WWJD?

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
81

[quote]Cockney Blue wrote:

The selection of clergy is not via the standard job application model so I would have thought you are safe on that count.[/quote]

How so, if you’re going to treat them like any other business? What matters the process? And what about the staff hired by a church? Will the rejected flaming homosexual have a legal case? Will the church be forced to provide contraception coverage in it’s employee health benefits? Will the EEOC be unleased in all it’s glory?
http://www.lifenews.com/state4338.html

82

[quote]Sloth wrote:

The tax issue could be set aside. If we’re distracted by the tax issue, the much more fundamental problem will sneak up on us. If Churches are treated no differently from businesses, then their hiring, firing, and employee benefits fall under oversight. Meaning they’ll either bend to government will and jettison core beliefs to accomadate the new reality (imposed by force) of being equal opportunity employers and providers, or, they’ll have to lock their doors and start up underground churches.[/quote]

And as a corrollary to this good point, the newly regulated churches now get their chance to influence the legislation that they must answer to - like any other industry, business, or institution - which means churches would now have PACs, lobbyists, and generally more political activity trying to influence the government and laws.

Regulation is a two-way street - the “regulated” get to try and influence the regulations that govern them per their democratic right. Secularists seem to be under the mistaken impression that regulation of churches is a one-way endeavor, where the government passes laws and dictates to churches how to behave and how much they pay in taxes with the churches simply sitting back and accepting it withoutt “pretitioning for a redress of grievances”.

Not so, and the precious “wall” between church and state would be shattered if churches were so regulated, because churches would become as politically active as Wall Street and unions.

Want to treat churches “like everybody else”? No problem, secularists - just be prepared that churches will now want their say in government just like “everyone else” as well and you will have no complaint when churches won’t play nice and stop trying to bend “the state” to its will.

83

[quote]thunderbolt23 wrote:
Sloth wrote:

The tax issue could be set aside. If we’re distracted by the tax issue, the much more fundamental problem will sneak up on us. If Churches are treated no differently from businesses, then their hiring, firing, and employee benefits fall under oversight. Meaning they’ll either bend to government will and jettison core beliefs to accomadate the new reality (imposed by force) of being equal opportunity employers and providers, or, they’ll have to lock their doors and start up underground churches.

And as a corrollary to this good point, the newly regulated churches now get their chance to influence the legislation that they must answer to - like any other industry, business, or institution - which means churches would now have PACs, lobbyists, and generally more political activity trying to influence the government and laws.

Regulation is a two-way street - the “regulated” get to try and influence the regulations that govern them per their democratic right. Secularists seem to be under the mistaken impression that regulation of churches is a one-way endeavor, where the government passes laws and dictates to churches how to behave and how much they pay in taxes with the churches simply sitting back and accepting it withoutt “pretitioning for a redress of grievances”.

Not so, and the precious “wall” between church and state would be shattered if churches were so regulated, because churches would become as politically active as Wall Street and unions.

Want to treat churches “like everybody else”? No problem, secularists - just be prepared that churches will now want their say in government just like “everyone else” as well and you will have no complaint when churches won’t play nice and stop trying to bend “the state” to its will.[/quote]

Unfortunately, I think a lot of the secularists here will say that since religious people vote, the church already influences government and your point will be entirely lost upon them.

84

[quote]Stronghold wrote:
thunderbolt23 wrote:
Sloth wrote:

The tax issue could be set aside. If we’re distracted by the tax issue, the much more fundamental problem will sneak up on us. If Churches are treated no differently from businesses, then their hiring, firing, and employee benefits fall under oversight. Meaning they’ll either bend to government will and jettison core beliefs to accomadate the new reality (imposed by force) of being equal opportunity employers and providers, or, they’ll have to lock their doors and start up underground churches.

And as a corrollary to this good point, the newly regulated churches now get their chance to influence the legislation that they must answer to - like any other industry, business, or institution - which means churches would now have PACs, lobbyists, and generally more political activity trying to influence the government and laws.

