71–80 of 537 posts
That is just what is uncovered in the investment market with one subsidiary. They also own 2% of Florida[0], huge land tracts in Argentina, Oklahoma and elsewhere, and attractive urban real estate in most major metropolises including apartment complexes in PA. They centralize donation collection of tithes and good will offerings such that about 8% stays back at congregations (based on personal observation as the fina…
I cannot fathom why churches are automatically tax exempt. Regular nonprofits have to jump through all kinds of hoops to prevent these kind of shenanigans. We are supposed to have a secular government. How is it that we single out this one class of institution for special treatment?
Religious orgs are a time-tested model for providing sustainable and widespread social cohesion, which is a huge positive externality and also protects the most vulnerable against marginalization and oppression. The tax exemption seems obviously warranted on that basis alone, even abstracting away from any of the more visible charity work or social support that these orgs usually provide.
I hear this a great deal, but would love some actual numbers to back it up. My own experience supports that this is true in a limited way for members of the church going through a discrete crisis, but pales in comparison to the good done by, for instance, WIC and SNAP.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Given that we haven't met, dorian-graph, this starts with the assumption that what people like me went through is trivial. For decency sake I ask you to reconsider this as a default position. In order to get my records at least flagged as no longer a Mormon, thus to keep random visits from local congregations from occurring, I had to get a lawyer involved. In order for my children to not be repeatedly hounded by some…
> Given that we haven't met, dorian-graph, this starts with the assumption that what people like me went through is trivial. For decency sake I ask you to reconsider this as a default position. What indicated that I thought it was trivial? It's not my default position, nor has it ever been my position that it's trivial—I know absolutely that it's not. Speaking of assumptions? Edit: For others, there's been substantia…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It always surprises me that wealthy churches pretend to take Christ seriously, when Jesus was not very fond of amassing money. I get why the churches do it (of course they don't believe in Christ), but why do the exploited masses believe them?
"It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich person to enter the Kingdom of God." -Jesus Matthew 19:24
17 “Why do you ask me about what is good?” Jesus replied. “There is only One who is good. If you want to enter life, keep the commandments.” “Which ones?” he inquired. Jesus replied, “‘You shall not murder, you shall not commit adultery, you shall not steal, you shall not give false testimony, 19 honor your father and mother,’ and ‘love your neighbor as yourself.’” “All these I have kept,” the young man said. “What do I still lack?” Jesus answered, “If you want to be perfect, go, sell your possessions and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven. Then come, follow me.” When the young man heard this, he went away sad, because he had great wealth. Then Jesus said to his disciples, “Truly I tell you, it is hard for someone who is rich to enter the kingdom of heaven. 24 Again I tell you, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for someone who is rich to enter the kingdom of God.” When the disciples heard this, they were greatly astonished and asked, “Who then can be saved?” Jesus looked at them and said, “With man this is impossible, but with God all things are possible.” Matthew 19:17-26 - https://www.biblegateway.com/passage?search=Matthew%2019:17-...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> when Jesus was not very fond of amassing money I'm guessing you're talking about the moneychangers being thrown out of the temple ? There are examples recorded in the scriptures of tithes and offerings, and also of a people preparing/amassing the relative wealth/supplies (Noah, Joseph, etc). There are multiple levels of preparedness taught in the LDS church. The lowest, the family, being to only have necessary debt…
> Why does the LDS church do it? To go into detail would probably be outside the scope of HN, but if this is a serious question, Richard Dawkins is a good source on how the LDS church was founded.
I cannot fathom why churches are automatically tax exempt. Regular nonprofits have to jump through all kinds of hoops to prevent these kind of shenanigans. We are supposed to have a secular government. How is it that we single out this one class of institution for special treatment?
Religious orgs are a time-tested model for providing sustainable and widespread social cohesion, which is a huge positive externality and also protects the most vulnerable against marginalization and oppression. The tax exemption seems obviously warranted on that basis alone, even abstracting away from any of the more visible charity work or social support that these orgs usually provide.
(Not to mention that your so-called “cohesion” also includes Scientology, Westboro Baptists and prosperity theology.)
1. Spend less than you take in. 2. Save/invest a portion of what you bring in for a rainy day.
Thus over a hundred years that builds up. I'm a Mormon and personally don't have an issue with it as I know that wealth doesn't go to church leaders (they all get the same stipend which for many is less than they made in their professional lives) and is simply fund available to the Church for times of need.
I cannot fathom why churches are automatically tax exempt. Regular nonprofits have to jump through all kinds of hoops to prevent these kind of shenanigans. We are supposed to have a secular government. How is it that we single out this one class of institution for special treatment?
Religious orgs are a time-tested model for providing sustainable and widespread social cohesion, which is a huge positive externality and also protects the most vulnerable against marginalization and oppression. The tax exemption seems obviously warranted on that basis alone, even abstracting away from any of the more visible charity work or social support that these orgs usually provide.
See women’s rights, gay and other sexual orientation rights, minority rights, catholic pedophilia, Mormon multiple wife and underage nonsense, Scientology, etc.
It provides a certain tribe a tax exemption, that may or may not do good deeds with it. No reason to provide any tax exemption (not that anyone should have one in the first place).