First Prev
of 3
Next Last

Since: Dec 11

Location hidden

#1 Oct 10, 2012
Well since it is my required turn for trolling (lol) I want to propose a set up to get more taxes into the coffers of Corinth MS.

Typically churches are not taxed. The prevailing thought is that they earn their tax exempt status by providing services that if not supplied by the church would have to be supplied by governmental departments. These governmental services would include the likes of healthcare, daycare, food, and housing. When was the last time you saw the tax exempt churches filling these needs? And if so was it some form of puny food pantry program? Oakland church has what must be a 4+ million tax exempt building as well as other tax exempt properties scattered around the city. Of that amount of assets, how much is given back to the community? I do remember them, Oakland, back in the spring planting a garden in the back of the church for people that needed food. Is this the best that they do for giving back to the community?

They and all of the tax exempt churches should have to keep detailed records of the moneys given back to the community in the services that they took up the slack for that was typically supplied by governmental services and only be tax exempt for that amount. The rest of their assets should be taxed just like everyone else. This would create a situation where churches could really help a community either by services rendered or taxes paid instead of the current situation where they tax exempt lobby group. A lobby group that has very deep pockets and lobbies only for themselves or their interests.
spitfire

United States

#2 Oct 10, 2012
Doubt1ng Th0mas wrote:
Well since it is my required turn for trolling (lol) I want to propose a set up to get more taxes into the coffers of Corinth MS.
Typically churches are not taxed. The prevailing thought is that they earn their tax exempt status by providing services that if not supplied by the church would have to be supplied by governmental departments. These governmental services would include the likes of healthcare, daycare, food, and housing. When was the last time you saw the tax exempt churches filling these needs? And if so was it some form of puny food pantry program? Oakland church has what must be a 4+ million tax exempt building as well as other tax exempt properties scattered around the city. Of that amount of assets, how much is given back to the community? I do remember them, Oakland, back in the spring planting a garden in the back of the church for people that needed food. Is this the best that they do for giving back to the community?
They and all of the tax exempt churches should have to keep detailed records of the moneys given back to the community in the services that they took up the slack for that was typically supplied by governmental services and only be tax exempt for that amount. The rest of their assets should be taxed just like everyone else. This would create a situation where churches could really help a community either by services rendered or taxes paid instead of the current situation where they tax exempt lobby group. A lobby group that has very deep pockets and lobbies only for themselves or their interests.
I say tax them 35 percent off the top
I Ron E.

Atmore, AL

#3 Oct 10, 2012
So, separation of church and state is bad?
POSs

United States

#4 Oct 10, 2012
All democrats should be taxed & only democrats. Keep your hands out of the rest of our pockets!
Hint

Dallas, TX

#5 Oct 10, 2012
[QUOTE who="I Ron E."]So, separation of church and state is bad?[/QUOTE]

They do not believe in seperation themselves, they violate the constitution and the laws that are in place to protect seperation of church and state, What is being proposed seems more fair then many churches have been with the public trust. Those that perform as supposed will do just fine.
Yep

United States

#6 Oct 10, 2012
Hint wrote:
<quoted text>
They do not believe in seperation themselves, they violate the constitution and the laws that are in place to protect seperation of church and state, What is being proposed seems more fair then many churches have been with the public trust. Those that perform as supposed will do just fine.
The separation was set up in order to prevent a state run religion.
Yep

United States

#7 Oct 10, 2012
Doubt1ng Th0mas wrote:
Well since it is my required turn for trolling (lol) I want to propose a set up to get more taxes into the coffers of Corinth MS.
Typically churches are not taxed. The prevailing thought is that they earn their tax exempt status by providing services that if not supplied by the church would have to be supplied by governmental departments. These governmental services would include the likes of healthcare, daycare, food, and housing. When was the last time you saw the tax exempt churches filling these needs? And if so was it some form of puny food pantry program? Oakland church has what must be a 4+ million tax exempt building as well as other tax exempt properties scattered around the city. Of that amount of assets, how much is given back to the community? I do remember them, Oakland, back in the spring planting a garden in the back of the church for people that needed food. Is this the best that they do for giving back to the community?
They and all of the tax exempt churches should have to keep detailed records of the moneys given back to the community in the services that they took up the slack for that was typically supplied by governmental services and only be tax exempt for that amount. The rest of their assets should be taxed just like everyone else. This would create a situation where churches could really help a community either by services rendered or taxes paid instead of the current situation where they tax exempt lobby group. A lobby group that has very deep pockets and lobbies only for themselves or their interests.
If you think that a church should be doing more than it is then get involved in one. Be an active member and voice your opinion don't get in here and cry