Regulation is a two-way street - the “regulated” get to try and influence the regulations that govern them per their democratic right. Secularists seem to be under the mistaken impression that regulation of churches is a one-way endeavor, where the government passes laws and dictates to churches how to behave and how much they pay in taxes with the churches simply sitting back and accepting it withoutt “pretitioning for a redress of grievances”.

Not so, and the precious “wall” between church and state would be shattered if churches were so regulated, because churches would become as politically active as Wall Street and unions.

Want to treat churches “like everybody else”? No problem, secularists - just be prepared that churches will now want their say in government just like “everyone else” as well and you will have no complaint when churches won’t play nice and stop trying to bend “the state” to its will.

Unfortunately, I think a lot of the secularists here will say that since religious people vote, the church already influences government and your point will be entirely lost upon them.[/quote]

We do vote, but a no one can use the pulpit to tell people how to vote. You do this you loose your non-profit status. You can only talk about the issues but can not say how to vote. I have heard stories where liberals will send people into churches near election time to verify that the church is not doing this. It is like espionage.

85

[quote]dmaddox wrote:
Stronghold wrote:
thunderbolt23 wrote:
Sloth wrote:

The tax issue could be set aside. If we’re distracted by the tax issue, the much more fundamental problem will sneak up on us. If Churches are treated no differently from businesses, then their hiring, firing, and employee benefits fall under oversight. Meaning they’ll either bend to government will and jettison core beliefs to accomadate the new reality (imposed by force) of being equal opportunity employers and providers, or, they’ll have to lock their doors and start up underground churches.

And as a corrollary to this good point, the newly regulated churches now get their chance to influence the legislation that they must answer to - like any other industry, business, or institution - which means churches would now have PACs, lobbyists, and generally more political activity trying to influence the government and laws.

Regulation is a two-way street - the “regulated” get to try and influence the regulations that govern them per their democratic right. Secularists seem to be under the mistaken impression that regulation of churches is a one-way endeavor, where the government passes laws and dictates to churches how to behave and how much they pay in taxes with the churches simply sitting back and accepting it withoutt “pretitioning for a redress of grievances”.

Not so, and the precious “wall” between church and state would be shattered if churches were so regulated, because churches would become as politically active as Wall Street and unions.

Want to treat churches “like everybody else”? No problem, secularists - just be prepared that churches will now want their say in government just like “everyone else” as well and you will have no complaint when churches won’t play nice and stop trying to bend “the state” to its will.

Unfortunately, I think a lot of the secularists here will say that since religious people vote, the church already influences government and your point will be entirely lost upon them.

We do vote, but a no one can use the pulpit to tell people how to vote. You do this you loose your non-profit status. You can only talk about the issues but can not say how to vote. I have heard stories where liberals will send people into churches near election time to verify that the church is not doing this. It is like espionage.[/quote]

Can you point me to where the law says preachers can’t ask their congregations to vote one way or another? I’m fairly certain that this is entirely untrue and protected under the first amendment.

86

[quote]Stronghold wrote:
<<< Can you point me to where the law says preachers can’t ask their congregations to vote one way or another? I’m fairly certain that this is entirely untrue and protected under the first amendment.[/quote]

Even if true it’s very selectively enforced. I can think of a few professional racists who’ve made a career out of political campaigning of one kind or another.

87

[quote]doc_man_101 wrote:

Not sure that I would put too much weight on that survey, it was conducted by a church group and sponsored by a church run bank so it is hardly impartial it is also based solely on what people claim to donate.

So you don’t like its conclusions. Go do your own research then. There are tons of stats out there that say religious people give more. Maybe that’s cause and effect; maybe it’s the other way around. Anyhow, they’re using their right of free association to get together with whoever they choose, and give money to the causes they care about, under the control of people they apparently trust, on terms they’re happy with.

Sure, tax it like a business if you like. I’ll find stealthier ways to give away my money. LOL most of the tax system is set up to try to track down illicit income. It would be pretty funny to try to turn it around and try to tax unregistered giving instead.
[/quote]

There is also plenty of research out there that shows that secular countries donate more to charity than religious. It is not the conclusion of the study I took issue with but the methodology. The methodology is flawed so the conclusion is meaningless.

