Christofacists at it again

I think that's an irrational fear. If people are giving soley to get a tax deduction, they will simply find another organization that they can claim a deduction on like the red cross. WORST case scenario, a few gender biased organizations lose their tax exempt status, they still help the needy with the funds they get IN ADDITION to lessoning the tax burden for the rest of us and they contribute X% of their 'earnings' to medicaid, medicare and a plethora of other social programs - just like the rest of us - oh......the horror.

But Tiana, that would be discrimination, in and of itself....

For you to manipulate our government so that Churches can not afford to take care of the needy and reccomend then going to the Red Cross etc....a secular form of help...

quite frankly ,....it seems like YOU ARE BEING A BIGOT... a bigot against anyone religious wanting to help the poor .... for some reason, you don't like the religious taking care of the poor and want to structure our country to meet those opinions of YOURS, while discriminating against the Church....

Now that is surprising to me that you can be so narrow minded on this....so vindictive, and hateful....is how it appears... especially since you want to take the tax write off to the Church charities that help the poor but NOT THE SECULAR charties....

can you spell DISCRIMINATION?

shameful tiana!!! again....what is the purpose of all of this Tiana...to help the needy or poor? Or to Punish the poor?
 
Care4all said:
I think that's an irrational fear. If people are giving soley to get a tax deduction, they will simply find another organization that they can claim a deduction on like the red cross. WORST case scenario, a few gender biased organizations lose their tax exempt status, they still help the needy with the funds they get IN ADDITION to lessoning the tax burden for the rest of us and they contribute X% of their 'earnings' to medicaid, medicare and a plethora of other social programs - just like the rest of us - oh......the horror.

But Tiana, that would be discrimination, in and of itself....

For you to manipulate our government so that Churches can not afford to take care of the needy and reccomend then going to the Red Cross etc....a secular form of help...

quite frankly ,....it seems like YOU ARE BEING A BIGOT... a bigot against anyone religious wanting to help the poor .... for some reason, you don't like the religious taking care of the poor and want to structure our country to meet those opinions of YOURS, while discriminating against the Church....

Now that is surprising to me that you can be so narrow minded on this....so vindictive, and hateful....is how it appears... especially since you want to take the tax write off to the Church charities that help the poor but NOT THE SECULAR charties....

can you spell DISCRIMINATION?

shameful tiana!!! again....what is the purpose of all of this Tiana...to help the needy or poor? Or to Punish the poor?
Click to expand...

Whoa, whoa whoa. This was written to Tiana, but this post really raised my eyebrows, so I'm going to respond.

You seem to be arguing that the work they do for the poor, absolves them of all harm they may cause to society at large. Would you then, make the same case for Hezbollah? Don't forget, Hezobollah, and groups like them, are extremely socially conscious and they feed the poor, and they rebuild for the poor, and they provide medical care for the poor, and they pay the bills of the poor. In fact, I would say the case can be made that they do more for the poor in their countries than Christians do here. Does that mean that anyone whom questions their methods, or attacks them in anyway, are being hateful bigots, who want the poor to suffer??

As for Christians in this country, yes they help the poor through their churches. They also, overwhelmingly, vote for right wing Republicans who vow and work to cut back the social safety net, thereby, creating more poor. In fact, since bush and his repuke congress were given power, poverty has risen every SINGLE YEAR!. More children live in poverty today, than did when he took office. Where is the outcry from the great charitable, religious folk? Where?

By voting for these harmful policies they do two things; they ensure the help of the churches will still be needed, thereby keeping power for themselves, and, they hurt those who are already poor, and, they drive larger and larger numbers into poverty.

So, is their overall contribution for the positive? And would the poor, and the just getting by, be better off with, or without them?

