Maybe start paying taxes, on that and all other land they’ve confiscated.
Churches aren’t tax free because they are churches, they are tax free bc they are charities, just like every other charity out there
Frustrating af that hardly any of you understand this.
You’re the one who’s wrong here. All other 501c3 nonprofits have to show their books and prove it. Churches get a rubber stamp.
Stop spreading this lie of yours
Removed by mod
Lol. I’m so scared, Internet tough guy.
Direct from the IRS website:
Churches (including integrated auxiliaries and conventions or associations of churches) that meet the requirements of section 501©(3) of the Internal Revenue Code are automatically considered tax exempt and are not required to apply for and obtain recognition of exempt status from the IRS. Donors are allowed to claim a charitable deduction for donations to a church that meets the section 501©(3) requirements even though the church has neither sought nor received IRS recognition that it is tax exempt. In addition, because churches and certain other religious organizations are not required to file an annual return or notice with the IRS, they are not subject to automatic revocation of exemption for failure to file.
Sounds like a rubber stamp to me. They are automatically assumed to be in compliance, and don’t have to ever prove it.
So, stop lying.
That’s just wrong. Churches are tax free because they are churches.
Don’t believe me? Go look up a church’s 990… oh, wait… you can’t. Because they don’t have to file them because they are “special” in the eyes of the law. Not just a run of the mill charity.
And yet many churches do choose to file their financial disclosure forms, for transparency sake
And I fully support removing that exemption, I don’t want to protect corrupt churches like you assume I do
Which disproves your original claim of “churches aren’t tax free because they are churches”
It doesn’t though. They still have to provide charitable services. You are being deliberately dense and obstinate and life is too short to waste on people like you
The IRS directly contradicts what you’re saying. You can stop pretending you know what you’re talking about now.
So, there isn’t one set of rules for charities and another for Churches? Really?
And how do we know they are providing charitable services, if there’s no way to verify it in their financial statements?
Frustrating you don’t understand how churches work and the “charity” they do is self-serving.
Oh son, you really have no clue who you are talking to.
-
Was an atheist and eventually an anti-theist for a decade and a half. Sam Harris was my favorite ‘horseman’. The moment I got out from under my conservative catholic family’s thumb
-
Realized I was an idiot and atheism is untenable, gave my heart to Christ and volunteered for more than a decade at a free drug rehab mission helping men recover from addiction and get back on their feet
So basically, there is no atheism argument you can bring that I haven’t already worn to death (but please feel free to try, I am quite eager on this point and have boundless energy to reply), and I have direct hands-on experience with how effective church charity can be when handled ethically
Sure I agree there are tons of churches that are rotten to the core, and I have no issue with any of them losing their tax exempt status at all. In fact, I kind of am even more angry at duplicitous false Christians than I am about you heathens and YES I make it a point to call them out even more often than I do your ilk. Yes I said ‘ilk’, deal with it.
I have seen brilliant and kind people dedicate their lives to a much humbler life of service than they could have taken in the private sector because they burned with the desire to help their fellow man, and I WILL NOT stand silent while people like you smear their good deeds with your implications that all church charity is self-serving
and I WILL NOT stand silent while people like you smear their good deeds with your implications that all church charity is self-serving
But you will do it without threatening language. Think it over and come back in a day if you’d like.
What an impressive big boy resume for an insulting baby-man.
Churches suck; they manipulate, drain, and abuse their communities then claim to be better than everyone and get away with it because enablers like you.
Eat a whole bag of dicks you pompous asshole.
-
Why? I mean, they are literally providing free food.
One is doing it.
The whole religion should be required to pay taxes on the money they profit off of their members.
Maybe if these religious outfits all did this stuff, the stuff they preach, maybe they’d have an argument against paying taxes, but they don’t, so they should be required to give back by taxes, but we all know that will never happen, big scary man in the sky doesn’t like it.
This is actually really cool. Cooler if maybe they can pay taxes next!
Churches aren’t tax free because they are churches, they are tax free bc they are charities, just like every other charity out there
False. They are exempt from having to even prove the money is being used for charity… because they are churches. Unlike every other nonprofit.
Ok, I am all for removing that exception, many churches already file their financial disclosure for transparency purposes, and I don’t like the idea of this loophole being used for greed.
I have no issue removing the tax status of churches that violate the political clause, and also fully support ending the financial disclosure exemption for churches.
So good to be in agreement!
edit: fucking lemmy, I concede every point and still get downvoted. This is why you will fail
Secular charities aren’t telling people that they are doomed to hell unless they follow their rules and worship their god. Hence the need to pay. Change their tax status.
Philosophical position about the rules of a hypothetical afterlife doesn’t have any impact on whether a charity is a charity either
Can you not see your hypocrisy for wanting to cripple a public service because you don’t like its ideology?