88

[quote]thunderbolt23 wrote:
Sloth wrote:

The tax issue could be set aside. If we’re distracted by the tax issue, the much more fundamental problem will sneak up on us. If Churches are treated no differently from businesses, then their hiring, firing, and employee benefits fall under oversight. Meaning they’ll either bend to government will and jettison core beliefs to accomadate the new reality (imposed by force) of being equal opportunity employers and providers, or, they’ll have to lock their doors and start up underground churches.

And as a corrollary to this good point, the newly regulated churches now get their chance to influence the legislation that they must answer to - like any other industry, business, or institution - which means churches would now have PACs, lobbyists, and generally more political activity trying to influence the government and laws.

Regulation is a two-way street - the “regulated” get to try and influence the regulations that govern them per their democratic right. Secularists seem to be under the mistaken impression that regulation of churches is a one-way endeavor, where the government passes laws and dictates to churches how to behave and how much they pay in taxes with the churches simply sitting back and accepting it withoutt “pretitioning for a redress of grievances”.

Not so, and the precious “wall” between church and state would be shattered if churches were so regulated, because churches would become as politically active as Wall Street and unions.

Want to treat churches “like everybody else”? No problem, secularists - just be prepared that churches will now want their say in government just like “everyone else” as well and you will have no complaint when churches won’t play nice and stop trying to bend “the state” to its will.[/quote]

The Church is already one of the most powerful lobbying groups in the US so not sure what your point is there.

89

[quote]Cockney Blue wrote:
There is also plenty of research out there that shows that secular countries donate more to charity than religious. It is not the conclusion of the study I took issue with but the methodology. The methodology is flawed so the conclusion is meaningless.[/quote]

And does this research breakdown by groups who is donating what in these secular countries?

90

[quote]Cockney Blue wrote:

The Church is already one of the most powerful lobbying groups in the US so not sure what your point is there.[/quote]

An absolute fabrication on your part. Do you even try and get close to the truth?

91

[quote]Cockney Blue wrote:

The Church is already one of the most powerful lobbying groups in the US so not sure what your point is there.[/quote]

You haven’t seen anything yet. Try turning on us (controlling) through the IRS, EEOC, and etc., and things will get very interesting.

92

[quote]thunderbolt23 wrote:
Cockney Blue wrote:

The Church is already one of the most powerful lobbying groups in the US so not sure what your point is there.

An absolute fabrication on your part. Do you even try and get close to the truth?
[/quote]

So you are trying to claim that the Church in the US is not a powerful lobbying group?

93

[quote]Sloth wrote:
Cockney Blue wrote:

The Church is already one of the most powerful lobbying groups in the US so not sure what your point is there.

You haven’t seen anything yet. Try turning on us (controlling) through the IRS, EEOC, and etc., and things will get very interesting.[/quote]

Your threats don’t scare me, I have the sword of truth and the shield of justice on my side :wink:

94

[quote]Cockney Blue wrote:

So you are trying to claim that the Church in the US is not a powerful lobbying group?[/quote]

Here is the database of lobbying information sorted by sectors, industries, players and dollar amounts. Have a blast fiding the “church lobby” as one of the “most poweful lobbying groups” in the US.

And, as we have already covered, if churches engage too much in political activities, they run the risk of losing tax-exempt status, so their lobbying is marginal.

Start regulating churches, and you will find their name on these lists.

95

[quote]Stronghold wrote:
dmaddox wrote:
Stronghold wrote:
thunderbolt23 wrote:
Sloth wrote:

The tax issue could be set aside. If we’re distracted by the tax issue, the much more fundamental problem will sneak up on us. If Churches are treated no differently from businesses, then their hiring, firing, and employee benefits fall under oversight. Meaning they’ll either bend to government will and jettison core beliefs to accomadate the new reality (imposed by force) of being equal opportunity employers and providers, or, they’ll have to lock their doors and start up underground churches.

And as a corrollary to this good point, the newly regulated churches now get their chance to influence the legislation that they must answer to - like any other industry, business, or institution - which means churches would now have PACs, lobbyists, and generally more political activity trying to influence the government and laws.