No, it's not such a clear cut case, and in no way can anyone make the claim that those who have a problem with these organized right wing religions are trying to hurt the poor. In fact, when we actually look at the facts, the opposite is true.
 
whoa whoa whoa to you darla...you equate our churches that help the poor to Hezbolla helping the poor?

you see Christian Charities EQUAL to Hezbolla's killers and suicide bombers?

shameful Darla, imo....

that in and of itself is TWISTED to me...


I haven't read the rest of your post yet but will respond...
 
the Bigotry comes from saying that Churches can not get a deduction for their donations to help the poor but Secular charties would be allowed to get the tax deduction for helping the poor...

please explain to me how is that not discrimination, Darla or Tiana?
 
Care4all said:
whoa whoa whoa to you darla...you equate our churches that help the poor to Hezbolla helping the poor?

you see Christian Charities EQUAL to Hezbolla's killers and suicide bombers?

shameful Darla, imo....

that in and of itself is TWISTED to me...


I haven't read the rest of your post yet but will respond...
Click to expand...

Your premise and your main argument has been that because these churches help the poor, then automatically, anyone who questions them or wants to take away their tax exempt status, is trying to hurt the poor.

The same would absolutely hold true of Hezbollah, were you being fair. But you're not being fair, and in Hezbollah's case you are demanding that we take into account their negative actions, but you are also demanding that in the case of Christians, we do not!

And further Care, as you should know, one person's killer is another person's hero. Unless you are really under the impression that there aren't many in the mid-east who consider the US soldier to be a murderer.
 
Your premise and your main argument has been that because these churches help the poor, then automatically, anyone who questions them or wants to take away their tax exempt status, is trying to hurt the poor.

Where did you get that Darla?
 
Care4all said:
the Bigotry comes from saying that Churches can not get a deduction for their donations to help the poor but Secular charties would be allowed to get the tax deduction for helping the poor...

please explain to me how is that not discrimination, Darla or Tiana?
Click to expand...

My main problem is your claim that she wants the poor to suffer. I can make the same claim about you, because you're against Hezbollah, and a lot more poor would suffer were it not for Hezbollah. There is no one else for them, in that region. Americans cannot donate, in fact, when was the last time Care, that ANY tragedy, either man or God made occurred that left ONE MILLION people, many of them children, homeless, and there were not collections and millions of dollars raised right here in America? Huh? But Americans cannot help the Lebanonese people because they would end up on a terrorist sypmathizer list, and their bank accounts would be seized. So who do those poor peopel have? They have Hezbollah. And that's all they have.

And as for your question, I believe Tiana has been very clear in stating, she is talking about across the board for all non-profits, not singling out religious ones, so there is NO bigotry Care.
 
Care4all said:
Your premise and your main argument has been that because these churches help the poor, then automatically, anyone who questions them or wants to take away their tax exempt status, is trying to hurt the poor.

Where did you get that Darla?
Click to expand...

From your posts on the subject, you talk about that in all of them. It appears to be your main concern, or, as I take it, your main argument.
 
Care4all said:
I think that's an irrational fear. If people are giving soley to get a tax deduction, they will simply find another organization that they can claim a deduction on like the red cross. WORST case scenario, a few gender biased organizations lose their tax exempt status, they still help the needy with the funds they get IN ADDITION to lessoning the tax burden for the rest of us and they contribute X% of their 'earnings' to medicaid, medicare and a plethora of other social programs - just like the rest of us - oh......the horror.

But Tiana, that would be discrimination, in and of itself....

For you to manipulate our government so that Churches can not afford to take care of the needy and reccomend then going to the Red Cross etc....a secular form of help...

quite frankly ,....it seems like YOU ARE BEING A BIGOT... a bigot against anyone religious wanting to help the poor .... for some reason, you don't like the religious taking care of the poor and want to structure our country to meet those opinions of YOURS, while discriminating against the Church....

