Grenade. Posted February 21, 2012 Report Share Posted February 21, 2012 This is the reboot of EDGEHEAD15's topic, and will serve the exact same purpose. This will be a thread for members to come and discuss their thoughts on religious matters. THIS IS NOT A TOPIC FOR PEOPLE TO BASH RELIGION/ATHEISM. I, and many others, would love to see this thing to succeed, but or it to do so there needs to be ground rules.1. If you feel like statements made in this topic will offend you, do not participate in the discussion, simple as that.2. Likewise, if you know something you say or post will probably offend someone, refrain from posting it.3. If you are going to argue your side, be fully prepared to take the other sides retaliation. Respectfully.4. Please do not flame anyone in this topic for their beliefs, if you have that big of an issue with them, PM them about it.5. If there's a question you want debated, PM me and I'll post it right here in the OP. ^Ernez's backs this up. You will be warned for breaking the above rules. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mustacio Posted February 21, 2012 Report Share Posted February 21, 2012 I don't see any reason for them to be tax-exempt, tbh. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Porkchop Posted February 21, 2012 Report Share Posted February 21, 2012 If they're gonna be tax-exempt then they should be required to do a certain amount of "community service" per year to stay tax-exempt. BUT, if that were the case so should non-profit organizations that help people/animals/etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nWo_Kevin Posted February 21, 2012 Report Share Posted February 21, 2012 If they're gonna be tax-exempt then they should be required to do a certain amount of "community service" per year to stay tax-exempt. BUT, if that were the case so should non-profit organizations that help people/animals/etc. Just a quick little addition to this topic, hopefully I can add more to the discussion after wrestling. The law itself known as 501©. Which is tax-exemption for religious, chartiable, scientific and other organizations (including educational, cruelty to people/animals). Lyndon B Johnson though wasn't a big fan of the churches however which is why when churches were added to this tax code he made it so that churches were prohibited from talking about many political issues in the world. You might also remember that Media Matters ran into the debate over tax exemption because it was said that they weren't using it for educational purposes but instead of political purposes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
unknownsold13r Posted February 21, 2012 Report Share Posted February 21, 2012 If they're gonna be tax-exempt then they should be required to do a certain amount of "community service" per year to stay tax-exempt. BUT, if that were the case so should non-profit organizations that help people/animals/etc. Just a quick little addition to this topic, hopefully I can add more to the discussion after wrestling. The law itself known as 501©. Which is tax-exemption for religious, chartiable, scientific and other organizations (including educational, cruelty to people/animals). Lyndon B Johnson though wasn't a big fan of the churches however which is why when churches were added to this tax code he made it so that churches were prohibited from talking about many political issues in the world. You might also remember that Media Matters ran into the debate over tax exemption because it was said that they weren't using it for educational purposes but instead of political purposes. That's interesting, I didn't know the history about that law and that LBJ was involved in it. Learn something new each day. But yeah, churches aren't the only tax exempt organization covered in that legislation, yet the religious institutions have to jump through more hoops than others. Personally, I have no problem with them being tax exempt, I mean plenty of other stuff is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nevermore. Posted February 21, 2012 Report Share Posted February 21, 2012 No, they shouldn't be tax exempt. Next question. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Whiterhyno333 Posted February 21, 2012 Report Share Posted February 21, 2012 No, they shouldn't be tax exempt. Next question. Profound... Not to bash the question, but you can guess who is going to say what here. Its an opinion question that folks like Purple Rayne, Sacriligium, Edgehead and Grenade are going to oppose and members like me Yeti Monsoon, Unknown and Austtinfan will support. There are tons of orginizations that are tax empt and no one cares. Taxing religious orginizations simply because they are religious when the government gives orginizations like Planned Parenthood and. And charity. Orginizations like The Intrpid Warrior Foundation the same tax breaks isn't fair. Religious orgs are essentially another nonprofit orginization on the books; until America gets rid of the tax emption for a majorityof nonprofits it makes little sense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kreay fufu Posted February 21, 2012 Report Share Posted February 21, 2012 No, they shouldn't be tax exempt. Next question. But yeah, I think they should get a tax break. Religious organisations do a lot of charitable work with the homeless or in poorer countries, so that break is helping not just the church but those that the church helps too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nWo_Kevin Posted February 21, 2012 Report Share Posted February 21, 2012 No, they shouldn't be tax exempt. Next question. Profound... Not to bash the question, but you can guess who is going to say what here. Its an opinion question that folks like Purple Rayne, Sacriligium, Edgehead and Grenade are going to oppose and members like me Yeti Monsoon, Unknown and Austtinfan will support. I hope your wrong though because this shouldn't be a "I don't believe in religion so I'm against it no matter what the question". This topic is doomed if that's the case. Like said above there are plenty of organizations that are tax exempt and there is a lot of history and information to this question that I hope people think about and examine before choosing a side. But anyway one of the things I brought up before was LBJ adding churches to the tax code. What I should of also brought up to add to the debate/discussion was my own opinion that even if churches weren't on the tax code I still don't believe they should be taxed. It goes back to the separation of church and state and protecting the churches from the state. In 1970 the high court ruled in Walz Vs Tax Commission in NYC. They said that by having the church