2 Next
Topic: Scientology Fraud?
no photo
Fri 09/12/08 03:18 PM
Edited by Jeanniebean on Fri 09/12/08 03:19 PM
I think the exact opposite. Taxing religion would simply mean that the money would go to “government” instead of “religion”. In terms of “actual valuable contribution to society”, I think “government” is MUCH more of a drain on the resources of a country than “religion”. But that’s just my opinion.


The government should be a tool of the people to serve the people. So should churches. I hate taxes in any case. IF you are going to tax small businesses, then you should also tax churches. If you are not going to tax churches, then you should not tax businesses either.

Income tax on wages is a fraud. There is no law enacted by congress that says we have to pay income tax. It is a fraud.

Everyone should become ordained and start their own church or their own tax exempt non-profit corporation. Or else just refuse to pay. How long would the government last if everyone just quit paying taxes?

JB

no photo
Fri 09/12/08 04:12 PM

religions are fraudulent.

I second that

no photo
Fri 09/12/08 04:20 PM


religions are fraudulent.

I second that


I think they are just approaching a time when they will be obsolete.

JB

MirrorMirror's photo
Fri 09/12/08 04:35 PM


religions are fraudulent.

I second that
:smile: I dont second that:smile:

MirrorMirror's photo
Fri 09/12/08 04:36 PM
Edited by MirrorMirror on Fri 09/12/08 04:36 PM



religions are fraudulent.

I second that


I think they are just approaching a time when they will be obsolete.

JB
laughDont hold your breathflowerforyou

SkyHook5652's photo
Fri 09/12/08 05:50 PM


I think the exact opposite. Taxing religion would simply mean that the money would go to “government” instead of “religion”. In terms of “actual valuable contribution to society”, I think “government” is MUCH more of a drain on the resources of a country than “religion”. But that’s just my opinion.


The government should be a tool of the people to serve the people. So should churches. I hate taxes in any case. IF you are going to tax small businesses, then you should also tax churches. If you are not going to tax churches, then you should not tax businesses either.

Income tax on wages is a fraud. There is no law enacted by congress that says we have to pay income tax. It is a fraud.

Everyone should become ordained and start their own church or their own tax exempt non-profit corporation. Or else just refuse to pay. How long would the government last if everyone just quit paying taxes?

JB

I too believe that “The government should be a tool of the people to serve the people.” But I also believe that the two main reasons for the tax-exempt status of churches is still valid.
1) To take some of the burden of “social welfare” off the inefficient government and put it into the hands of the more efficient “private” sector. For example, in the case of food preparation for the needy, the monetary donations are virtually 100% free of “administrative costs”. And the labor that is used is almost 100% volunteer. Whereas for the government to accomplish the same thing, every person involved has to be paid – from the servers to the administrators to the tax collectors.
2) To keep the government from being able to control the churches. This to me is the more important aspect. It means that there is at least one area of life that cannot be controlled by the government. I think that from this viewpoint, taxing churches would be the biggest single blow to personal freedom this country has ever seen.

And I also believe “The churches should be a tool of the people to serve the people.” But I believe that there is a fundamental difference between the churches and the government, in that respect, because churches provide something the government cannot. The ability to choose where their money goes. Taxes are forced upon us. Church donations are not. Even if one thinks the donations of parishioners are improperly used, there is no reason to think that they would be MORE properly use by the government. But really the issue to me is that parishioners have control of who they donate too and how much. Which is not the case with taxes. So taxing churches is simply saying, “no matter what you want your money to go toward, we’re going to take some of it”.

I can’t argue the legality of the 16th amendment, but I do believe that income tax is the single biggest impediment to production in this country.

And of course there’s the 1st amendment, which I hope is never overturned.

Moondark's photo
Fri 09/12/08 05:52 PM
As I always say, do not trust a religion invented by a science fiction writer 4 years after he said, "You will never get rich earning pennies a word. If you really want to make money, start your own religion."

SkyHook5652's photo
Fri 09/12/08 06:09 PM

As I always say, do not trust a religion invented by a science fiction writer 4 years after he said, "You will never get rich earning pennies a word. If you really want to make money, start your own religion."

Personally, I would not trust a third-hand account published 20 years after the alleged fact.

Moondark's photo
Fri 09/12/08 06:16 PM


As I always say, do not trust a religion invented by a science fiction writer 4 years after he said, "You will never get rich earning pennies a word. If you really want to make money, start your own religion."

Personally, I would not trust a third-hand account published 20 years after the alleged fact.


Not published third hand in just one account. Based on the sheer numbers of people to whom he supposedly said it, based on the fact those people say he said it TO them, not to someone they knew, I'm going to have to go with the idea that it is highly likely that he did in fact say it.

SkyHook5652's photo
Fri 09/12/08 06:19 PM



As I always say, do not trust a religion invented by a science fiction writer 4 years after he said, "You will never get rich earning pennies a word. If you really want to make money, start your own religion."

Personally, I would not trust a third-hand account published 20 years after the alleged fact.


Not published third hand in just one account. Based on the sheer numbers of people to whom he supposedly said it, based on the fact those people say he said it TO them, not to someone they knew, I'm going to have to go with the idea that it is highly likely that he did in fact say it.

Ok. I only saw the one published account, which was third-hand and 20 years later.

2 Next