The Johnson Amendment

[Crovax]

The Amendment is not about The People. Nice try.

Actually it is, the freedom of religion was incorporated as a personal right in Cantwell v. Connecticut (1940)

I would said "nice try" but that would be a lie, I see you claim that your location is "TEXAS" that has to be a lie also we have good schools here.

 

[poweRob]

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?

The first amendment says the state cannot make laws that establish a religion (promote one over another as a state religion). You can tax all religions and that wouldn't be against the 1st amendment.

 

[DamnYankee]

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

How so?

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.

So you believe in free speech but not for people in church? But on the other hand DJT is evil for being anti free speech? Okay. Yes, I brought up “the separation of church/state,” what’s your point? Having said that, the freedom of religion clause isn’t there to restrict the church, it’s there to restrict the state. No a church is does not have a “captured audience.” People are free to leave anytime they want. Where do you get these strange notions?

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.

Churches are not paid by the gov’t, LMAO.

 

[Casper]

Actually it is, the freedom of religion was incorporated as a personal right in Cantwell v. Connecticut (1940)

I would said "nice try" but that would be a lie, I see you claim that your location is "TEXAS" that has to be a lie also we have good schools here.

Has nothing to do with Freedom of Religion. Obviously not in your part of Texas.

 

[DamnYankee]

Not a person and not speaking for the whole.

So, what about the right to speak freely?

 

[Casper]

So, what about the right to speak freely?

Does everyone in the church get to take the pulpit or the mic, nope I thought not. Good grief either you want Religion and Government to stay out of each others business or you do not, as I said You want a Double Standard.

 

[poweRob]

So, what about the right to speak freely?

Everyone in a church has a right to speak freely. But as an org, they are not to delve into politics. Because, thanks to citizens united, money = speech, these giant mega-churches could then start buying politicians like the corporations do.

 

[Crovax]

Has nothing to do with Freedom of Religion.

Yes it does if a church is subject to an IRS audit it would clearly inhibit the right to freely practice religion

 

[MrWonka]

Why are you so angry?

Because I'm sick of watching this country be flushed down the toilet by morons who believe their magical sky monster is awesome while trampling on those who have a different magic sky monster all while not having to pay a dime in taxes to help support the country that's protecting their right to brainwash it's citizens. Churches are being protected by our military. Their congregants get there on our roads. They're using our infrastructure to preach hatred the least they could do is chip in on the tax bill.

 

[poweRob]

Yes it does if a church is subject to an IRS audit it would clearly inhibit the right to freely practice religion

If churches can buy politicians with their money=speech ability, then the government is establishing a religion. Unconstitutional.

 

[Crovax]

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

Im sure its right after the part where the constitution explicitly says that churches can be taxed. I have already shown how taxation would be a burden of freedom to exercise religion.

However this argument is pointless, the SCOTUS has already ruled as far as tax exemptions go, and they have ruled that the tax exemptions crates a bigger wall of separation that taxing them would.

"The exemption creates only a minimal and remote involvement between church and state, and far less than taxation of churches. It restricts the fiscal relationship between church and state, and tends to complement and reinforce the desired separation insulating each from the other." Walz v. Tax Commission of the City of New York (1970)

 

[countryboy]

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.

Um, no, they are tax exempt because they are non-profit organizations.

 

[Ikari]

Churches are not paid by the gov’t, LMAO.

Tax exemptions are handouts, of course they are being paid. They should be paying things such as property and income tax, but they don't. that's a handout, a subsidy, taking government money.

If you take handouts from the government it may come with strings.

 

[Crovax]

If churches can buy politicians with their money=speech ability, then the government is establishing a religion. Unconstitutional.

How exactly is a church buying politicians by speaking their opinion?

 

[poweRob]

How exactly is a church buying politicians by speaking their opinion?

Citizens united and some other past precedence has stated that money = speech. Therefore, buying a politician is free speech. A church doing to is establishing a religion.

 

[Crovax]

Tax exemptions are handouts, of course they are being paid. They should be paying things such as property and income tax, but they don't. that's a handout, a subsidy, taking government money.

If you take handouts from the government it may come with strings.

How much money should a non-profit pay in income tax?

 

[Ikari]

Im sure its right after the part where the constitution explicitly says that churches can be taxed. I have already shown how taxation would be a burden of freedom to exercise religion.

However this argument is pointless, the SCOTUS has already ruled as far as tax exemptions go, and they have ruled that the tax exemptions crates a bigger wall of separation that taxing them would.

No you didn't, you just made a statement, but it wasn't a demonstration.

"The exemption creates only a minimal and remote involvement between church and state, and far less than taxation of churches. It restricts the fiscal relationship between church and state, and tends to complement and reinforce the desired separation insulating each from the other." Walz v. Tax Commission of the City of New York (1970)

OK, if we're isolating churches from politics/state then there are restrictions to what can be preached about with a captive audience. Churches get cash money by not having to pay taxes and in return they can't just tell their congregation how to vote.

 

[DamnYankee]

"2+2=5!" <- You.

ROTFLMAO.

Is that all you got?

 

[RJApple]

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.

Separation of church and state does not mean the churches can't discuss politics, it means the government should not create and enforce policy based on religious beliefs. It does not violate the separation of church and state for a church to express a political opinion.

Apologies for interrupting.

 

[Ikari]

How much money should a non-profit pay in income tax?

"non-profit" HAHAHAHAHAHA. Have you seen some of these churches, gold and marble, huge buildings and land holdings....non-profit. Religion is all about the profit, it's been that way since..well since man invented organized religion.

How much does any business or individual pay for income taxes. That value. Or they can keep the cash money and have restrictions on political speech/advisement during church services.

 

[Abbazorkzog]

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?

I agree with 90% of your post and you start kicking and screaming about the other 10%.

Real ****ing mature.

 

[Casper]

Yes it does if a church is subject to an IRS audit it would clearly inhibit the right to freely practice religion

If they pay their taxes there is no inhibiting of anything. But since you brought it up I can assure you that some Church leaders want the government auditing their books like wanting to get a brain tumor, they know some of them just might end up in prison.

 

[Ikari]

Separation of church and state does not mean the churches can't discuss politics, it means the government should not create and enforce policy based on religious beliefs.

Apologies for interrupting.

You should also apologize for not reading the post I was responding to and taking things out of context.

 

[Crovax]

Citizens united and some other past precedence has stated that money = speech.

You are missing the big point how is the 1st amendment being violated? only the govt can violate it.

 

[DamnYankee]

Tax exemptions are handouts, of course they are being paid.

They should be paying things such as property and income tax, but they don't. that's a handout, a subsidy, taking government money.

If you take handouts from the government it may come with strings.

So since they are "getting paid" then the left's "separation of church/state," is nullified. And, since it's nullified, then a state can choose an official religion. Agreed?