• mommykink
    link
    fedilink
    -2511 months ago

    Taxing religious organizations gives them official representation in government affairs which is just as bad, if not worse.

    • @kent_eh@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      2211 months ago

      Not taxing them hasn’t kept their fingers out of the American government.

      Far from it.

      Hell, the current speaker is trying to convince everyone that the government was always intended to be based on religious dogma.

    • @givesomefucks@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      411 months ago

      Please elaborate…

      Like, do you think McDonald’s as a corporation gets to vote?

      Do you think priests and preachers don’t get to vote now?

    • @Fisk400@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      3111 months ago

      Definitely not how that works. All companies are taxed and they don’t get any special representation outside lobbying that they were going to do either way and churches do in fact put a lot of the money they should have payed in taxes into lobbying.

      • mommykink
        link
        fedilink
        -311 months ago

        companies don’t get any special representation

        Lmao

        • @mateomaui@reddthat.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          211 months ago

          To some degree, agreed, but your original assertion is still wrong. Unless you count all the devoutly religious people in Congress, and they already have that representation.

          • themeatbridge
            link
            fedilink
            -211 months ago

            No, but well-connected companies use regulatory capture to structure taxes as a burden on their competition.

            Consider for a moment how churches would be taxed. Maybe they are taxed on their assets. That would disproportionately affect larger churches with valuable real estate holdings, like the Catholic and Mormon churches. Maybe the donations they receive are taxed. That disadvantages newer churches which don’t have corporate investments or endowments. Tax land? Hurt cemeteries. Tax salaries? Favor Quaker meeting houses where there is no specific pastor.

            Look, I don’t think churches should be involved in politics. Any that donate to candidates or endorse a party should lose their tax exempt status, because they are no longer churches. But a blanket removal of all tax exemptions for religious organizations is a threat to religious freedom. It would allow the religious leaders in government to play favorites and pick winners, kind of like they do now already.

            • originalucifer
              link
              fedilink
              111 months ago

              yes, freedom of religion can only exist with in perpetuity tax free landownership

              hahaha

              • themeatbridge
                link
                fedilink
                -111 months ago

                Is that what I said?

                Tax code is applied by politicians. Do you really expect Christian Conservatives to fairly tax Muslims and Sikhs and Hindus at the same rates as their own churches? Freedom of Religion cannot exist when political leaders are able to tax competing religions into oblivion.

      • themeatbridge
        link
        fedilink
        111 months ago

        You don’t think certain companies get favorable treatment via tax code and lobbying?