Now that is surprising to me that you can be so narrow minded on this....so vindictive, and hateful....is how it appears... especially since you want to take the tax write off to the Church charities that help the poor but NOT THE SECULAR charties....

can you spell DISCRIMINATION?

shameful tiana!!! again....what is the purpose of all of this Tiana...to help the needy or poor? Or to Punish the poor?
Click to expand...

waaaa????? That doens't even make any sense? I'm discriminating? Against people that discriminate? Ummm, okay then. I accept that label I guess. You're problem is you seem to think that tax exemption status should be a right. Its not its a priveledge that some organizations are afforded if the meet certain criteria. Much like getting a city contract. If your company discriminates against white people you're not entitled to get a contract even if you do have the capacity to do the job faster than all other contractors. Is that discriminatory too?

And seriously Care, this is getting a bit fustrating, because I've stated SEVERAL TIMES WITHIN THIS THREAD that ALL NON PROFITS would have to adhere to the same standards regarding this. Whether its a women's rights group, whether its PETA, or whatever - if they have institutionalized bigotry, they shouldn't be eligible.

I'll repeat it:

ALL NON PROFITS would have to adhere to the same standards regarding this. Whether its a women's rights group, whether its PETA, or whatever - if they have institutionalized bigotry, they shouldn't be eligible.


ALL NON PROFITS would have to adhere to the same standards regarding this. Whether its a women's rights group, whether its PETA, or whatever - if they have institutionalized bigotry, they shouldn't be eligible.


ALL NON PROFITS would have to adhere to the same standards regarding this. Whether its a women's rights group, whether its PETA, or whatever - if they have institutionalized bigotry, they shouldn't be eligible.


ALL NON PROFITS would have to adhere to the same standards regarding this. Whether its a women's rights group, whether its PETA, or whatever - if they have institutionalized bigotry, they shouldn't be eligible.


ALL NON PROFITS would have to adhere to the same standards regarding this. Whether its a women's rights group, whether its PETA, or whatever - if they have institutionalized bigotry, they shouldn't be eligible.


ALL NON PROFITS would have to adhere to the same standards regarding this. Whether its a women's rights group, whether its PETA, or whatever - if they have institutionalized bigotry, they shouldn't be eligible.


So please, stop saying that I'm "attacking the churches" because I'm not. I'm proposing an extension to the tax code.
 
my points have been that it is discrimination against churches to give a deduction to secular organizations for helping the poor but NOT to give the same benefit to the Church's for taking care of the poor...

that is discrimination.

In addition to this, my point was that because of our constitution and how our founding father's put the Church's protection from the government in to the First Amendment and the Protection from the government's control....that what YOU ALL are proposing is ILLEGAL and against our Constitution.... YOU CAN NOT FORCE the Cathoilic Church as an example to have Female Priests....And that is what Tiana is proposing, or we cut them off...

We also have a right to assemble...WITHOUT ANY GOVERNMENT INTERFERENCE......
 
Care4all said:
my points have been that it is discrimination against churches to give a deduction to secular organizations for helping the poor but NOT to give the same benefit to the Church's for taking care of the poor...

that is discrimination.

In addition to this, my point was that because of our constitution and how our founding father's put the Church's protection from the government in to the First Amendment and the Protection from the government's control....that what YOU ALL are proposing is ILLEGAL and against our Constitution.... YOU CAN NOT FORCE the Cathoilic Church as an example to have Female Priests....And that is what Tiana is proposing, or we cut them off...

We also have a right to assemble...WITHOUT ANY GOVERNMENT INTERFERENCE......
Click to expand...

Well, the problem Care is that you seem to be approaching this from the standpoint that a Tax Exempt status is a right given to you in the constitution, and it's not. Anymore than getting a gov't contract is. As long as any regulations are applied EQUALLY, I do not see it as unconstitional. No one is being cut off, they either qualify for a program, or they don't. No one is being prevented from assembling, and saying whatever they want to. It's a question of, do the taxpayers have to pick up the tab or not.

I thought IHG made a much better case for this not being the best way to approach the problem, and I can see his points. But you are not making a good case, because it has been made very clear to you that there is no discrimination, it would apply to all non-profits, and a tax exempt status is not your God-given right. So I really don't get your argument.