tax exempt it help creates a minimum relationship between church and state. In fact the Supreme Court said "the power to tax involves the power to destroy". In other words and in an argument that I've brought up in the past. Our government is always looking for more control over people and organizations and once you start taxing the churches you start getting uncomfortably close to the line of free exercises of religion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EDGEHEAD15 Posted February 21, 2012 Report Share Posted February 21, 2012 Actually whiterhyno, you're wrong in who you said would oppose tax exemption. I for one think it's a good idea to have churches tax exempt; provided that religion and churches do not influence government and political ideas. The whole point of secularism, which I support, is to not only take religion out of state but state out of religion too. As long as the churches aren't exploiting the tax exemption (since they can only get money from donations, which surprisingly is an extremely large amount), I think it's perfectly acceptable to exempt them from taxing status, also providing that they use their exemption in support of charities and humanist qualities, rather than spending it on golden statues etc (just as a metaphor, I know they don't actually spend it on golden statues). I think that it's a very difficult thing to place a border however, on where the tax exemption is situated and which religions should be classified as tax exempt. For example, is it right to exempt the 'mock religions' (FSM etc) and the religions that actually do believe what they preach? Would it be immoral to choose which religions SHOULD get tax exemption, and risk bringing state in to religion, with the possibility of screwing over one group of people for the benefit of another? For example, look at Scientology and their tax exemptions, which vary from country to country. Who's to say they don't actually believe what they preach and if it's any different from say, Roman Catholic? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Whiterhyno333 Posted February 21, 2012 Report Share Posted February 21, 2012 Actually whiterhyno, you're wrong in who you said would oppose tax exemption. I for one think it's a good idea to have churches tax exempt; provided that religion and churches do not influence government and political ideas. The whole point of secularism, which I support, is to not only take religion out of state but state out of religion too. As long as the churches aren't exploiting the tax exemption (since they can only get money from donations, which surprisingly is an extremely large amount), I think it's perfectly acceptable to exempt them from taxing status, also providing that they use their exemption in support of charities and humanist qualities, rather than spending it on golden statues etc (just as a metaphor, I know they don't actually spend it on golden statues). I think that it's a very difficult thing to place a border however, on where the tax exemption is situated and which religions should be classified as tax exempt. For example, is it right to exempt the 'mock religions' (FSM etc) and the religions that actually do believe what they preach? Would it be immoral to choose which religions SHOULD get tax exemption, and risk bringing state in to religion, with the possibility of screwing over one group of people for the benefit of another? For example, look at Scientology and their tax exemptions, which vary from country to country. Who's to say they don't actually believe what they preach and if it's any different from say, Roman Catholic? The danger of that line of thinking is that members that make up churches, mosques and synagouges are American citizens and have just as much right to influence the political procecess as members of the NRA, NAACP and any other orginization. Choosing to be religious shouldn't exclude an orginization from having a say in the system and "influencing it". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Purple Rayne Posted February 21, 2012 Report Share Posted February 21, 2012 Meh. Boring question. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Holliday Posted February 21, 2012 Report Share Posted February 21, 2012 I was a bit surprised at the timidity of this question as well. But I do believe for the most part, churches and religious places can be tax exempt. In some eastern religions, like Buddhism, that money is the source of food and shelter for their members. But I don't support the use of tax free money on paying molestation settlements and relocating accused priests. For the most part, I have no issue with it, but certain uses should either somehow be taxed or not allowed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EDGEHEAD15 Posted February 21, 2012 Report Share Posted February 21, 2012 In regards to the question, I wanted to ask something different to the usual subjects to start (e.g. GOD DON'T EXIST), but if you guys think it's boring etc, then feel free to ask your own questions. Rather than complain, actually try to start some discussions, even if it's just a single off-topic statement. Whiterhyno: I don't mind people being religious and being part of the government, even if their religion influences their opinion, but they cannot bring their belief in to the state. For example, you cannot use 'the bible says it is evil and it will corrupt the Christian traditional way of marriage' to oppose homosexual marriage. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nWo_Kevin Posted February 21, 2012 Report Share Posted February 21, 2012 Whiterhyno: I don't mind people being religious and being part of the government, even if their religion influences their opinion, but they cannot bring their belief in to the state. For example, you cannot use 'the bible says it is evil and it will corrupt the Christian traditional way of marriage' to oppose homosexual marriage. Well every person is going to have different beliefs based on their religion even if its the same religion. For example I don't believe gay marriage is right, I don't agree with it. But i'm also not threatened about it or really care if they get married (Though I wish they would use a different name than "Marriage".) Where I would have a problem with gay marriage is if the state someday tries to force churches to do it. For example of Church A wants to do gay marriage and Church B doesn't. Well then go get married in Church A and leave Church B alone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EDGEHEAD15 Posted February 21, 2012 Report Share Posted February 21, 2012 Whiterhyno: I don't mind people being religious and being part of the government, even if their