OT - Mormon Scum!

This has always been a bone of contention for me. If the leaders of a church want to actively campaign and influence their churchgoers to vote in a particular way on a referendum or for/against a political canidate because of a certain issue, then let them give up their tax free status. We all PAY for the right to participate in our system of democracy, yet religious groups and churches hide behind tax-exempt status and seek to influence the outcome of non-religious issues. Show me the money, and then they can have their say. Otherwise, stay out of it.

_________________________________________

Bingo (Oops, Catholic background coming to the fore here ;) !
When the Church recently laid out petitions for parishioners to sign against gay marriage, they were actively entering into politics. Why wasn't their tax-free status taken away?
 
BradyGirl said:
This has always been a bone of contention for me. If the leaders of a church want to actively campaign and influence their churchgoers to vote in a particular way on a referendum or for/against a political canidate because of a certain issue, then let them give up their tax free status. We all PAY for the right to participate in our system of democracy, yet religious groups and churches hide behind tax-exempt status and seek to influence the outcome of non-religious issues. Show me the money, and then they can have their say. Otherwise, stay out of it.

_________________________________________

Bingo (Oops, Catholic background coming to the fore here ;) !
When the Church recently laid out petitions for parishioners to sign against gay marriage, they were actively entering into politics. Why wasn't their tax-free status taken away?
I don't understand why a church (or other religious organization) wouldn't have the same free speech rights as any other entity. As for the tax status, I think a church should be treated just like any other non-profit organization. As I'm not a tax expert, I don't know what non-profit organizations pay for taxes, but I think that's how churches should be treated.

However, IMO they absolutely have the same rights to free speech as everyone else.
________
Geo/Chevrolet Tracker history
 
BradyGirl said:
Bingo (Oops, Catholic background coming to the fore here ;) !
When the Church recently laid out petitions for parishioners to sign against gay marriage, they were actively entering into politics. Why wasn't their tax-free status taken away?

Also, the Catholic higher-ups have been telling politicians that if they are deemed pro-choice, they will be denied communion.

I was going to ask this question myself, but then I thought that perhaps the RCC isn't tax-exempt anyway since they have so much $$.
 
Anybody find any irony in the fact that Utah was the 36th and deciding state in the ratification of the 21st amendment - the one that repealed prohibition in 1933? :spock:
 
Wandering Athol said:
Anybody find any irony in the fact that Utah was the 36th and deciding state in the ratification of the 21st amendment - the one that repealed prohibition in 1933? :spock:

Actually, that's one reason I was upset with the church over the gay rights thing in California. Usually, they've stayed out of the government.
 
So what are your feelings on Blood Atonement (I notice Utah finally banned new executions by firing squad in 2004)? :spock:

Actually, Mormomism has some pretty strong historical roots in pushing theocracy: see State of Deseret and the origins of the Utah War . (yes, like many of you, I was surprised to learn that the U.S. government in essence declared war on Utah). But, then again, that doesn't make them too much different from just about every other mainstream religion in that respect.
 
Those were rough times in the early days of the church. For one, at that time, trying to found a new religion was pretty much considered sacrelidge (ironic when these are the same people who fled England for religious freedom eh?) and usually treated pretty violently. Joseph Smith turned himself in to the authorities and was shot by a mob while in his cell.

At first, I believe the idea was to just found a territory or state and be happy, but things never really went right. Then you have the whole polygamy thing, which aggrevated the situation.
 
dchester said:
I don't understand why a church (or other religious organization) wouldn't have the same free speech rights as any other entity. As for the tax status, I think a church should be treated just like any other non-profit organization. As I'm not a tax expert, I don't know what non-profit organizations pay for taxes, but I think that's how churches should be treated.

However, IMO they absolutely have the same rights to free speech as everyone else.

In order for deductions to a tax-exempt organization to be tax deductable to the donor the organization may not attempt to influence public opinion on political matters.

This is why deductions to a PAC or political party are NOT deductable.
 
This story was on my morning Yahoo thing this morning:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060224/ap_on_go_ot/irs_politics

IRS Finds Charities Overstep Into Politics

By MARY DALRYMPLE, AP Tax Writer

WASHINGTON - IRS exams found nearly 3 out of 4 churches, charities and other civic groups suspected of having violated restraints on political activity in the 2004 election actually did so, the agency said Friday.