Since: Dec 11

Location hidden

#8 Oct 11, 2012
Yep wrote:
<quoted text>
If you think that a church should be doing more than it is then get involved in one. Be an active member and voice your opinion don't get in here and cry
AhÖ The usual ad hominem fallacy in a post on topix, how surprising. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem

I donít think that one man joining one church could make the difference an influx of money into local infrastructure that a church tax would provide. You have misinterpreted the motive that the tax would impose on churches. Gone would be the snow ball scenario of build a bigger church, get more people to come, get more money, build an bigger church, get more people to come, get more moneyÖ.. a totally self-serving, circular motive that serves no one but a few whereas taxing churches on everything except their charitable works (same way we are all taxed ) would entice churches to be more charitable.

Churches enjoy every bit of infrastructure that any other taxpayers enjoy; they just donít have to bring anything to the table. Example; does the churches have a fire department that responds to a church on fire or does the local taxpayer funded fire department respond to the church fire.

Can anyone give us an idea what churches like Oakland brings in through investments or tithes and what of that amount is used as charitable community based works? I have no reason to think anything other than it would be very lopsided with large amounts of money brought in and little money used charitably.
Make them keep detailed records of a monetary amount that has been given back to the community, donít tax them on that amount, and tax them on what is left. Then we would see exactly how effective churches that engage in Philanthropy are changing our community.
Hint

Dallas, TX

#9 Oct 11, 2012
Yep wrote:
<quoted text>
The separation was set up in order to prevent a state run religion.
Why is it illegal for them to be active in politics but they are anyway. Is it not a violation that they push their religion through a state sponsored captive audience like a school, but they do it anyway. They violate separation , they are the ones trying to set up a state sponsored religion not government, as such they should be taxed as proposed.
The other side

Shannon, MS

#10 Oct 11, 2012
Now Thomas, do you realy think taxing churches is going to solve the governments financial problems?
Do you really think planting a vegetable garden is all churches do for there community?
No, that's just some more of the silly rhetoric, that you spew.
Most people know better than to believe that the only thing a church does for the community is plant a garden.
I can say for a fact, there are churches in Corinth that fund drug treatment programs, provide activities for childeren that would otherwise be getting in trouble, provide shelter and food for those in need.
How many tax dollars are saved when drug addicts are transformed back into productive citizens?
This is just scratching the surface of what some churches do for our local community.
Go to the Gulf coast and ask the people that live there, who did you get the most and best help from? They will tell you, "from the churches"!
Churches provide more effective help for pople in need because they do not have the red tape to deal with. When church based groups know what needs to be done, they just do it.
I Ron E.

United States

#11 Oct 11, 2012
Hint wrote:
[QUOTE who="I Ron E."]So, separation of church and state is bad?"

They do not believe in seperation themselves, they violate the constitution and the laws that are in place to protect seperation of church and state, What is being proposed seems more fair then many churches have been with the public trust. Those that perform as supposed will do just fine.
how do they violate the constitution? What laws have they broken?
Hint

Millington, TN

#12 Oct 11, 2012
[QUOTE who="I Ron E."]<quoted text>how do they violate the constitution? What laws have they broken?
[/QUOTE]

Exemption Requirements - Section 501(c)(3) Organizations

To be tax-exempt under section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code, an organization must be organized and operated exclusively for exempt purposes set forth in section 501(c)(3), and none of its earnings may inure to any private shareholder or individual. In addition, it may not be an action organization, i.e., it may not attempt to influence legislation as a substantial part of its activities and it may not participate in any campaign activity for or against political candidates
Hint

Millington, TN

#13 Oct 11, 2012
[QUOTE who="I Ron E."]<quoted text>how do they violate the constitution? What laws have they broken?
[/QUOTE]
Churches are the ones who are the driving force for these prayers with the pastors, preachers, ministers doing the praying.

