| Topic: |
Sociology > Education |
| User: |
"" |
| Date: |
24 Nov 2005 05:34:32 AM |
| Object: |
Inside the First Amendment |
Inside the First Amendment
http://www.northcountrygazette.org/articles/112205HaynesOnIRS.html
North Country Gazette - Chestertown,NY,USA
.... Americans United for Separation of Church and State warns on its Web
site that the Jones bill would circumvent campaign laws by using
tax-deductible ...
**************************************************************
Posting and reading from alt.politics.usa.constitution OR alt.education
You are invited to check out the following:
The Rise of the Theocratic States of America
http://members.tripod.com/~candst/theocracy.htm
American Theocrats - Past and Present
http://members.tripod.com/~candst/theocrats.htm
The Constitutional Principle: Separation of Church and State
http://members.tripod.com/~candst/index.html
[and to join the discussion group for the above site and/or Separation of
Church and State in general, listed below]
HRSepCnS · Hampton Roads [Virginia] SepChurch&State
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HRSepCnS/
[Its not just Hampton Roads folks who are members, there are members from
all over the U.S. and a couple from overseas as well]
***************************************************************
.. . . You can't understand a phrase such as "Congress shall make no law
respecting an establishment of religion" by syllogistic reasoning. Words
take their meaning from social as well as textual contexts, which is why "a
page of history is worth a volume of logic." New York Trust Co. v. Eisner,
256 U.S. 345, 349, 41 S.Ct. 506, 507, 65 L.Ed. 963 (1921) (Holmes, J.).
Sherman v. Community Consol. Dist. 21, 980 F.2d 437, 445 (7th Cir. 1992)
.. . .
****************************************************************
THE CONSTITUTIONAL PRINCIPLE:
SEPARATION OF CHURCH AND STATE
http://members.tripod.com/~candst/index.html
****************************************************************
.
|
|
| User: "Ron Young" |
|
| Title: Re: Inside the First Amendment |
26 Nov 2005 07:13:01 AM |
|
|
<buckeye-ELO@nospam.net> wrote in message
news:4a9bo1t3jfiv57infsl4ggmhtcn6hfeh0r@4ax.com...
Inside the First Amendment
http://www.northcountrygazette.org/articles/112205HaynesOnIRS.html
North Country Gazette - Chestertown,NY,USA
... Americans United for Separation of Church and State warns on its Web
site that the Jones bill would circumvent campaign laws by using
tax-deductible ...
Never imagined I would ever side with the IRS but in this case they need to
revoke that churches tax exempt status. The laws are very clear and both
consevative and liberal churches agreed to them when they applied.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Mark Stahl" |
|
| Title: Re: Inside the First Amendment |
27 Nov 2005 10:13:40 AM |
|
|
"Ron Young" <byoung@teleclipse.net> wrote in message
news:ebZhf.453$eP.3110@eagle.america.net...
<buckeye-ELO@nospam.net> wrote in message
news:4a9bo1t3jfiv57infsl4ggmhtcn6hfeh0r@4ax.com...
Inside the First Amendment
http://www.northcountrygazette.org/articles/112205HaynesOnIRS.html
North Country Gazette - Chestertown,NY,USA
... Americans United for Separation of Church and State warns on its Web
site that the Jones bill would circumvent campaign laws by using
tax-deductible ...
Never imagined I would ever side with the IRS but in this case they need
to revoke that churches tax exempt status. The laws are very clear and
both consevative and liberal churches agreed to them when they applied.
Why not simply revoke the tax-exempt status of all churches? What is the
rationale for keeping it in the first place?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Martin Holterman" |
|
| Title: Re: Inside the First Amendment |
27 Nov 2005 02:07:31 PM |
|
|
Mark Stahl wrote:
"Ron Young" <byoung@teleclipse.net> wrote in message
news:ebZhf.453$eP.3110@eagle.america.net...
<buckeye-ELO@nospam.net> wrote in message
news:4a9bo1t3jfiv57infsl4ggmhtcn6hfeh0r@4ax.com...
Inside the First Amendment
http://www.northcountrygazette.org/articles/112205HaynesOnIRS.html
North Country Gazette - Chestertown,NY,USA
... Americans United for Separation of Church and State warns on its Web
site that the Jones bill would circumvent campaign laws by using
tax-deductible ...
Never imagined I would ever side with the IRS but in this case they need
to revoke that churches tax exempt status. The laws are very clear and
both consevative and liberal churches agreed to them when they applied.
Why not simply revoke the tax-exempt status of all churches? What is the
rationale for keeping it in the first place?
Well, they're a kind of charity. As such, they get our support. But I've
been wondering, isn't the idea of a not-for-profit that they don't make
any profit? So, making churches pay income tax shouldn't really matter,
should it? Or do they have big savings that they would have to pay
capital gains tax on?