religion influences their opinion, but they cannot bring their belief in to the state. For example, you cannot use 'the bible says it is evil and it will corrupt the Christian traditional way of marriage' to oppose homosexual marriage. Well every person is going to have different beliefs based on their religion even if its the same religion. For example I don't believe gay marriage is right, I don't agree with it. But i'm also not threatened about it or really care if they get married (Though I wish they would use a different name than "Marriage".) Where I would have a problem with gay marriage is if the state someday tries to force churches to do it. For example of Church A wants to do gay marriage and Church B doesn't. Well then go get married in Church A and leave Church B alone. But what is the true difference between the two examples? The first has the opinion of the church forcing the state to deny homosexual marriage and the second has the opinion of the state forcing the church to allow homosexual marriage. Also, can I ask what your issue is with homosexual marriage and why you don't agree with it? Marriage is not a Christian-only sanctity and marriages have been performed for many years before the Judeo-Christian marriage was even around. Here in the UK, we have 'civil partnerships', rather than marriages, and quite frankly, even though it finally lets gay couples to be 'together', it seems like a downgrade to a marriage. As if to say 'we'll give you all the benefits and rights of a married couple, but you can't call yourselves married because both of you have the same genitals. Instead you have to say you're in a "civil partnership", so everyone knows you're a gay guy/girl with a wedding ring. Sorry, civil union ring.' Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grenade. Posted February 21, 2012 Author Report Share Posted February 21, 2012 I noticed some people saying this question is boring, but I haven't got a single new suggestion yet so ¯\_(?)_/¯ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mustacio Posted February 21, 2012 Report Share Posted February 21, 2012 Why do you believe in God? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kreay fufu Posted February 21, 2012 Report Share Posted February 21, 2012 why not? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Holliday Posted February 22, 2012 Report Share Posted February 22, 2012 To compound that question, why do people believe that God has a personal relationship with you, or do you think that God even wants a relationship with the human race? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RVD 4:20 Posted February 22, 2012 Report Share Posted February 22, 2012 Can a sports team be considered a religion? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Whiterhyno333 Posted February 22, 2012 Report Share Posted February 22, 2012 To compound that question, why do people believe that God has a personal relationship with you, or do you think that God even wants a relationship with the human race? Why wouldn't he? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Holliday Posted February 22, 2012 Report Share Posted February 22, 2012 A number of reasons. He isn't around anymore. Or perhaps the God is too disappointed in us and doesn't wish to deal with us anymore. Or maybe the god doesn't manifest in a personal way, but as a force on the world. One that doesn't actually listen or care, but does what it does in the world. I can see how in Christianity it would make sense to assume he does. However, God hasn't really directly spoken or interacted with anyone since the Old Testament, and he sent Jesus down, who was on Earth for around 30 years or so. After that, we don't really get any more interactions with God at all. And any other claims to the contrary (Joseph Smith) aren't widely accepted. Even if God is the way he is in Christianity, I haven't seen any update on his status. I know the Revelation/Second Coming is a sign of him returning, but why the sudden drop in correspondance? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Whiterhyno333 Posted February 22, 2012 Report Share Posted February 22, 2012 A number of reasons. He isn't around anymore. Or perhaps the God is too disappointed in us and doesn't wish to deal with us anymore. Or maybe the god doesn't manifest in a personal way, but as a force on the world. One that doesn't actually listen or care, but does what it does in the world. I can see how in Christianity it would make sense to assume he does. However, God hasn't really directly spoken or interacted with anyone since the Old Testament, and he sent Jesus down, who was on Earth for around 30 years or so. After that, we don't really get any more interactions with God at all. And any other claims to the contrary (Joseph Smith) aren't widely accepted. Even if God is the way he is in Christianity, I haven't seen any update on his status. I know the Revelation/Second Coming is a sign of him returning, but why the sudden drop in correspondance? So because God isn't checking in often enough on a grand scale, he doesn't want a relationship with us? Let's be honest, if someone told you that God spoke to them would you honestly belive them. Say your Dad was diagnosed with cancer and was later found to be cancer free... would people that didn't belive in God really give him credit for healing or would it be catorgarized as a misdiagnosis,or even maybe a medical miracle/anomily? If you want to believe in God, you can find all sorts of proof (whether it really is or not). If you don't, the same logic applies.... No matter what proof is shown, it can be explained away using anything as a reason (except God) This is an opion based question that really has no proveable answer. Not that those are bad, but its just too easy to tear down the arguments on both sides. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Holliday Posted February 22, 2012 Report Share Posted February 22, 2012 I don't think any question in here is going to have a provable answer. These are more just thought provoking questions, not fact based things that you can prove. This is a religious debate thread, I don't believe any of these questions have to find a real answer. It's argument. I'm arguing that the Christian God might not care anymore due to his lack of communication and more so lack of any real showing of divine power for over 2000 years. Now would be a perfect time for God to reveal himself in some way. With the amount of communication and networking the entire world able to hear about things in minutes, he could easily perform a miracle and show us he is still there, yet he doesn't do this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.