The charity provided is oftentimes contingent on worship, therefore not it’s truly public. Even if that’s not always the case, if it’s done once to one person, then it’s not public. Have whatever ideology you like. That’s not my issue. It’s a free country. Where’s the hypocrisy in wanting religious organizations that generally creep into business and politics to pay taxes? That’s nonsense.
Furthermore, how the hell does paying taxes cripple you? People of low economic means pay more taxes than churches.
People like you are eager to throw the baby out with the bathwater and that shows how little nuance you allow and just how broad that brush you use to paint over everything is
You say ‘is often times’, and then declare it all to be truly not public, you say ‘if everyone can’t be helped it’s not public’, why are you so fuckdamn eager to discount every good deed based on your gut feeling of the incidence of self-serving intent? It’s basically pathologic to think that way about such a large, ununified patchwork of fuzzy boundaried sects as somehow all being corrupt and self-serving.
The simple fact is churches across the nation do more charity work than you can even imagine but you won’t ever bother learning that nuance b/c the ‘god hates fags’ sign wavers have convinced you that that’s what ALL Christians are like
And that’s pretty bigoted of you
You don’t know anything about me buddy. You should chill.
I don’t have any problem with charitable works by you, your church or anyone else. All I said is churches should pay taxes. And they should. You’re complicating it way more than my intent, to the point that I’m now supposed to be bigoted and pathological. Lmao. Get a grip.
Churches also do a hell of a lot of damage too. Heck no one is perfect. I never insinuated getting rid of organized religion. But since you’re suggesting throwing out the baby with the bathwater, then I wholeheartedly agree.
On the contrary, I’ve seen the shape of your arguments hundreds of times and spoken many of them myself in my ignorant and heady days of youth
You saying ‘all I said is churches should pay taxes’ is you saying that you want to bar some of the most established charities in the U.S. from benefiting from the same programs that any other charity can participate in based on your dislike of their ideology and that IS bigoted af, the literal definition of it.
I bet you don’t bitch about the Satanic Churchs’ various tax exempt churches, because their ideals of heathen sacrilege appeal to you, and you are so far up your own ass you don’t see how that makes you a hypocrite.
Sure churches do a hell of a lot of damage, I’m not denying that and I personally dance for joy for every corrupt and disgusting church leader jailed and wish that everyone would STOP protecting them. This isn’t exclusive to churches. THIS HAPPENS in EVERY place that power shields people from criticism. There are more per capita child molesters in Hollywood than in the Vatican and you KNOW this to be true
I don’t want ANY abuser protected, but you are deluded if you think this is exclusively or even mostly a church thing. It is an abuser thing, and abusers actively seek out power and because capitalism it has become normalized to ignore their foul deeds
If you want to remove the financial disclosure exemption for churches, and tax those who refuse to comply? SURE I’m ALL for that. I fully support that
But insisting that all churches are corrupt money laundering operations because of the rancid actions of the few is disingenuous and fueled by antitheist bigotry
Churches are not a public service.
Incorrect, churches were historically the first service hubs in most communities, and many continue to do so
Food outreach, emergency economic relief, free childcare services, and more
Look I get you enjoy being an edgy little atheist but that doesn’t give you the right to ignore the massive amount of good churches do every day in communities across the world.
Food outreach, emergency economic relief, free childcare services, and more
… Exclusively to their church members. C’mon, that’s low hanging fruit.
Not true and I actively worked at a church that provided food outreach to anyone that came to their doors, and considered anyone suggested by a church member for financial relief (there has to be some limits, the funds are not infinite)
Sure not every church does, but I’ll tell you this that any church that only provides services for their members is ignoring some of Jesus’s most important teachings and I will never support such an organization
You cannot discount all the good because of the bad, it creates a false image of their contribution to the cohesiveness of this country and I am telling you RIGHT NOW that if you want ANY hope of the U.S. coming out of this even SLIGHTLY then you will need to sit beside progressive theists because we ALL have a common enemy and your marginalization is going to hamper that (I don’t just mean you, I mean ALL heathens)
Would you want a food bank to pay taxes?
I would like a for-profit organisation that is occasionally gives food on their conditions to pay taxes.
Yes! They can deduct anything they donate from their taxes!
So you want fewer groups doing charitable work? Who do you think is picking up that slack since progressive candidates have not traditionally suggested creating new ones that aren’t religious?
If they are doing as much charity work as they claim they are, then there’s no issue, since it will all be deductible.
No harm, no foul. Only hurts the liars and the cheats. Win, win.
Except now you have the government deciding what constitutes charity for those religions which is a huge violation of the first amendment rights of those churches.
This isn’t remotely how this works. It’s not based on the acts being done, it’s based on whether the organization is being run to make money, or of it’s spending all it’s revenue in pursuit of a purpose.
And churches aren’t for profit
Sorry to be the one to break it to you, but they already do that.
