Comments on: the Pulpit Initiative—or, should churches maintain their tax exempt status? http://www.mindonfire.com/2008/09/29/the-pulpit-initiative%e2%80%94or-should-churches-maintain-their-tax-exempt-status/ Religion, SF, and Other Speculative Fictions. Thu, 18 Mar 2010 04:35:24 -0700 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9 hourly 1 By: xJane http://www.mindonfire.com/2008/09/29/the-pulpit-initiative%e2%80%94or-should-churches-maintain-their-tax-exempt-status/comment-page-1/#comment-21941 xJane Fri, 07 Nov 2008 16:52:53 +0000 http://www.mindonfire.com/?p=1242#comment-21941 I don't mean that religionists are more charitable than atheists—just that religions have a built-in infrastructure (their community, their buildings, they're already passing around requests for money) from which to more easily perform charitable tasks. And I totally agree that true separation would mean taxation. I don’t mean that religionists are more charitable than atheists—just that religions have a built-in infrastructure (their community, their buildings, they’re already passing around requests for money) from which to more easily perform charitable tasks.

And I totally agree that true separation would mean taxation.

]]> By: Chris http://www.mindonfire.com/2008/09/29/the-pulpit-initiative%e2%80%94or-should-churches-maintain-their-tax-exempt-status/comment-page-1/#comment-21939 Chris Fri, 07 Nov 2008 16:21:36 +0000 http://www.mindonfire.com/?p=1242#comment-21939 I agree with Marsha. Many churches in California sponsored meeting and allowed tax exempt church property to be used as a base for organizing and co-ordinating activities for the Yes on 8 campaign. While church members have the right to their beliefs and have the right to support a measure such as Prop 8, tax exempt church resources should not be allowed to facilitate this. Even more, I have observed public school buses being used for ferrying worshippers from remote parking areas to several of the large evangelical churches in my area. I assume that these resources are being paid for, however they should not be allowed. These are tax payer assets that are being used to support religious organizations. If they need buses, they should contract for them from private transportation providers at current market rates. I agree with Marsha. Many churches in California sponsored meeting and allowed tax exempt church property to be used as a base for organizing and co-ordinating activities for the Yes on 8 campaign.

While church members have the right to their beliefs and have the right to support a measure such as Prop 8, tax exempt church resources should not be allowed to facilitate this.

Even more, I have observed public school buses being used for ferrying worshippers from remote parking areas to several of the large evangelical churches in my area. I assume that these resources are being paid for, however they should not be allowed.

These are tax payer assets that are being used to support religious organizations. If they need buses, they should contract for them from private transportation providers at current market rates.

]]> By: Marsha http://www.mindonfire.com/2008/09/29/the-pulpit-initiative%e2%80%94or-should-churches-maintain-their-tax-exempt-status/comment-page-1/#comment-21937 Marsha Fri, 07 Nov 2008 04:03:34 +0000 http://www.mindonfire.com/?p=1242#comment-21937 Although some churches do good works, benefiting our society, many push forth their agendas using the pulpit, and it angers me that they get a tax free forum for doing this. I don't want churches to use their congregations and their money to help enact laws which impinge upon my civil rights and liberties. For example, the passage of Prop 8 in California, the anti-gay marriage initiative, was supported by the Mormon Church in Utah. Hey, keep your money and your god out of my state! So, if my tax money indirectly subsidizes the very profitable Mormon Church, I think it's wrong, wrong, wrong for them to be able to politicize from the pulpit. If there is a true division of church and state, then they shouldn't be pushing forth their views while benefiting from this tax policy. I also don't agree that religions do a better job of charity than atheists. You don't have to accept the premise of god to act godly. Although some churches do good works, benefiting our society, many push forth their agendas using the pulpit, and it angers me that they get a tax free forum for doing this. I don’t want churches to use their congregations and their money to help enact laws which impinge upon my civil rights and liberties. For example, the passage of Prop 8 in California, the anti-gay marriage initiative, was supported by the Mormon Church in Utah. Hey, keep your money and your god out of my state! So, if my tax money indirectly subsidizes the very profitable Mormon Church, I think it’s wrong, wrong, wrong for them to be able to politicize from the pulpit. If there is a true division of church and state, then they shouldn’t be pushing forth their views while benefiting from this tax policy. I also don’t agree that religions do a better job of charity than atheists. You don’t have to accept the premise of god to act godly.

]]>