141–150 of 232 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why would the fine be higher? Presumably it's proportionate to the harm caused, not by the size of the fund.
It's actually a settlement, not a fine, which is probably pinned closer to the "This is the amount we think we'd have to pay lawyers to argue the case" value than the "This is how much we would owe if we were found guilty of breaking the law" value.
The Church's statement: https://newsroom.churchofjesuschrist.org/article/church-issu...
> Q: Did Ensign Peak fail to comply with SEC regulations? > A: We reached resolution with the SEC. We affirm our commitment to comply with the law, regret mistakes made, and now consider this matter closed. Why would they ask themselves a question that they refuse to answer? Did they have to negotiate these FAQs with the SEC too?
Some info about how the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints uses its donations: https://newsroom.churchofjesuschrist.org/article/humanitaria... I suspect most of its investments are targeted towards the same ends.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I feel worse for the whistleblower that probably reported that They thought they were going to get a much bigger payday by reporting the malfeasance of a 32 billion portfolio
I would guess that the whistleblower was employed by the church directly or via a subsidiary. Knowing many people who work for the Mormon church, it is likely the whistleblower lost their job and their pension. You will lose your job and pension if you stop regularly attending church services or giving 10% of your paycheck back to the church ('tithing'). I can't imagine they don't take a harder approach to this. To b…
But job, yes. They want people who are devoted, if they are going to pay them to further the work. To me that makes perfect sense.
(Thoughtful comments appreciated with downvotes; thanks.)
Nearly every Baptist church/preacher I have seen explicitly endorsed Donald Trump in 2020, and calls Joe Biden an election thief (or one of a dozen other conspiracies). My understanding is that this is in direct violation of their tax-free status [1]. Maybe we should actually start enforcing this. [1] https://www.irs.gov/newsroom/charities-churches-and-politics EDIT: I couldn't remember the name of the thing that sta…
There's a massive difference between an individual putting forth an opinion, and them using an organization to specifically promote that opinion.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The separation of church and state is not about preventing any kind of relationship between religious institutions and the government. Rather, it is about ensuring that the government does not establish an official state religion, and that it remains neutral towards different religious beliefs and practices.
This - but one could argue that the state having to make determinations of what constitutes a religious belief and practice _could_ go against the separation of church and state.
Any idea what specific investments the church was trying to distance themselves from?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
But what kind of staff or funding does it take to say literally different words out of your mouth like, you are fined $5B instead of $5MM? I can do that for free, especially if they are already at the point where they are making the charge. Every fine should be devastating so that they either barely survive or die, and every other company shits themselves for life and we solve the problem.
The lawyers to back it up. Fines and judgements are subject to judicial review.
A "religion" primarily assumes standard Christianity, Judaism, Islam, Buddhism, Sikhism, etc: all of which have buildings, assets, collections, and such. For those of us who either have a solitary practice or meet with a small group (coven), none of our costs for our practices are tax exempt. If we are large enough, we usually cannot be "acknowledged by the state" to get tax exempt status. When we do get enough peopl…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Its basis is that taxation is a form of coercion, and government having the ability to coerce or even persecute religious organizations through taxation would violate the separation of church and state. I personally think the incestuous menage-a-trois between corporate interests, the Republican party and Conservative Christianity is a bigger threat to liberty, but whatever.
I hear you, and suspect generalizing to not only one party or religious faction still works.
Which in a way makes them more sincere than the Democrats, whose embrace of secularism and leftism so often seems like half-measures compared to what the other party is willing to commit to.