Most of the examinations that have concluded found only a single, isolated incidence of prohibited campaign activity.

In three cases, however, the IRS uncovered violations egregious enough to recommend revoking the groups' tax-exempt status.

"While the vast majority of charities, including churches, did not engage in politicking, our examinations substantiated a disturbing amount of political intervention in the 2004 electoral cycle," IRS Commissioner Mark Everson said in a statement.

The tax agency looked only at charities, churches and other tax-exempt organizations referred to the IRS for potentially violating laws that bar them from participating in or intervening in elections, including advocating for or against any candidate.

Those referred to the IRS represent a tiny fraction of more than 1 million tax-exempt organizations organized under section 501(c)(3) of the tax law.

The IRS examined 110 organizations referred to the tax agency for potentially violations, and 28 cases remain open.

Among the 82 closed cases, the IRS found prohibited politicking and sent a written warning to 55 organizations and assessed a penalty tax against one group. Those organizations included 37 churches and 19 other organizations.

In the three additional cases in which the IRS recommended revoking tax-exempt status, none of the organizations were churches. The agency did not identify the three.

The IRS found tax violations unrelated to politics in five cases. Examinations of the 18 remaining groups did not turn up any wrongdoing.

Among the prohibited activities, the examiners found that charities and churches had distributed printed material supporting a preferred candidate and assembled improper voter guides or candidate ratings.

Religious leaders had used the pulpit to endorse or oppose a particular candidate, and some groups had shown preferential treatment to candidates by letting them speak at functions.

Other charities and churches had made improper cash contributions to a candidate's political campaign.

The IRS said the cases covered "the full spectrum" of political viewpoints.

The tax agency set up a task force in 2004 to review allegations of improper political activity. The special procedures, revealed shortly before the election, drew criticism from some tax-exempt groups.

An audit by Treasury Department inspectors found nothing inappropriate in the examinations, but it faulted the IRS for creating the appearance of political motivations by waiting too long to announce the project and contact organizations.

The IRS said it plans to continue using the task force, and its speedier procedures, for this year's election and in the future. It also released detailed guidance to charities and churches about the prohibitions against political activities.
 
On an unrelated note, I found this story on ABC News about a new HBO series about a polygamist's family, and thought our resident members of the LDS might wish to comment.

I remember hearing about this months ago, but at that time they said it was going to be a movie, not a TV series.
 
Well, it is fictional. I think some of it will be funny. But at the same time I think it will also makes others think we are even crazier than before. Not everyone is going to catch the disclaimer. I would like if they put it in front of every show. I don't see this show converting anyone and I know it's hard to change people's minds that already hate us, so nig big whoop to me.

It can't be any worse then South Park.:p
 
Wow, Tom Hanks, Bill Paxton, Chloe Sovensomething or other, Jeanne Tripplehorn. Those are some pretty big names, and HBO has a pretty decent track record. I bet it'll be a hit.

Honestly, polygamists deserve to be made fun of. Besides the fact that it is just way wrong, the strain they put on the welfare system of their states and government is ridiculous. Their poor kids grow up without any social skills, and very under educated, (not to mention the inbreeding).

I'm sure there will be some terrible Mormon references, and ridicule. I'm also sure that the conservative base that is the "Mormon culture" will have all kinds of protest rally's and the like. And I'm pretty sure that the content will be so over the top, that we really shouldn't be that worried about it.

I've been defending my religion all my life. I doubt very much that this show will make it any harder. Actually, with it's premise, it can't help but be funny.

JMHO
 
It should be noted that the LDS church in no way, shape, or form any longer endorses or tolerates polygamy. Even the reorganized folks don't (and they're kinda weird folks). All four of my wives are adamantly opposed to it.
 
TommyD420 said:
Happy Ash Wednesday everyone!



:pat:

I'm trying to get my wife to give up not having sex multiple times daily for lent, but she's not going for it.
 
mikiemo83 said:
I gave up giving things up - first time in years I make it through lent without screwing up
Fortunately, as a Baptist I don't have to partake in these pagan rituals.
________
iolite vaporizer
 
TommyD420 said:
Been Smudged already (7AM...did the 1/2 hour express special...)


:pat:

What does smudged mean?

And what about this thread... is it going to be moved to the classics section, or what? Would be a shame to lose it...
 
Back
Top