Should Prayer Be Allowed At Public School Events?

by Jenny Murphy
Wednesday, April 26, 2000

On June 20, 2000 the Supreme Court reaffiremed its long-held position that prayer does not belong in public school. In a 6-3 decision, the juctices ruled that a Texas school district could not permit students to lead spectators in prayer before sporting events. The case, Santa Fe School District v. Jane Doe, originated when two families, one Mormon and the other Catholic, sued a Texas school district for allowing students to broadcast Christian prayers over school-owned loudspeakers before football games. The U.S. 5th Circuit Court ruled in February 1999 that prayer before school-sponsored games violated the First Amendment prohibition against the establishment of a religion by the state. Last November, the U.S. House of Representatives passed a non-binding resolution supporting the students' right to pray before games. Texas Attorney General John Cornyn will argue the case on behalf of the Santa Fe school district, and Governor George W. Bush has filed a brief supporting the students' right to pray before games.

In the Santa Fe school district, the student body votes to select a student to address spectators before football games, and school administrators do not play a role in selecting the content of that student's prayer. However, the chosen student uses school-owned equipment to address the spectators.

On One Hand...

The prayer before a football game is a time-honored student tradition. Individual students, not school administrators, control the content of the prayer and these individuals' right to free speech would be violated if this practice is prohibited. Unlike classes and assemblies, attendance at school sporting events is not required; people who are offended by the pre-game prayer can choose not to attend.

On the Other Hand...

The fact that students vote on who delivers the prayer does not privatize the pre-game prayer. The school organizes the sporting event, so it is responsible for its content, just as it is responsible for the content of its classes and assemblies. Although attendance at football games is voluntary, such events are central to the fabric of school life, and non-Christian students should not feel that they have to stay away if they don't want to hear a prayer.

In 1993, the Supreme Court let stand a lower court ruling permitting student-led graduation prayers in Texas.

In 1996, it refused to revive a Mississippi law that would have allowed student-led prayer at assemblies, sporting events and in the classroom.

In 1998, the Supreme Court rejected an appeal to reinstate an Alabama law that would have allowed nonsectarian, non-proselytizing, student-led prayer at all school events.

In the 1990 case Westside Board of Education vs. Mergens, the Supreme Court ruled that public schools generally must allow student prayer groups to meet and worship if other student clubs are permitted at school.

In July, the U.S. 11th Circuit Court ruled that an Alabama school district could not ban student-initiated prayer at school activities, even when attendance is mandatory.

In the early 1960s the Supreme Court case Engel vs. Vital invalidated school prayer on the grounds that public school students are required by the state to attend school.

Since: Dec 11

Location hidden

#15 Oct 11, 2012
The other side wrote:
Now Thomas, do you realy think taxing churches is going to solve the governments financial problems?
Do you really think planting a vegetable garden is all churches do for there community?
No, that's just some more of the silly rhetoric, that you spew.
Most people know better than to believe that the only thing a church does for the community is plant a garden.
I can say for a fact, there are churches in Corinth that fund drug treatment programs, provide activities for childeren that would otherwise be getting in trouble, provide shelter and food for those in need.
How many tax dollars are saved when drug addicts are transformed back into productive citizens?
This is just scratching the surface of what some churches do for our local community.
Go to the Gulf coast and ask the people that live there, who did you get the most and best help from? They will tell you, "from the churches"!
Churches provide more effective help for pople in need because they do not have the red tape to deal with. When church based groups know what needs to be done, they just do it.
You are still missing the point. They will be tax exempt on all of the wonderful, appreciated programs that you have listed.

They will not be tax exempt of property taxes on those big useless buildings, assets and land.

They will pay the taxes that run the infrastructure, just like you and me, on any totals that have not been used on the programs you have bragged about.

