Oh, and you thought they actually practice what they preach

Yes, but when Jesus made those remarks of Mathew 22:21 no self respecting Jew of the time believed that Caesar deserved anything. It was a trick question.

What does that mean this "resistance against Islamization of Canada?"

@gracielufreebush It means that Quebec actively opposes the takeover of Canadian society by Sharia and the cruel, oppressive, imperialistic ideology of Islam. Most provinces are too politically correct to take such steps.

Once the non-believers make up more than 50% of the population, we can get a Constitutional amendment passed to ban all the tax exemptions of churches.

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Nothing there about avoiding your taxes, it basically says only that the government cannot MAKE LAWS that inhibit the free establishment and practice of religion.
The whole churches not paying taxes tradition mainly dates from tradition and agreements with the popes of the middle ages, or the kings of the reformation period who owned the damn churches anyway.

@LenHazell53 Tax law is, yep, law. The power to tax is also the power to inhibit or even to destroy.

I also want churches taxed like anything else but I see no way around the first amendment as it is written.

@dumasarok I don't think any reasonable judge would agree, there is a law exempting the church from taxation as a privilege, removing that privilege does not require the making of a new law to bring churches in to line with the universally existing law that all citizens and institutions must pay tax at the prescribed rate, it simply removes the exemption.
We had a case like this in the UK a few years ago when it was decided that the two Mormon temples in England should pay ground rates and property tax, since by the churches own rules they were not public buildings and so did not qualify for tax exemption.
The LDS church tried to fight it but lost on precisely the grounds I have stated, they were not having a new law made to persecute them, they were simply being held to the law as it stands for everyone, because they did not qualify for the exemption from taxation.

@dumasarok I don't see how taxing, especially at the same rate as all other businesses, prohibits the free exercise of a religion...

@JeffMurray I don't either.

despite that observation, any attempt by a local government to impose tax law on a church will result in a lawsuit. That lawsuit would work it's way through the legal process to the Supreme Court and they will have the power to interpret the wording of the first amendment.

What I think is a more likely result would be the appellate court ruling against the local government. The case then being appealed further and the SCOTUS declining to hear the case. Then the appellate court decision stands.

I don't like it but our opinions on this don't really matter. Maybe our Grandchildren will see this ultimately resolved.

@dumasarok Oh, of course not. I doubt even two generations from now they'd have a shot fixing this, especially if Republicans keep winning elections and packing courts.

The churches also lay a huge cost on the world due to their opposition to birth control. Overpopulation is the root of many of the world's worst issues. Canada is so far ahead of the US on this and healthcare. I would like to see them continue blazing a path and ban contributions sending money to vatican unless they drop their opposition to birth control

@Fartwink Thank you. I have pushed this issue many times.

@JackPedigo I used to go to factories that were having quality or process issues and investigate for root causes. We never stopped with the first answer. If we found a cause, we would dig until we found 5 layers of root problems that led to that "root" problem and some companies wanted us to look 8 layers deep. Just about every world problem is somehow rooted in religion or is indirectly related to religion. Even most monarchies claim to be given authority by god.

@Fartwink And yet so many still don't recognize that fact.

@JackPedigo It is the opposite, our problem is that most people think that religion is the ultimate solution to all problems

@Fartwink But luckily the number of people believing that is shrinking.

If they used the cash to support the needy as was the traditional roll, I would agree, but using it to build themselves large gymnasiums and other amenities closed to the public while supporting Republican political candidates, leaves them in the business catagory, not non profit

@wolf041

I have used church gyms. So nah. Plus, look at all of the things govts give to themselves. Chartered flights, large salaries, cars, boats, security details, and on and on and on. And thats on both sides, not just dems or repubs.

Also, at least people have the choice to give to churches or not. Government is force ans waste. Nothing you said contradicts that.

@SCal in the Bible belt, it hardly qualified as a choice in many places not going to a church means moving.

@wolf041 No debate there my friend. That's why we need to help them save money om their car insurance by switching to reason and evidence!

@maturin1919 without an audit trail, I have no confidence that they are actually reporting their true income.

MOst clery are not paid a salary they receive Stipends or Honorariums to cover living expenses which are considered donations to the church administered by the individual, or a corporation sole, they are allowed to live in church owned furnished property rent free, their utilities are are paid for by the churches and food is donated.
There is however nothing to stop a clergy man forming his or her own business and selling their products or services to the church and paying tax on any profits made, which most of them do as choir masters, consultants, events organisers etc.

@maturin1919 yes...they are supposed to pay income tax.....but who knows if they all file and pay taxes?????

@Redheadedgammy Canada seems to ALWAYS be ahead of the US.

@soulless I thought you were going to say, "Canada ALWAYS seems to be above the US."

@soulless There seems to be much smarter people in Canada. If it wasn’t so dang cold there in the winter, I would take up my cousins offer to sponsor me and move there!!

@Redheadedgammy I live 20 minutes from 5 different border crossings. I would be fine lol.

The answer is to remove power from govt. Not give govt more power to rob more people.

Businesses and churches seek power from govt because people allow govt to become all powerful.

The religious will simply filter into govt more than they already have.

@Larry-new often, but not always. If a church is legitimately helping people without requiring church BS they deserve a tax break IMO.

I'm okay if the pastor down the street gets a little help from the government for running a food bank. LOL, he's a judgy asshole and a homophobe but he doesn't even mandate people who get food listen to his drivel, which is why I'm volunteer with him.

Maybe, I'll eventually convert him to FSM

@educatedredneck Then they should open a separate business that is independent of the church, doesn't mix funds, applies for tax free status, and follows all the rules therein. A church doesn't need tax free status to do this.

@JeffMurray true, they don't need tax deferments. LOL, I'm one of the only ones on social I've seen who will acknowledge if they don't know much about a topic. I have no idea what it would take for churches to separate their genuine charities from the BS. I'm reluctant to make a firm opinion where I haven't researched the complexities of the issue.

Many churches, including the one that runs the food bank I volunteer at, have minimal education on business, laws... and still do good things.

Many atheists and some agnostics seem to want to annihilate religion in the public sector and use laws to disenfranchise churches. That's not what separation of church and state means, it's also not feasible. We're still radically outnumbered, if we encourage a major conflict with religious idiots in the USA we'll lose badly. We're slowly winning against the idiocy bc we've mostly pushed for fairness and secular government which isn't using laws to disenfranchise religion.

@educatedredneck That's where we differ. I don't think taxing them is disenfranchising them, and I don't think it matters what it would take to separate their charity. If they claim something as tax free, and an audit shows it shouldn't be based on the [new version of the] tax law, then they face the same penalties as any other company that cheats on their taxes.
Obviously we're not discussing what's going to happen, only what we believe ought to happen. Over 72% of the US is still religious, so I don't see anything like this happening here in my lifetime.

@JeffMurray I'm 100% on board with taxing churches. I don't want to disenfranchise their genuine charities.

@educatedredneck Non-religious charities do it all the time...