Discrimination in the name of religion

[jackstar7]

Then you agree the laws saying religion must fund birth control should be thrown out, correct?

Then you agree that religious institutions must waive their tax exempt status if they wish to abstain from state and federal work regulations, correct?

 

[cybrsage]

Then you agree that religious institutions must waive their tax exempt status if they wish to abstain from state and federal work regulations, correct?

Only if you also agree that religion can then become political. The reason they are tax exempt is so that they can be denied political influence. If you start taxing them, you lose the ability to stop them from directly engaging in politics.

Is that what you want?

 

[fskimospy]

Except you didnt. You made a generalized statement. And it has nothing to do with race or culture. It was really about CLASS. And you forgot to mention how Asians would fit into your generalize statement (because you knew it would destroy you little Black and White worldview).

Nothing you wrote here is at all relevant to my point. Is the average white person going to have greater networking and employment opportunities or lesser networking and employment opportunities than the average black person coming out of an identical college with an identical major and GPA?

It's a simple question. Once you've answered it you can then use that answer to understand white privilege.

 

[cybrsage]

If they go to the same college and graduate with the same major and GPA, affirmative action ensures the black guy will beat the white guy for the same job.

 

[jackstar7]

Only if you also agree that religion can then become political. The reason they are tax exempt is so that they can be denied political influence. If you start taxing them, you lose the ability to stop them from directly engaging in politics.

Is that what you want?

Last I checked many many religions were already politically active, so I'd just like to see them start paying for it, like everyone else.

What I want is no religion outside the individual... but it takes a while to kill gods.

 

[JEDIYoda]

Last I checked many many religions were already politically active, so I'd just like to see them start paying for it, like everyone else.

I think not..I actually thinjk you believe that somebody who goes to church has no right to promote their own individual beliefs......even if those beliefs fall in libe with what their particular church believes...

 

[cybrsage]

Last I checked many many religions were already politically active, so I'd just like to see them start paying for it, like everyone else.

Then report them and they will lose their tax exempt status.

I assume you also want unions to have to pay taxes since they are directly engaged in politics?

 

[jackstar7]

I think not..I actually thinjk you believe that somebody who goes to church has no right to promote their own individual beliefs......even if those beliefs fall in libe with what their particular church believes...

Can you pull out your point from that post and give me a hand in responding to it?

People are allowed to do as they please as citizens. I have no issues with the reality of that.

But there are certainly religious organizations that are politically active.

In fact I'll pull this quote:

"Churches and non-profits are free to be involved in political issues as long as no candidate or party is endorsed."

Also this:

What Political Activities by Churches are Permitted?
The Congressional Research Service findings on the political activities of tax-exempt organizations state the following.

Clearly, IRC § 501(c)(3) organizations may not do such things as make statements that endorse or oppose a candidate, publish or distribute campaign literature, or make any type of contribution, monetary or otherwise, to a political campaign. On the other hand, IRC § 501(c)(3) organizations are allowed to conduct activities that are not related to elections, such as issue advocacy, lobbying for or against legislation, and supporting or opposing the appointment of individuals to non-elective offices.

Where did I get it from? Here.

Then report them and they will lose their tax exempt status.

As mentioned right there, the law does not agree with you.

 

[cybrsage]

As mentioned right there, the law does not agree with you.

Clearly, IRC § 501(c)(3) organizations may not do such things as make statements that endorse or oppose a candidate, publish or distribute campaign literature, or make any type of contribution, monetary or otherwise, to a political campaign.

If they violate any of those items, they lose their tax free status. Labor Unions are IRC § 501(c)(5) so they are not bound by any of those things. They can give money to candidates and stay tax free.

 

[jackstar7]

If they violate any of those items, they lose their tax free status. Labor Unions are IRC § 501(c)(5) so they are not bound by any of those things. They can give money to candidates and stay tax free.

Now show how it's not a false equivalency, please.

Or you could show what this has to do with the thread.

Or both.

 

[cybrsage]

Now that you lost the argument, you are going to switch to the "wahhh...false equvialency...wahhh...OT....wahhhh"

Man up and admit unions are tax free and can fund the political process while religion cannot do so and still remain tax free.

 

[jackstar7]

Now that you lost the argument, you are going to switch to the "wahhh...false equvialency...wahhh...OT....wahhhh"

Man up and admit unions are tax free and can fund the political process while religion cannot do so and still remain tax free.

What argument did I lose? My point was that religious institutions can actively participate in the political process and do. I showed exactly how they can do so AND they remain tax-free.

If you mean why won't I adopt your re-framing of the argument today... well, it's because it's a bullshit comparison. And when your response is as you posted, I infer you can't show how they are equivalent and want to cry foul while claiming I'm the one doing so...

 

[cybrsage]

Well duh, of course Church members can actively participate in the political process. All Americans have that right.

HOWEVER, the preacher cannot stand up at the pulpit and tell the congregants who to vote for or the church loses its tax free status. UNION leaders do this all the time.

Chruches CANNOT fund a politician, UNIONS can.

So you are wrong, Churches do NOT have the ability to actively participate in the political process. Active participation is MUCH MORE than the very limited allowances you showed. We both know this, but you like to troll on and pretend it is not the case.

 

[Charles Kozierok]

UNION leaders do this all the time.

Preachers do it all the time too. They are just (usually) a bit more subtle about it.

 

[cybrsage]

Preachers do it all the time too. They are just (usually) a bit more subtle about it.

Can you quote some?

Preachers can tell the official church position on the topics of interest, they can also tell the official position of the candidates, but they must stop there.

 

[Charles Kozierok]

Can you quote some?

Here's one:

Pastor Ronnie Spriggs of Hager Hill Freewill Baptist Church said during a May 13 sermon that he wants Obama voted out of office because of the president's support of gay marriage.


Obama "said that he believes that gays ought to have the right to marry in the United States. That's the president of the United States who said that," Spriggs told his flock during the sermon. "I don't know about you folks, but I'm going on record and I don't care who knows it. I want the guy out."

There are lots more.

As I said, usually they are more subtle. But they are still getting involved in politics.

Then there are the millions of dollars that churches have contributed to various political causes, such as the financing of anti-gay-rights referendums in various states.

 

[jackstar7]

We both know this, but you like to troll on and pretend it is not the case.

You say that I troll. Have you reported me to the mods for that behavior?

I'm not sure how presenting you with clear examples as to how religions are able to participate in the political process is trolling, and why you continue to bring unions into this disucssion of religion and politics. Can you elaborate on those?