"Johnny" <wxpprofessional@msn.com> wrote in message
news:Goyzg.28509$ZH1.22924@bignews4.bellsouth.net...

"Denis Loubet" <dloubet@io.com> wrote in message
news:h7mdnR38YvHR5FPZnZ2dnUVZ_sadnZ2d@io.com...

"Johnny" <wxpprofessional@msn.com> wrote in message
news:hduzg.3159$l7.81@bignews5.bellsouth.net...

"Denis Loubet" <dloubet@io.com> wrote in message
news:S-idnVxc3umr2FPZnZ2dnUVZ_sqdnZ2d@io.com...

"Yang, AthD (h.c), Kicking AWOL's Cocaine Snorting *****"
<eacmole@/*AWOLBUSH*/mail.com> wrote in message
news:bv6sc2d2gr8jn41ffv97q53lj7kbsrj8jr@4ax.com...

Yep, another J Young Christian moral superiority

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-churches31jul31,1,2582684.story?coll=la-headlines-nation

Churches Putting Town Out of Business

Stafford, Texas, has 51 tax-exempt religious institutions and wants
no
more: `Somebody's got to pay for police, fire and schools.'

By Lianne Hart, Times Staff Writer
July 31, 2006


STAFFORD, Texas - They are not the words one expects to hear from a
politician or a Southerner, and Leonard Scarcella is both: "Our city
has an excessive number of churches."

Scarcella is mayor of this Houston-area community, which has 51
churches and other religious institutions packed into its 7 square
miles.

The town shares the blame for creating an exploitable situation.
The churches share the blame for exploiting it.

How does the right to free exercise of religion which shows that taxes
are unnecessary have any blame upon it?

Well, I don't think that churches can exempt themselves from police,
fire, and EMT services. Instead, they take advantage of those expensive
utilities and pay nothing in return.

I don't think they would if they needed them,

Huh? They DO need them, and they DON'T pay for them.

and their members more than likely pay taxes.

And in return their houses and persons receive the services.

And, speaking of taxes, do you think people shouldn't rely upon the
services they are paying to fund?

People should rely on them. But the church isn't paying for any,

and still relies on them.

That's unfair.

Sweet for them, in a parasitical sort of way, I suppose.

I can see your point there. Currently, Church workers who draw wages are
taxed.
If we were to eliminate property taxes then this unequal protection would
cease to exist.

Yes. But property taxes have not been eliminated.\

Major budget item, I know, but it isn't like it is impossible to
eliminate property taxes.

Granted. But that's not the current state of affairs.

Property taxation seems usurious to me.

How you feel about it isn't the issue.

I assume they use the eminent domain provision couples with the
'constitutional authority" to levy property taxes to fund these
'essential' services.

I suppose so.

I still do not like property taxes because, imo, they do not fulfill the
4th Amendment's provision to be safe and secure in our possesions and
effects against unreasonable search and seizure well enough.

And that may very well be a valid viewpoint.

--
Denis Loubet
dloubet@io.com
http://www.io.com/~dloubet

Well, I don't think that churches can exempt themselves from police,
fire, and EMT services. Instead, they take advantage of those expensive
utilities and pay nothing in return.

I don't think they would if they needed them,

Huh? They DO need them, and they DON'T pay for them.

and their members more than likely pay taxes.

And in return their houses and persons receive the services.

And, speaking of taxes, do you think people shouldn't rely upon the
services they are paying to fund?

"Johnny" <wxpprofessional@msn.com> writes:

"The Chief Instigator" <patrick@io.com> wrote in message
news:szky7u981m9.fsf@fnord.io.com...

"Johnny" <wxpprofessional@msn.com> writes:

"The Chief Instigator" <patrick@io.com> wrote in message
news:szkvepd8mk9.fsf@fnord.io.com...

"Johnny" <wxpprofessional@msn.com> writes:

"Yang, AthD (h.c), Kicking AWOL's Cocaine Snorting *****"
<eacmole@/*AWOLBUSH*/mail.com> wrote in message
news:bv6sc2d2gr8jn41ffv97q53lj7kbsrj8jr@4ax.com...

Yep, another J Young Christian moral superiority

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-churches31jul31,1,2582684.story?coll=la-headlines-nation

Churches Putting Town Out of Business

Stafford, Texas, has 51 tax-exempt religious institutions and wants
no
more: `Somebody's got to pay for police, fire and schools.'

Really? You think people need to pay for such?

That's how it's done, even in Anderson...why aren't you complaining to
your city council? (Not that it'll make any impression on you, but
I'm a
frequent traveler through Stafford, since it's between where we live
and
where my wife works, in Sugar Land...and the Times drones wrote their
article like they'd never set foot there.)

Well, in view of what was reported I am not sure if Stafford needs much
in
the way of Police or Fire Protection or Schools.

Your opinion might change a bit if you actually took the trouble to
visit
it. I've been watching it grow since I first moved here four decades
and
change ago.

Maybe the Churches there are running the taxing government out of
business.
Looks more like a job security issue to me.

You don't live there, so your opinion is irrelevant to those who do.

Opinion? *****. Anyone can see this is nothing more than some local tax
authority bitching against religious organizations. Seems to me the Mayor
of
Stafford doesn't want to free the people into their Constitutionally
protected right to govern themselves.

As usual, you go on another whine. You don't live there, therefore you
have
no say in what the city government does. That is a fact.

