How much religious freedom is needed?

[Atheris]

Some of the temples that I've seen were run by small immigrant communities who made ends meet by selling food.

This seems like it would harm them a ton.

Why should religion get an exception that no other cub gets?

I'm pretty sure most baby bears are tax exempt...

[Neutraligon]

Why should religion get an exception that no other cub gets?

Plenty of clubs can be tax exempt.

And so would plenty of "churches" in the scheme

Why should religion get an exception that no other cub gets?

Because otherwise this gives the government far more power to regulate the free expression of religion using means that aren't directly discriminatory and thus can be done without due consideration for the rights of the congregation.

Oh, how so? By removing the tax exempt status you remove the ability of the government to determine what counts as a church and what does not, thus reducing the power to regulate the free expression of religion.

[Neutraligon]

Why should religion get an exception that no other cub gets?

I'm pretty sure most baby bears are tax exempt...

Stupid keyboard.

[Suriyanakhon]

Some of the temples that I've seen were run by small immigrant communities who made ends meet by selling food.

This seems like it would harm them a ton.

Why should religion get an exception that no other cub gets?

Why is Separation of Church and State part of the US Constitution and not Separation of Club and State?

[Insaanistan]

This could greatly harm smaller faiths and make owning things like temples or churches impossible.

Some of the temples that I've seen were run by small immigrant communities who made ends meet by selling food.

This seems like it would harm them a ton.

Same thing with a lot of mosques.

[Neutraligon]

Why should religion get an exception that no other cub gets?

Why is Separation of Church and State part of the US Constitution and not Separation of Club and State?

Because for some reason the founders placed special importance on religion. More then that by removing tax exempt status you actually remove the interference of church and state since the state no longer gets/has to decide what is a religion and what is not.

[The Marlborough]

If you want to tax churches you better be willing to accept more presence of the churches in state. What is that oft quoted creed of America? "No taxation without representation" that is right.

[Punished UMN]

Why should religion get an exception that no other cub gets?

Because otherwise this gives the government far more power to regulate the free expression of religion using means that aren't directly discriminatory and thus can be done without due consideration for the rights of the congregation.

Oh, how so? By removing the tax exempt status you remove the ability of the government to determine what counts as a church and what does not, thus reducing the power to regulate the free expression of religion.[/quote]
Because you can impose taxes that weren't originally intended to apply to small congregations with little income, to religious organizations more generally, to monasteries, etc. to such entities, and in such a way, totally prevent them from operating without actually making any kind of decree regarding the government's power over them.

[Wink Wonk We Like Stonks]

If you want to tax churches you better be willing to accept more presence of the churches in state. What is that oft quoted creed of America? "No taxation without representation" that is right.

pretty sure the people going to those churches are still represented in government

[Washington Resistance Army]

If you want to tax churches you better be willing to accept more presence of the churches in state. What is that oft quoted creed of America? "No taxation without representation" that is right.

So what you're saying is we can have state representation for Divus George Washington, I'm game

[Albrenia]

If you want to tax churches you better be willing to accept more presence of the churches in state. What is that oft quoted creed of America? "No taxation without representation" that is right.

That's actually a fair point, not for more power to religions, but a reason to make them tax exempt without being charities. It would help if some religious leaders didn't use their tax-free pulpit to spout support to a political leader, but the world's not perfect I guess.

[Suriyanakhon]

If you want to tax churches you better be willing to accept more presence of the churches in state. What is that oft quoted creed of America? "No taxation without representation" that is right.

So what you're saying is we can have state representation for Divus George Washington, I'm game

Different American polytheist religions: all having a cult to George Washington

[Kowani]

If you want to tax churches you better be willing to accept more presence of the churches in state. What is that oft quoted creed of America? "No taxation without representation" that is right.

So what you're saying is we can have state representation for Divus George Washington, I'm game

BioShock was a warning, not a guide!

[Neutraligon]

If you want to tax churches you better be willing to accept more presence of the churches in state. What is that oft quoted creed of America? "No taxation without representation" that is right.

Many churches are already involved in the state. How many church leaders have we heard shilling for Trump and Republicans from the pulpit. They already are not fulfilling their end of the bargain.

