Almost 1,600 Psators Defy IRS, preach politics from the Pulpit

[EmperorNapoleon]

If someone has free speech rights, the government is not allowed to punish them for exercising their free speech rights (by fining them) or charging them a tax to do so.

Normal taxation is not a punishment. The State is allowed to encourage behavior, in this case political neutrality, with tax incentives. If the Church does not engage in that behavior then it is not entitled to a tax exemption and hast to pay the same taxes everyone else does.

Cannot charge someone for exercising a constitutional right.

No one is being charged for exercising a constitutional right. The State rewards procreation with tax incentives but if you don’t have children you don’t get the deduction. Likewise, the State rewards political neutrality with tax exemption but if you’re not politically neutral then you don’t get the exemption.

And there is a constitutional right for churches not to pay taxes, under three reasons. First it is called separation of church and state. By taxing them, the government is entangling themselves in church governance, violating that principle.

The separation of church and state refers to the endorsement or founding of religion on the part of the State and has nothing to do with taxation and taxes do not interfere in church governance.

Second, One sovereign does not tax another. The USA cannot tax Greece. Nor can it tax the Vatican. Agents of a sovereign are not taxed by another sovereign. Look at the zero taxes embassies and foreign government buildings pay. Since courts have ruled that priests are employees of the Vatican (sex abuse lawsuits) thus the churches are agents of the Vatican and are nontaxable.

Actually the courts ruled that priests are not employees of the Holy See so your argument here goes out the window.

Third, if the secularists want to use SOCAS to force religion out of the public square, the public square cannot demand taxes from religions. Taxation without representation. Also you cannot tax me to fund a publicly accessible building or space and tell me I’m not allowed in there. Same thing for the Church.

No one is telling anyone they’re not allowed in a Church. Also, representation refers to representatives not christmas trees.

 

[BobCatholic]

Normal taxation is not a punishment.

This is not normal taxation. This is taxation based on content discrimination. If the government passed a tax on every mention of Jesus’ name, that would be blatantly unconstitutional.

The State is allowed to encourage behavior, in this case political neutrality, with tax incentives.

This is not political neutrality. This is silencing speech.

No one is being charged for exercising a constitutional right.

Let’s put that to the test.

Take a church. Ask them how much money in taxes they pay now by not speaking. ZERO.
Take the same church when they speak and have their tax exemption yanked. MUCH MORE.

That is a tax on speech, and being charged for exercising a constitutional right.

The separation of church and state refers to the endorsement or founding of religion on the part of the State and has nothing to do with taxation and taxes do not interfere in church governance.

SOCAS is also interpreted as preventing the Church from running the government and vice versa. Taxing the Churches turns SOCAS into a one way street.

No one is telling anyone they’re not allowed in a Church. Also, representation refers to representatives not christmas trees.

The Catholic faith, or other faiths are not allowed on government property. Yet this same government wants to tax the Catholic faith or other faiths.

And please tell me which congressional representatives or senators represent the Catholic Church. The answer is ZERO.

 

[EmperorNapoleon]

This is not normal taxation. This is taxation based on content discrimination.

It is normal taxation. Churches are tax exempt BECAUSE it is politically neutral and supposedly non-profit just like every other 501c3 organization. Tax exemption is a privilege not a right.

If the government passed a tax on every mention of Jesus’ name, that would be blatantly unconstitutional.

Thats not what the government is doing.

This is not political neutrality.This is silencing speech.

Pure delusion.

That is a tax on speech, and being charged for exercising a constitutional right.

I assume you pay taxes. Do you consider yourself being charged for exercising your constitutional rights?

The Catholic faith, or other faiths are not allowed on government property. Yet this same government wants to tax the Catholic faith or other faiths.

That isn’t true. The government can and does have all kinds of religious figures decorating its buildings and holiday displays. It also funds all sorts of faith-based initiatives. What the State can’t do is show preference for one religion above another.

And please tell me which congressional representatives or senators represent the Catholic Church. The answer is ZERO.

The right to vote isn’t a constitutional guarantee that your preferred candidate will win.

 

[BobCatholic]

It is normal taxation.

Nope.

Churches are tax exempt BECAUSE it is politically neutral and supposedly non-profit just like every other 501c3 organization.

And you admit the tax exemption is based on content of speech. Thank you for proving my point. Say the wrong thing and you get taxed.

Tax exemption is a privilege not a right.

Free speech and freedom of religion is a right and not to be taxed.

The prohibition of poll taxes, is a great example of a tax exemption that is a right. Foreign governments are tax exempt by right.

And another example of free speech that is not taxed: political campaign funds. Politicians can raise hundreds of millions of dollars of tax free cash (like Obama and Romney) and pay zero tax.

Thats not what the government is doing.

I didn’t say they did. I said IF they did that. I was using it as an example.

I assume you pay taxes. Do you consider yourself being charged for exercising your constitutional rights?

Thanks to Obamacare, yes.

I’m not Amish so I’m not exempt from the mandate, so I have the “wrong religion” and am required to pay for health insurance or pay a tax because I’m Catholic. If I converted to Amish tomorrow, my mandate would disappear and so would my tax obligation.

That isn’t true. The government can and does have all kinds of religious figures decorating its buildings and holiday displays. It also funds all sorts of faith-based initiatives. What the State can’t do is show preference for one religion above another.

Then you need to yell at the ACLU and People for the American way who sue local government left and right. They disagree with you and got judges to make what I say is true.

The right to vote isn’t a constitutional guarantee that your preferred candidate will win.

I"m not saying that.

I’m asking you which representative or senator represents the Catholic Church. The correct answer is none. I have yet to see to see any news broadcast where the politician has (D) - Vatican City or (R) - Vatican City say something.

 

[EmperorNapoleon]

Nope.

Yep. You pay income taxes do you not?

And you admit the tax exemption is based on content of speech. Thank you for proving my point. Say the wrong thing and you get taxed.

It doesn’t prove your point; it proves that the State has the right to levy taxes and there is no right to tax exemption. The official position of the Church is one of political neutrality anyway so this is a non-issue.

Then you need to yell at the ACLU and People for the American way who sue local government left and right. They disagree with you and got judges to make what I say is true.

Actually they don’t. The lawsuits are based on the exercise of religious preference not display. For example, allowing a nativity display but refusing to allow a menorah.

I’m asking you which representative or senator represents the Catholic Church. The correct answer is none. I have yet to see to see any news broadcast where the politician has (D) - Vatican City or (R) - Vatican City say something.

This isn’t Vatican City so why would there be representatives of Vatican City in the United States Congress? Their representative is the same as everyone else’s in their district.

 

[BobCatholic]

Yep. You pay income taxes do you not?

Yes I do. However, I am also going to be charged taxes because I’m the wrong religion. If I was Amish or Muslim I wouldn’t have to pay this tax.

It doesn’t prove your point; it proves that the State has the right to levy taxes

And the state has no right to tax free speech. Or are you advocating poll taxes now? Maybe requiring a tax on forum posts?

Actually they don’t. The lawsuits are based on the exercise of religious preference not display. For example, allowing a nativity display but refusing to allow a menorah.

And you forgot Mount Soledad. These SOCAS types want ZERO Christian faith on government property.

This isn’t Vatican City so why would there be representatives of Vatican City in the United States Congress? Their representative is the same as everyone else’s in their district.

Again, you proved my point. There are no representatives of the Catholic Church in the Congress.

 

[Elizium23]

The tax code has loopholes (surprise!), and both sides take advantage of them.

Identity Politics Moment: Obama’s Very Public Planned Parenthood Embrace

Arizona Catholic Conference