And, how about that Free Exercise of Religion right, now?
Scarcella has no legal power to do anything about it, actually.
The people of Stafford can vote him out and operate without a mayor if
they
need to save money to pay police, etc.

Really? Maybe you'd better look at the city charter before you assume
you;re
such an expert. (Maybe you should go there and preach your lunacy. The
voters would appreciate the laugh.)

Again, I am not sure, I would need to look into it further.
At least if the Churches grow enough the government is forced to
downsize.
Now, wouldn't it be a welcome relief to be taxed less?

Someone will have to pay for the money spent to build Stafford Centre,
though (which opened last year), and if the churches go on a
land-grabbing
spree, guess who gets to foot the bill? The businesses *and* the
homeowners. It's not rocket science to figure out what happens then.
In
this instance, it'll go much as a large chunk of the Fondren Southwest
development in Houston did from the late 1980s on...descending into
slums.

Maybe the Churches will buy Stafford Centre.

Maybe you'll someday be cured of your mental illness, too. I wouldn't bet
on
that, though - if the churches could buy it, that makes it obvious that
they're wrecking the city's ability to provide services for its citizens.

And, how many times do you need to be reminded that the government pays NO
PROPERTY TAX.

Idiot! The city can (and does) -collect- property taxes.

So, the burden that is placed on the people is there to fund a government
that isn't paying property taxes.

People live there because they're better off on taxes than they would be
in
other parts of the metro area, and their opinions make yours meaningless.

Governments send bills to people.
Churches don't.
Big difference.
Contributions to Churches are voluntary.
Contributions to governments are mandatory, even though you can 'donate'
to
government if you want to.

Churches also remove property from tax rolls.

(Duh.) In Stafford, it's
apparently getting to be a problem, from the amount of taxable land that's
being removed from consideration.

As far as the national defense goes that isn't funded via property
taxes,
so why would it be such a problem if some areas operated tax-free in
their
locales?

There's no problem in that, up to a point. When the churches start
taking
enough taxable land off the rolls to the point that the city has to
raise
taxes or cut necessary services, that's going to be a problem.
(Remember
Fondren Southwest, just mentioned? They seem to have a few churches of
recent vintage through that stretch of the southwest city...)

Valid points. Churches can teach children, many of them do already.
I guess the government of Stafford will have to do what they have to do,
and
if they go bankrupt then that is their problem, you know?
If the government of Stafford over burdens the people there via taxation
then they are sinking their own ship. Make sense?
It wouldn;t bother me if the government of Stafford went bellyup.
There is no reason for me to feel compassion on an entity that demands so
much from people.

I won't wait for you to actually drag your psychotic ***** here and see it
with
your own eyes, as you've already demonstrated your brains are too
scrambled to
understand what you read, let alone what you might see.

--
Patrick "The Chief Instigator" Humphrey (patrick@io.com) Houston, Texas
chiefinstigator.us.tt/aeros.php (TCI's 2006-07 Houston Aeros)
LAST GAME: Milwaukee 4, Houston 2 (May 9)
NEXT GAME: Saturday, October 7 vs. TBA, 7:35

"Ray Fischer" <rfischer@sonic.net> wrote in message
news:44ced635$0$34532$742ec2ed@news.sonic.net...

Johnny <wxpprofessional@msn.com> wrote:

"Denis Loubet" <dloubet@io.com> wrote in message

"Johnny" <wxpprofessional@msn.com> wrote in message

"Yang, AthD (h.c), Kicking AWOL's Cocaine Snorting *****"

Yep, another J Young Christian moral superiority
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-churches31jul31,1,2582684.story?coll=la-headlines-nation
Churches Putting Town Out of Business
Stafford, Texas, has 51 tax-exempt religious institutions and wants no
more: `Somebody's got to pay for police, fire and schools.'

Really?
You think people need to pay for such?

What else is gonna pay for them? Badgers perhaps?

Only reason I asked is because if society were operated well enough we
wouldn't need to pay for these services.
That is being quite an optimist, imo.

The word isn't "optimist". The word is "stupid".

You say that because you know you are a criminal, right?

Fires happen,

Because you are an arsonist?

children need educating,

What they are taught is more important than your gay and pro-choice agenda
public tax leech preaching.

and communities need policing.

Do you mean so you can have a personal gooney boy patrol enforcing your
personal opinions on the masses?

"Ray Fischer" <rfischer@sonic.net> wrote in message

Johnny <wxpprofessional@msn.com> wrote:

"Denis Loubet" <dloubet@io.com> wrote in message

"Johnny" <wxpprofessional@msn.com> wrote in message

"Yang, AthD (h.c), Kicking AWOL's Cocaine Snorting *****"

Yep, another J Young Christian moral superiority

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-churches31jul31,1,2582684.story?coll=la-headlines-nation

Churches Putting Town Out of Business

Stafford, Texas, has 51 tax-exempt religious institutions and wants no
more: `Somebody's got to pay for police, fire and schools.'

Really?
You think people need to pay for such?

What else is gonna pay for them? Badgers perhaps?

Only reason I asked is because if society were operated well enough we
wouldn't need to pay for these services.
That is being quite an optimist, imo.

The word isn't "optimist". The word is "stupid".

You say that because you know you are a criminal, right?

Fires happen,

Because you are an arsonist?

children need educating,

What they are taught is more important than your gay and pro-choice agenda
public tax leech preaching.