was replying to someone who brought it up

So someone else said something completely ignorant you chose to do the same and now when you have been made too look like a fool you are pinning the blame on them.

[/quote]Didn't say they weren't. that's 0 for 2 on being relevant.[/quote]

Actually you did since you made the claim that a church would be violating the "separation of church and state". Just an FYI only the govt can violate the 1st amendment. The constitution is a limit on what the govt can do not the people.

That's 0 for 2 on sounding like you even have a clue of what you are talking about

Nothing in the Constitution says we cannot tax Churches.

The 1st amendment


McCulloch v. Maryland (1819)

Slippery slope. Taxing a church does not mean that the government has destroyed a church.

I never said it did only that would would give the govt the power to do so.
 

Ikari

Moderator
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 8, 2006
Messages
82,248
Reaction score
50,622
Location
Colorado
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Left
The 1st amendment

Quote the first amendment, show me where it says Churches may not be taxed.

I never said it did only that would would give the govt the power to do so.

The government can destroy in many ways, not just taxation. It doesn't make taxation itself unconstitutional. If the government did use it to try to destroy a church, then maybe you'd have a case. if it's just having a church pay their property and income tax as any other business/individual would have to, there is no case.
 
Top Bottom