Regulation is a two-way street - the “regulated” get to try and influence the regulations that govern them per their democratic right. Secularists seem to be under the mistaken impression that regulation of churches is a one-way endeavor, where the government passes laws and dictates to churches how to behave and how much they pay in taxes with the churches simply sitting back and accepting it withoutt “pretitioning for a redress of grievances”.

Not so, and the precious “wall” between church and state would be shattered if churches were so regulated, because churches would become as politically active as Wall Street and unions.

Want to treat churches “like everybody else”? No problem, secularists - just be prepared that churches will now want their say in government just like “everyone else” as well and you will have no complaint when churches won’t play nice and stop trying to bend “the state” to its will.

Unfortunately, I think a lot of the secularists here will say that since religious people vote, the church already influences government and your point will be entirely lost upon them.

We do vote, but a no one can use the pulpit to tell people how to vote. You do this you loose your non-profit status. You can only talk about the issues but can not say how to vote. I have heard stories where liberals will send people into churches near election time to verify that the church is not doing this. It is like espionage.

Can you point me to where the law says preachers can’t ask their congregations to vote one way or another? I’m fairly certain that this is entirely untrue and protected under the first amendment.[/quote]

Here is a publication from the IRS website.

I wish these people could preach from the pulpit just like a Union has the ability to, but the government has limited us.

96

[quote]Cockney Blue wrote:
thunderbolt23 wrote:
Cockney Blue wrote:

The Church is already one of the most powerful lobbying groups in the US so not sure what your point is there.

An absolute fabrication on your part. Do you even try and get close to the truth?

So you are trying to claim that the Church in the US is not a powerful lobbying group?[/quote]

The Church is not a lobbying group, but we do have a large vote that has to be considered. Why do you think Obama during his campaign kept stating he was a Christian. Mitt Romney stated the same thing. Whether true or not you have to keep the Church in mind when you are running for political office.

97

[quote]thunderbolt23 wrote:
Cockney Blue wrote:

So you are trying to claim that the Church in the US is not a powerful lobbying group?

Here is the database of lobbying information sorted by sectors, industries, players and dollar amounts. Have a blast fiding the “church lobby” as one of the “most poweful lobbying groups” in the US.

And, as we have already covered, if churches engage too much in political activities, they run the risk of losing tax-exempt status, so their lobbying is marginal.

Start regulating churches, and you will find their name on these lists.

[/quote]

They are not specifically set up as a lobbying group but they are very powerful lobbyists. They are not allowed to specifcally advocate a candidate or party but are free to lobby on issues.

98

From page one of that document [quote]
Congress has enacted special tax laws applicable to churches, religious organizations, and ministers in recognition of their unique status in American society and of their rights guaranteed by the First Amendment of the Constitution of the United States. Churches and religious organizations are generally exempt from income tax and receive other favorable treatment under the tax law; however, certain income of a church or religious organization may be subject to tax, such as income from an unrelated business.
[/quote]

Can someone please justify why they should hold a unique status and why they should receive favourable treatment?

99

[quote]Cockney Blue wrote:

They are not specifically set up as a lobbying group but they are very powerful lobbyists. They are not allowed to specifcally advocate a candidate or party but are free to lobby on issues.[/quote]

Really? Fascinating. Point me to the source that confirms this rule of churches’ “lobbying” that says “no” to candidates but yes to “issues”. Looking forward to seeing it, thanks in advance.

Because I am sure you didn’t just make that up.

100

[quote]Cockney Blue wrote:

From page one of that document
Congress has enacted special tax laws applicable to churches, religious organizations, and ministers in recognition of their unique status in American society and of their rights guaranteed by the First Amendment of the Constitution of the United States. Churches and religious organizations are generally exempt from income tax and receive other favorable treatment under the tax law; however, certain income of a church or religious organization may be subject to tax, such as income from an unrelated business.

Can someone please justify why they should hold a unique status and why they should receive favourable treatment?[/quote]

Your quoted “page one” gives you the answer you seem to think doesn’t exist. It’s become painfully obvious you don’t have a clue as to what the First Amendment entails.