Taxing religion.

[9-10ths_Penguin]

I don't know. Is the Anglican Church taxed in Britain? Are bodies that are not part of the State Church?

I'm not sure of the exact details, but does it matter? I asked your opinion of how things should be, not how they are (apart from the particular details I mentioned).

 

[sojourner]

I'm not sure of the exact details, but does it matter? I asked your opinion of how things should be, not how they are (apart from the particular details I mentioned).

It differs from country to country, Penguin. It's a legal issue, not a theological issue. It should be as I've already asserted in the US. I don't know how it "should" be in Britain. They don't operate off the same Constitution as we do.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

It differs from country to country, Penguin. It's a legal issue, not a theological issue.

Is it? You've gone off before about how treating religious organizations like similar secular institutions ignores the "special nature of the church".

It should be as I've already asserted in the US. I don't know how it "should" be in Britain. They don't operate off the same Constitution as we do.

I don't operate off your constitution either. The Canadian constitution doesn't say anything about church-state separation; it only establishes the right of the individual to freedom of belief and conscience, and the right of equality of religion. Taxing religious organizations would be constitutional in Canada as long as the taxation was done equitably to all religions.

But to get back to the point I was driving at: earlier (and in other threads), you've put forward an argument that church-state separation is a sort of bargain: that (and I'm paraphrasing here, obviously) the price of having everyone else shoulder the tax burden for religious organizations buys us non-interference in government by those religious organizations... a sort of Danegeld for churches.

In the case of the UK, religion is not meeting one side of that bargain. What I want to know from you is whether you think that this implies the government isn't required to hold up the other side.

 

[InformedIgnorance]

A religious institution is not a charity. Charities should be tax exempt, doesn't matter if they are religiously affiliated or not - however a faith based initiative is not necessarily a charity and if the focus of their operations is not to d charitable work or to do so contingent upon demonstration of religious association or practice (such as requiring the clients to attempt a mass before giving them food) then no.

 

[satori8]

No way. Tax the church, and that does away with separation of church and state.

leave the constitution alone.

 

[Sha'irullah]

If religion was taxed all economic problems would end right away. Look at the Catholic church.....

This is an utter shame. I for one believe religions should be taxed to some degree because they have not benefited society significantly to begin with.

 

[InformedIgnorance]

No way. Tax the church, and that does away with separation of church and state.

leave the constitution alone.

If you DONT tax the church then you are not respecting that distinction because you are giving it special privileges.

 

[yoda89]

To begin with many religious institutions worship a higher being that is all powerful. Therefore the concept of these all powerful beings running out of money really tends to shine light on the extents of these powers. I would debate that many of these exceptions were in place long ago to prevent church merging with the government. The power and pull of the church was much higher. Many of our founding fathers were against religion such as Thomas Jefferson. However, many of these founders were fundamentalists. Quite frankly it couldn't have passed without these political figures that were religious and thus it became part of the compromise. Therefore, it should be at least redesigned.

If you tax the church, then they are part of the Government, if they're part of the Government then they can pass laws, do you really want the churches passing laws? I don't think so.

Representation among the government are elected or mainly and unfortunately bought. Non-taxation of institutions that sell invisible intangible products leaves a lot of space of lowered costs. These organizations are still selling a commodity and produce revenue. Thus should be taxed to a certain extent if they are profitable.