No violation of the first amendment at all.
In what way does the government determine what are appropriate acts of charity for religions? Please be specific.
You’re not wrong, and neither are they. Non-profit charities should be able to pay taxes if income exceeds a reasonable amount and have deduction on FMV of benefits provided. Small charitable organizations should be exempt. Everyone should be required to keep records subject to unannounced auditing. Churches like Joel Osteen and creflo dollar should be under criminal investigation or simply go away.
This is a post about churches.
I know. They are also functioning as a food bank. They are a non-profit acting in a charitable manner.
Do ypu think they should engage in less charity so they can pay taxes?
Then they can file like every other nonprotand prove it through their finances, instead of the idiotic rubber stamp they get - including those megachurch abominations that drive lambos onto the stage of their sermons and own multiple private jets.
Which are by no means common at all
Then fixing the idiotic rules won’t make much of a difference…stop defending the abusers
Yes, they should not pay takes for money they can justify they used for charity.
Building mega-churches, having expensive cars and jets is not charity.
Building mega-churches, having expensive cars and jets is not charity.
That’s also extremely uncommon in almost all churches/denominations. The overwhelming majority of churches in the USA are mainstream denominations.
What exactly do you mean by mainstream? Evangelicals are the largest branch of Christianity in America. Hell white evangelicals alone are 13 percent of all Americans which is tied for the largest group of all.
https://www.prri.org/research/2020-census-of-american-religion/
Evangelical churches are not a single denomination but rather are a collection of unaffiliated churches.
The reality is the mega church that owns private jets is extremely uncommon.
I dunno about other churches but I’m pretty sure the one I grew up in gave away donated food. Paying taxes wouldn’t impact that at all.
They do other charitable work that isn’t handing out donated food. There is of course expenses associated with storing and giving out that food as well.
You’ll be furious to know that the workers are almost entirely volunteers as well. The cost to the church directly is negligible. And I’m still sure whatever other charitable work they do would not be significantly impacted by paying taxes. If anything, the money generated could do infinitely more good in expanding welfare programs. Charity is a band aid, not a solution.
My mom ran one for over a decade. You might be surprised to find out your assertions are not correct in my experience as the people running food banks are in fact paid.
The US social net was built around religious charity and it is sophomoric to presume the state would utilize increased tax revenue to replace what was lost.
These taxes can be used to support food banks. So the church would receive subsidies.
Tax and transfers. Income inequality is 0,26 in my country and 0,41 in yours. Even china is down to 0,35.
Charity doesn’t seem to work. Taxes do work.
I don’t need to feel good about doing something nice for someone else. I just pay taxes and the person doing something nice gets paid to do it.
They can be used for that purpose but they aren’t. This church is doing this right now.
Charity isn’t meant to tackle income inequality. It’s assistance for anyone who needs it when they need it (in theory).
Probably my culture, but I have no faith in charities. You know why? Because I haven’t given a single euro to charity in my entire fucking life.
"The effectiveness of charities in the USA and tax and transfer systems in the EU in combating poverty can be evaluated through different lenses:
-
Charities in the USA:
- Charities in the USA often focus on direct interventions and community-based solutions. Organizations like GiveWell evaluate charities based on their cost-effectiveness and impact, ensuring that donations achieve the greatest good per dollar .
- American charities often operate with transparency and target specific issues such as health, education, and direct cash transfers to those in need .
-
Tax and Transfer Systems in the EU:
- The EU’s tax and transfer systems are designed to reduce poverty through redistributive policies. These systems aim to correct market incomes through taxes and social transfers, which can significantly reduce poverty rates .
- The EU’s approach often involves comprehensive social welfare programs that provide a safety net for citizens, although the effectiveness can vary across member states .
-
Comparison of Effectiveness:
- Studies suggest that while the USA has a strong culture of charitable giving, the EU’s tax and transfer systems may be more effective in providing a broad safety net that reduces overall poverty levels .
- The EU’s systems are more integrated into the fabric of society, offering universal benefits that can reach a wider population, whereas US charities often target specific groups or issues .
Both approaches have their strengths and weaknesses, and their effectiveness can depend on various factors, including economic conditions, political climate, and social norms."
-
If they operated full time as a food bank and didn’t proselytize to the people they are helping, then they shouldn’t pay taxes. If they preach and try to convert people to their religion during their service, then I’m going to bet they try to do that to the people they feed. Preying upon people in their weakest moments is not a good thing to do, but it’s all I’ve ever seen Christians do
Edit: “Marianists emphasized the power of small communities to “renew Christianity” following the French Revolution.” If this is their emphasis, then they should definitely be paying taxes.
ok so the issue is your disdain for religion. You would be fine with a different food bank not paying taxes but only because they share your lack of faith.