Let's just agree to disagree on this one please.
 
LadyT said:
waaaa????? That doens't even make any sense? I'm discriminating? Against people that discriminate? Ummm, okay then. I accept that label I guess. You're problem is you seem to think that tax exemption status should be a right. Its not its a priveledge that some organizations are afforded if the meet certain criteria. Much like getting a city contract. If your company discriminates against white people you're not entitled to get a contract even if you do have the capacity to do the job faster than all other contractors. Is that discriminatory too?

And seriously Care, this is getting a bit fustrating, because I've stated SEVERAL TIMES WITHIN THIS THREAD that ALL NON PROFITS would have to adhere to the same standards regarding this. Whether its a women's rights group, whether its PETA, or whatever - if they have institutionalized bigotry, they shouldn't be eligible.

I'll repeat it:

ALL NON PROFITS would have to adhere to the same standards regarding this. Whether its a women's rights group, whether its PETA, or whatever - if they have institutionalized bigotry, they shouldn't be eligible.


ALL NON PROFITS would have to adhere to the same standards regarding this. Whether its a women's rights group, whether its PETA, or whatever - if they have institutionalized bigotry, they shouldn't be eligible.


ALL NON PROFITS would have to adhere to the same standards regarding this. Whether its a women's rights group, whether its PETA, or whatever - if they have institutionalized bigotry, they shouldn't be eligible.


ALL NON PROFITS would have to adhere to the same standards regarding this. Whether its a women's rights group, whether its PETA, or whatever - if they have institutionalized bigotry, they shouldn't be eligible.


ALL NON PROFITS would have to adhere to the same standards regarding this. Whether its a women's rights group, whether its PETA, or whatever - if they have institutionalized bigotry, they shouldn't be eligible.


ALL NON PROFITS would have to adhere to the same standards regarding this. Whether its a women's rights group, whether its PETA, or whatever - if they have institutionalized bigotry, they shouldn't be eligible.


So please, stop saying that I'm "attacking the churches" because I'm not. I'm proposing an extension to the tax code.
Click to expand...

you are attacking the Churches Tiana...by wanting to make them change their Church Doctrines of not allowing female priests....or female sunday school teachers... you have NO RIGHT to do that...our first amendment protects us from just what you are trying to do...

so, answer my question please, please please...

Are YOU SAYING that the Catholic Church would have to change their church doctrine that they have held for 1500 years of not having any female in the Priest position would make the Catholic Charties INELIGIBLE for the tax exempt/ not for profit status?
 
so, answer my question please, please please...

Are YOU SAYING that the Catholic Church would have to change their church doctrine that they have held for 1500 years of not having any female in the Priest position would make the Catholic Charties INELIGIBLE for the tax exempt/ not for profit status?
 
And why would you want to have government control over groups that peacibly assemble?


Tiana...WHAT IS YOUR PURPOSE to all of this other than MORE government control? And why is it that you want MORE government control over charities?

Maybe if you explain your GOAL in all of this, I could understand where you are coming from?

Is it to SQUASH the religious right of their voice? The purpose of all of this...pretty please.
 
Care4all said:
you are attacking the Churches Tiana...by wanting to make them change their Church Doctrines of not allowing female priests....or female sunday school teachers... you have NO RIGHT to do that...our first amendment protects us from just what you are trying to do...

so, answer my question please, please please...

Are YOU SAYING that the Catholic Church would have to change their church doctrine that they have held for 1500 years of not having any female in the Priest position would make the Catholic Charties INELIGIBLE for the tax exempt/ not for profit status?
Click to expand...


Care, you're not making sense here. They can do whatever they want. The extension to the tax provision I proposed wouldn't dictate anything to them. It extends eligibility for a priveledge. I don't care what they do in their organization, the question is should I have to pick up the tab for any sexist or racist organization? I say no.
 