Why is that so hard to understand?
The other side

Shannon, MS

#16 Oct 11, 2012
Doubt1ng Th0mas wrote:
<quoted text>
You are still missing the point. They will be tax exempt on all of the wonderful, appreciated programs that you have listed.
They will not be tax exempt of property taxes on those big useless buildings, assets and land.
They will pay the taxes that run the infrastructure, just like you and me, on any totals that have not been used on the programs you have bragged about.
Why is that so hard to understand?
When does stating simple facts become bragging?
Now, the reason tax exempt organizations don't pay taxes is because they are TAX EXEMPT which is unlike you and me.
Where do you think church members should meet? Tents?
Why should churches be treated different than any other tax exempt organization and be forced to pay taxes on the buildings they meet in?
Name one tax exempt organization that pays taxes on there building.
No problems understanding this.
tax

Corinth, MS

#17 Oct 12, 2012
you can't understand, the money that built the buildings, pays the bills etc. etc. that money has already been taxed to death. you want to pay double tax? why not make he city pay taxes on the taxes they get. hell make the state, feds and the oil cos. pay tax. the oil cos. make billions of $$$$ every month and the feds give them money, my tax money. make no one tax exempt.
flat tax everyone. if you make money pay tax no matter how many rug rats and ankle biters the walfare people have. make them pay tax on food stamps. tax tax tax

Since: Dec 11

Location hidden

#18 Oct 12, 2012
tax wrote:
you can't understand, the money that built the buildings, pays the bills etc. etc. that money has already been taxed to death. you want to pay double tax? why not make he city pay taxes on the taxes they get. hell make the state, feds and the oil cos. pay tax. the oil cos. make billions of $$$$ every month and the feds give them money, my tax money. make no one tax exempt.
flat tax everyone. if you make money pay tax no matter how many rug rats and ankle biters the walfare people have. make them pay tax on food stamps. tax tax tax
That reasoning doesn't release either you are me from my property taxes.

We enjoy the services (fire protection, roads and bridges, police etc.)that our property taxes provide. Why shouldn't church property not pay just like the rest.

I think we have a misunderstanding in that you all think I am proposing to tax church goers. I am just proposing that the church at least pay the property taxes that the rest of us do.
Yep

United States

#19 Oct 12, 2012
Doubt1ng Th0mas wrote:
<quoted text>
That reasoning doesn't release either you are me from my property taxes.
We enjoy the services (fire protection, roads and bridges, police etc.)that our property taxes provide. Why shouldn't church property not pay just like the rest.
I think we have a misunderstanding in that you all think I am proposing to tax church goers. I am just proposing that the church at least pay the property taxes that the rest of us do.
What about the rest of the non profits. Should they pay property taxes?

And the church is paying the property taxes. Each member there that owns property pays taxes. Under your reasoning people who rent should not be protected by police and fire. They don't pay property taxes.

Since: Dec 11

Location hidden

#20 Oct 12, 2012
Yep wrote:
<quoted text>
What about the rest of the non profits. Should they pay property taxes?
And the church is paying the property taxes. Each member there that owns property pays taxes. Under your reasoning people who rent should not be protected by police and fire. They don't pay property taxes.
Perhaps I am missing something.

You pay property taxes, I pay property taxes, the landlord that rents to the tenant pays taxes. They only entity that has property and assets that is not taxed is the church.

As an abstract thought, does anyone know if the Elks lodge pays property taxes? If they pay property taxes on their building how is it any different for them to pay taxes than the church?
cmon now

Abbeville, MS

#21 Oct 12, 2012
Churches do charity work. Sure 90% of it is spent on parking lots,flights to teach godless darkies in africa whom begat whom and bibles instead of the sinful prideful worldy things like rice and housing but its still charity right?
If the sarcasm wasn't picked up yes tax them. Also tax the donors more since they are so willing to part with more of their money.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 3
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Corinth Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
gays in army 14 min MB - king of the ... 28
our waste water is literally more productive th... 17 min MB - king of the ... 3
Smith vs Mitchell For ASD Supt 1 hr Bob C 23
Should whites date blacks or Mexican. 2 hr TheROX 35
who is the republician for sheriff 3 hr Bond, James Bond 3
Keep a word; drop a word (Mar '12) 3 hr Having Fun 999
todd gray (Sep '12) 4 hr Chick 19
Corinth Dating
Find my Match
More from around the web

Corinth People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]

NFL Latest News

Updated 4:39 pm PST

NFL 4:39PM
Steven Jackson released by Falcons after two seasons
Bleacher Report 4:43 PM
Steven Jackson Cut by Falcons: Latest Details, Comments and Reaction
ESPN 4:52 PM
Falcons part ways with veteran RB Jackson
Yahoo! Sports 5:26 PM
Atlanta Falcons cut RB Steven Jackson
Yahoo! Sports 5:36 PM
Falcons release veteran running back Steven Jackson