Yes. I’m not sure why you seem confused. The premise is churches should pay taxes. I’m not sure what you don’t understand about that. They should pay taxes. They are influencing people’s opinions on our politics and policies. They should pay taxes. They are influencing people in their weakest moments. They should pay taxes. Do you understand that I believe any religious institution should pay taxes? I hope you aren’t confused still.
Anarchist groups do the sane thing so Food Not Bombs should pay taxes then and do less charity.
All your leftist charities do everything you state churches are doing. Should your local mutual aide org get taxed because they influence people’s views?
The real issue here is your bigotry against churches.
We wouldn’t need that much charity if they paid their fucking taxes
That’s simply not true. There isn’t enough money being made by religious organizations for that to be the case, and the tax exempt status of religious organizations is not connected to how poorly the working classes are faring.
Sure, not enough money at all /s
Do you think the existence of a singular megachurch is why the working class cannot make ends meet? How would that even work?
I’m pretty sure that Jesus guy that christianity is so famous for was doing it all for free.
Jesus had wealthy women giving him money.
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Luke+8&version=GW
I’m not sure what point you’re trying to make. Churches should pay taxes that’s all. Don’t complicate it. Why would paying taxes force them to engage in less charity? Are you saying they’re incapable of doing both?
The whole basis of the no taxing thing was because of the charity. I’m fine with small churches who do a lot of good for their community being exempt, the problem are the mega churches who make mountains of money and do nothing good with it.
That’s the assumption. Many don’t. They should have to prove they’re doing that charity work like every other nonprofit.
I’m not. They can register as a tax-exempt charity and do the paperwork like all the other tax-exempt charities.
Sure, I agree with that.
Well if a church is doing so much charity that it offsets their profits then it won’t be a problem.
If they are paying taxes they have less money to engage in charitable works. Is this not immediately apparent?
There are plenty of tax-exempt charities. And they file paperwork and meet several conditions. Churches don’t.
If churches want to be tax-exempt, they should meet the same criteria as the other charities.
Yes, that “condition” is the 1st amendment establishment clause. It’s inappropriate for the government to dictate religious matters.
It’s odd how many people here want to ditch 1A while bitching about right wing authoritarians.
Paying taxes immediately benefits everyone in the community. Helps pay for schools, roads, police and fire, etc. Do you not know how taxes work? There’s also the added benefit of not being proselytized at.
Perhaps larger, proselytizing , politically active in the pulpit churches should pay taxes. Perhaps small churches who ‘proselytize’ by merely setting an example by serving should be exempt.
deleted by creator
Nonprofits are not paying taxes.
But they do have to prove they are nonprofit, unlike churches. At least understand the thing you have an issue with
This is doing church right.
There’s so much good that some churches do. The Methodist near me has a permanent trans flag and a sign saying all are welcome. Do all sorts of good deeds. If you’re looking for community and a place to put your charity, either your money or your labor, you could do much worse. It’s an established functional thing, actually dedicated to good deeds and love.
Such churches do exist, and if your a product of western society, as I suspect anyone reading this is, it’s the closest thing to heritage and a sort of tribal inclusion you’re likely to get. A thing I think all humans crave on some level.
Then the Catholics, mega churches etc out there giving it all a bad name. Just hateful with a side of systematic sexual abuse. My point being maybe just don’t turn your nose up at the mere thought of it. There’s so much goodness about if you only reach out and grab it.
Sadly churches are filled with people and people are fallible. The larger the church the more likely problems occur visibly.
I had a priest as a kid who was always saying that god doesn’t hate & neither should you. I remember during one sermon he was talking about Harry Potter(during height of anti Harry Potter bullshit) & how love was a major theme in the book we should all pay attention too.
He was cool.
how love was a major theme in the book
Well, unless you’re gay. Or trans. Or not white.
yeah, jk became the voldemort of her own story. either way, ol’ boy holyman was legit af.
Man I was so disappointed with all that. At first I thought maybe people were overreacting and taking what was said out of context. It’s obviously a deeply personal thing (gender and sexuality) for a lot of people, and as such is sometimes difficult to speak of. I figured the woman who wrote such a lovely whimsical novel wouldn’t really be hateful. But holy shit did she double down! Just disappointing.
Some people make wonderful art and are hateful bitches.
Like hitler.
That priest would be considered “woke” in 2025.
If religious leaders aren’t woke, they’re false prophets in my estimation. Maybe not on purpose, but all the same. Redemption is available for them, should they set aside false pride and judging. We can make judgement calls on who or what we want in our personal space, but church and salvation ain’t that.
I’m not Catholic but I know some good and bad ones. Same with every other denomination. Unfortunately it’s the loud hateful ones that keep getting noticed. The quiet ones who do as Jesus commanded and let God do the judging are there, they’re just unobtrusive, and don’t get media attention.
It has a bad name because it’s rooted in magical thinking and overall ill intent regardless of what a few do.
That’s so awesome!:-)
