Taxes on Churches?

[Swkoll]

Charging for driveways! That's outrageous!

[Tekcirb]

How about ya' burn em down instead

[The Rich Port]

How about ya' burn em down instead

Because free speech...

Unless, of course, you're opposed to free speech.

[Dyakovo]

Unconstitutional.

How, exactly is it unconstitutional? Where does it say in the constitution that churches must be exempted from all taxes? Be specific.

[Voltronica]

The whole entire law is unconstitutional because the city does not have the power to regulate interstate commerce. Each delivery truck to said locations is a federal power that is not reserved for the local. Unless the tax-exempt laws protect public places from this type of property tax then they are not exempt from it.

However, it is not all unconstitutional. The property taxes on the residents is legal. The taxes on businesses without a public service owned parking lot is not. If the driveway/road was built by the private enterprise and maintained by the private enterprise then the city has no right to tax for something they do not maintain.

Another thing...placing a toll on a road makes it now a toll road...I see State power arguments against this legislation as well...allthough the state has the authority to place this as a statewide legislature concerning they hold authority over property taxes.

The residents are screwed, the churches have a chance, and the businesses that trade nationally are off scott-free.

[Occupied Deutschland]

they may not be charities, but they do almost the same things as a charity (providing a community service) so should not be taxed.

Bible says other wise.

It calls you to pay whatever the state commands you to pay, because money means nothing when you have God.

"Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection. But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence. For Adam was first formed, then Eve. And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression.
--1 Tim. 2:11-14
I'd like to think people have progressed enough to realize that "rendering unto Caesar" blindly is just as unethical as not suffering a women to teach.
The Bible was a period-piece, as such you cannot treat its messages the same way you would treat Enlightenment messages.

[Minotzia]

they may not be charities, but they do almost the same things as a charity (providing a community service) so should not be taxed.

Bible says other wise.

It calls you to pay whatever the state commands you to pay, because money means nothing when you have God.

Tax code says they are the equivalent to NPOs...

[Cool Egg Sandwich]

They were saying that so as to not antagonize the Berber (Muslim) pirates of the Barbary coast.

So an official document by the government talking about said government only has meaning if it agrees with your predetermined view point, good to know for future reference.

-snip- We are guaranteed a free press, yet we pay sales taxes on books and newspapers (in some states, at least). -snip-

Wrong definition of free. There's a fancy word for that fallacy, but I can't remember it off the top of my head.

I believe its a fallacy of equivocation, but I could be wrong on that one. Anyone care to check ?

[Trollgaard]

What the...Mission is just as short drive away and I haven't heard anything about this...taxing driveways seems very...wrong; be it church driveways or personal driveways...

[Revolutopia]

I'd like to think people have progressed enough to realize that "rendering unto Caesar" blindly is just as unethical as not suffering a women to teach.
The Bible was a period-piece, as such you cannot treat its messages the same way you would treat Enlightenment messages.

I really don't think asking churches or people to pay taxes is equal to saying that women should be denied education. However, as aside I as a liberal who does not normally mind taxes find this whole idea of a drive way tax stupid. How is the government going to measure a use of the drive ways are they going to install tickers to measures use or something. Additionally, this will just mean more people parking in the streets.

[Wamitoria]

I don't think that it's unconstitutional.

[Itinerate Tree Dweller]

I don't think that it's unconstitutional.

According to the Supreme Court of the United States, it is unconstitutional.

[Wamitoria]

I don't think that it's unconstitutional.

According to the Supreme Court of the United States, it is unconstitutional.

Never mind then.

[Dyakovo]

I don't think that it's unconstitutional.

According to the Supreme Court of the United States, it is unconstitutional.

Cite the case where the supreme court states that taxing churches is unconstitutional.

[Itinerate Tree Dweller]

According to the Supreme Court of the United States, it is unconstitutional.

Cite the case where the supreme court states that taxing churches is unconstitutional.

Walz v. Tax Commission

Held that "...exemptions were granted to all houses of religious worship within a broad class of property owned by nonprofit, quasi-public corporations..." and that "...the exemptions for religious organizations created only a minimal and remote involvement between church and state, and far less of an involvement than would be created by taxation of churches..."

[Greed and Death]

Cite the case where the supreme court states that taxing churches is unconstitutional.

Walz v. Tax Commission

Held that "...exemptions were granted to all houses of religious worship within a broad class of property owned by nonprofit, quasi-public corporations..." and that "...the exemptions for religious organizations created only a minimal and remote involvement between church and state, and far less of an involvement than would be created by taxation of churches..."

That is not what Walz held, it was held by the court that exemption from taxation did not violate the establishment clause. Walz had brought the suit to force Churches to pay taxes.

[Sociobiology]

I just think churches should have to go through the same hurdles as any other non-profit organization. including publishing their profit and accounting numbers.
no free rides for religions

[Wamitoria]

I just think churches should have to go through the same hurdles as any other non-profit organization. including publishing their profit and accounting numbers.
no free rides for religions

^This

Some churches are truly non-profit organizations, and some aren't. This would allow us to distinguish between the two.

[Jesus Strippers]

I just think churches should have to go through the same hurdles as any other non-profit organization. including publishing their profit and accounting numbers.
no free rides for religions

^This

Some churches are truly non-profit organizations, and some aren't. This would allow us to distinguish between the two.

What defines whether a church is a non-profit organization or not?

[Wamitoria]

^This

Some churches are truly non-profit organizations, and some aren't. This would allow us to distinguish between the two.

What defines whether a church is a non-profit organization or not?

Whether or not they truly contribute most of their leftover income (after paying pastors/priests, and paying for repairs, etc.) to charity.

EDIT: And if their pastors can afford crocodile-skin shoes and gold chains.

[Tergnitz]

Unconstitutional.

^That

[Caninope]

That would create more entanglement between the church and state than not doing so, to paraphrase the Supreme Court.

To paraphrase myself, bull-oney.

And what makes you think that you're right and the Supreme Court is wrong?

[Caninope]

Tax the lilly-livered religious institutes.

All of this "Christian" this and "Christian" that is making me ill.

Religion=/=Christianity. Similarly, all religions receive tax breaks from the government(s) in America.

[Caninope]

Walz v. Tax Commission

Held that "...exemptions were granted to all houses of religious worship within a broad class of property owned by nonprofit, quasi-public corporations..." and that "...the exemptions for religious organizations created only a minimal and remote involvement between church and state, and far less of an involvement than would be created by taxation of churches..."

That is not what Walz held, it was held by the court that exemption from taxation did not violate the establishment clause. Walz had brought the suit to force Churches to pay taxes.

Added comment: It went on to say that taxing churches would create more entanglement. However, as G_n_D said, it didn't ban the practice.

[Los Cabreddes]

I'm not sure about it being unconstitutional (remember, this is a law applied GENERALLY not just against churches) but it certainly is unrighteous. Giving nonprofits like Churches and Charities a way out from normal commerce helps them to keep their integrity. When you start taxing, they start having to consider their decisions from an economic standpoint, and nonprofits are meant specifically to be a oasis of hope, truth, and humanity in a desert of commercial despair and human exploitation. They're meant to be an escape, the place where money doesn't matter. I don't believe its currently unconstitutional, but maybe we should go ahead and make it unconstitutional!

I'm reposting this.