Care4all said:
so, answer my question please, please please...

Are YOU SAYING that the Catholic Church would have to change their church doctrine that they have held for 1500 years of not having any female in the Priest position would make the Catholic Charties INELIGIBLE for the tax exempt/ not for profit status?
Click to expand...

Yes. If they wanted tax exemption, yes they would.
 
Care4all said:
And why would you want to have government control over groups that peacibly assemble?


Tiana...WHAT IS YOUR PURPOSE to all of this other than MORE government control? And why is it that you want MORE government control over charities?

Maybe if you explain your GOAL in all of this, I could understand where you are coming from?

Is it to SQUASH the religious right of their voice? The purpose of all of this...pretty please.
Click to expand...

Well, looking at the amount of federal debt we are racking up, and no end insight to our involvement in the middle east, our dependence on oil and our further isolation from the international community, lately I've been pretty concerned about the value of the dollar long term. The US credit score would be 50 if rated. We all have to do our part to ensuring economic strength for our retirements and our childrens lifetime. The unfortunate reality of that is that we all have to pay taxes to do this. We allow a lot of freebies to certain companies and np's, however our debt is racking up by the minute. Why should we allow organizations that promote institutionalized racism not to contribute their fair share when the rest of have to, particularly given my aforementioned conditions?
 
LadyT said:
Yes. If they wanted tax exemption, yes they would.
Click to expand...

Then YOU are breaking our constitution by trying to manipulate an established church's Doctrine....

Final answer: you are wrong and what you are suggesting is against our constitution....and can not be done without eliminating the First amendment.

These places take in money from people that donate to them...it is not the government GIVING THEM MONEY, it is not a business that earns money, it is a private member organization that makes no money...and is made up of volunteers that want to help the poor.... these people choose freely to be members or volunteers of these groups and they DONATE their own money and time to these groups....

you can not change any church doctrine tiana...no matter how much you would like to manipulate the system to do such.... Our Constitution, states such.
 
Care4all said:
Then YOU are breaking our constitution by trying to manipulate an established church's Doctrine....
Final answer: you are wrong and what you are suggesting is against our constitution....and can not be done without eliminating the First amendment.
QUOTE]

Well, if that's the case then when the churches that have gotten their TE status yanked for supporting political candidates have had a grave injustice done because according to you, its unconstitutional. You should give alberto a call and let him know.
Click to expand...
 
LadyT said:
Well, looking at the amount of federal debt we are racking up, and no end insight to our involvement in the middle east, our dependence on oil and our further isolation from the international community, lately I've been pretty concerned about the value of the dollar long term. The US credit score would be 50 if rated. We all have to do our part to ensuring economic strength for our retirements and our childrens lifetime. The unfortunate reality of that is that we all have to pay taxes to do this. We allow a lot of freebies to certain companies and np's, however our debt is racking up by the minute. Why should we allow organizations that promote institutionalized racism not to contribute their fair share when the rest of have to, particularly given my aforementioned conditions?
Click to expand...

BECAUSE they SAVE the usa tax payer BILLIONS in tax dollars over time, in taking care of the needy.

Because they provide a good service to the community.

Because it is against our constitution to do as you ask....you have no right to do such...

and for you to cut off the cathoilic charities is to cut off the biggest charity for the needy that we have in this country, just because you don't agree with THEIR CHURCH DOCTRINE regarding female priests...again, you are breaking our constitution.

what exactly do you want them to pay taxes on...OUR FRICKING DONATIONS TO HELP THE POOR.... you are taking MONEY AWAY from the poor and I could never, ever agree to such a selfish thing....never!

Now, if you want to say that these religious institutions should not be given money from our government to help people....I agree with you! I am dead set against the Faith based initiatives that the repugs have out there....

but for you to want to control private membership groups made up of volunteers and Donaters to the cause, and their religious beliefs/doctrines "just because you don't like their doctrine" is against our constitution....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top