[Nekostan-e Gharbi]

"Man, why do a lot of religious people distrust contemporary secular movements and hold this weird notion that today's secularism is just disguised anti-clericalism and state atheism?!"

The same reason, I suspect that a lot of irreligious people distrust movements around “religious freedom” (specifically in the west, anyway) to actually just be fronts for religious supremacy over the state and bigotry

I simply ignore people whose name has “China” in it and spreads Sinostatist views. It is not really about secularism or religious freedom. That person represents the orthodox view of PRC, not what The Marlborough means by “secularism”. Just ignore them.

[Sanghyeok]

The same reason, I suspect that a lot of irreligious people distrust movements around “religious freedom” (specifically in the west, anyway) to actually just be fronts for religious supremacy over the state and bigotry

I simply ignore people whose name has “China” in it and spreads Sinostatist views. It is not really about secularism or religious freedom. That person represents the orthodox view of PRC. Just ignore them.

I almost thought I had entered the wrong thread for a moment.

[Northern Socialist Council Republics]

How much religious freedom is necessary? None.

Everything valuable about this “religious freedom” is already adequately covered by the freedom of thought and conscience, and everything about “religious freedom” that isn’t already covered by that isn’t worth preserving.

We can start by demanding equality before the law for religious and nonreligious people.

[Salus Maior]

That's actually a fair point, not for more power to religions, but a reason to make them tax exempt without being charities. It would help if some religious leaders didn't use their tax-free pulpit to spout support to a political leader, but the world's not perfect I guess.

I'd actually agree that churches should not support electoral candidates.

It's bad for the state, and it's bad for the congregations themselves. In this past couple elections I hear that tons of congregations were divided by how political churches have become, and I know plenty of people who have been hurt by that.

[The Black Forrest]

If you want to tax churches you better be willing to accept more presence of the churches in state. What is that oft quoted creed of America? "No taxation without representation" that is right.

Many churches are already involved in the state. How many church leaders have we heard shilling for Trump and Republicans from the pulpit. They already are not fulfilling their end of the bargain.

Indeed. They should loose their tax exempt status.

[Nekostan-e Gharbi]

I simply ignore people whose name has “China” in it and spreads Sinostatist views. It is not really about secularism or religious freedom. That person represents the orthodox view of PRC. Just ignore them.

I almost thought I had entered the wrong thread for a moment.

I had to since these nonsense are easily mistaken as Western leftist or rightist views and leads to flaming. I just points out the China (and hence that extreme view is irrelevant) and return to the topic.

Religious freedom is of course good.

[Salus Maior]

Many churches are already involved in the state. How many church leaders have we heard shilling for Trump and Republicans from the pulpit. They already are not fulfilling their end of the bargain.

Indeed. They should loose their tax exempt status.

Well, that's not exactly fair to punish the entirety of them.

My church, which is a tiny village church, never touches politics explicitly.

[Cordel One]

The same reason, I suspect that a lot of irreligious people distrust movements around “religious freedom” (specifically in the west, anyway) to actually just be fronts for religious supremacy over the state and bigotry

I simply ignore people whose name has “China” in it and spreads Sinostatist views. It is not really about secularism or religious freedom. That person represents the orthodox view of PRC, not what The Marlborough means by “secularism”. Just ignore them.

Can you please stop bringing China into every single thread?

[Nekostan-e Gharbi]

Indeed. They should loose their tax exempt status.

Well, that's not exactly fair to punish the entirety of them.

My church, which is a tiny village church, never touches politics explicitly.

If we agree that religious groups are NGOs (since that’s what they are) they could be tax exempt, right?

[Nekostan-e Gharbi]

I simply ignore people whose name has “China” in it and spreads Sinostatist views. It is not really about secularism or religious freedom. That person represents the orthodox view of PRC, not what The Marlborough means by “secularism”. Just ignore them.

Can you please stop bringing China into every single thread?

I’m not. It’s that poster with the name including China who did it by spreading views that are deeply inflammatory and makes legit Western secularists look bad.

Now let’s return to the topic.

[Atheris]

Can you please stop bringing China into every single thread?

I’m not. It’s that poster with the name including China who did it by spreading views that are deeply inflammatory and makes legit Western secularists look bad.

No, you are.