Martin Holterman
.
|
|
|
| User: "Mark Stahl" |
|
| Title: Re: Inside the First Amendment |
27 Nov 2005 02:34:18 PM |
|
|
"Martin Holterman" <martin.holterman@wxs.nl> wrote in message
news:438a1203$0$2338$ba620dc5@text.nova.planet.nl...
Mark Stahl wrote:
"Ron Young" <byoung@teleclipse.net> wrote in message
news:ebZhf.453$eP.3110@eagle.america.net...
<buckeye-ELO@nospam.net> wrote in message
news:4a9bo1t3jfiv57infsl4ggmhtcn6hfeh0r@4ax.com...
Inside the First Amendment
http://www.northcountrygazette.org/articles/112205HaynesOnIRS.html
North Country Gazette - Chestertown,NY,USA
... Americans United for Separation of Church and State warns on its Web
site that the Jones bill would circumvent campaign laws by using
tax-deductible ...
Never imagined I would ever side with the IRS but in this case they need
to revoke that churches tax exempt status. The laws are very clear and
both consevative and liberal churches agreed to them when they applied.
Why not simply revoke the tax-exempt status of all churches? What is the
rationale for keeping it in the first place?
Well, they're a kind of charity. As such, they get our support.
Most churches' charitible activities are minimal, especially compared with
all the other commerce they engage in. Why should the whole operation get a
break for a minor subsidiary activity?
But I've been wondering, isn't the idea of a not-for-profit that they
don't make any profit? So, making churches pay income tax shouldn't really
matter, should it? Or do they have big savings that they would have to pay
capital gains tax on?
They have absolutely massive holdings in real estate, for example. They
don't pay property taxes, which I'd imagine if they did would do more good
for their communities than all their charity combined.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Gray Shockley" |
|
| Title: Re: Inside the First Amendment |
27 Nov 2005 03:35:58 PM |
|
|
On Sun, 27 Nov 2005 14:07:31 -0600, Martin Holterman wrote:
Mark Stahl wrote:
"Ron Young" <byoung@teleclipse.net> wrote in message
news:ebZhf.453$eP.3110@eagle.america.net...
<buckeye-ELO@nospam.net> wrote in message
news:4a9bo1t3jfiv57infsl4ggmhtcn6hfeh0r@4ax.com...
Inside the First Amendment
http://www.northcountrygazette.org/articles/112205HaynesOnIRS.html
North Country Gazette - Chestertown,NY,USA
... Americans United for Separation of Church and State warns on its Web
site that the Jones bill would circumvent campaign laws by using
tax-deductible ...
Never imagined I would ever side with the IRS but in this case they need
to revoke that churches tax exempt status. The laws are very clear and
both consevative and liberal churches agreed to them when they applied.
Why not simply revoke the tax-exempt status of all churches? What is the
rationale for keeping it in the first place?
Well, they're a kind of charity. As such, they get our support. But I've
been wondering, isn't the idea of a not-for-profit that they don't make
any profit?
That totally depends on your definition
of what "non-profit" means.
So, making churches pay income tax shouldn't really matter,
should it?
I'm not making a profit. Are you?
Do you have more or owe more?
Or do they have big savings that they would have to pay
capital gains tax on?
This is sheer guesswork but I imagine that, in the United States
alone, the Christian Business' property (of all types) would be
measured in the trillions (USA-10 to the 12th trillions).
What are they doing and when did they start doing it?!
Gray Shockley
--------------------------
Vice President Cheney was in a
secret hiding place and could
not be reached for comment.
Martin Holterman
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Gray Shockley" |
|
| Title: Re: Inside the First Amendment |
24 Nov 2005 10:02:25 PM |
|
|
On Thu, 24 Nov 2005 05:34:32 -0600, wrote:
Inside the First Amendment
http://www.northcountrygazette.org/articles/112205HaynesOnIRS.html
North Country Gazette - Chestertown,NY,USA
... Americans United for Separation of Church and State warns on its Web
site that the Jones bill would circumvent campaign laws by using
tax-deductible ...
Well, of course!
"Liberals" should be subjected to the same business laws as
"conservatives".
It shouldn't make one iota of difference whether the business is
"conservative" or "liberal".
Down the street from me there is a furniture dealer and a church.
Both of these businesses entice people - through advertising and
other propaganda - to enter their businesses and make a
contribution.
The main diff is that the furniture store gives you something in
return for your money.
Gray
**************************************************************
Posting and reading from alt.politics.usa.constitution OR alt.education
You are invited to check out the following:
The Rise of the Theocratic States of America
http://members.tripod.com/~candst/theocracy.htm
American Theocrats - Past and Present
http://members.tripod.com/~candst/theocrats.htm
The Constitutional Principle: Separation of Church and State
http://members.tripod.com/~candst/index.html
[and to join the discussion group for the above site and/or Separation of
Church and State in general, listed below]
HRSepCnS · Hampton Roads [Virginia] SepChurch&State
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HRSepCnS/
[Its not just Hampton Roads folks who are members, there are members from
all over the U.S. and a couple from overseas as well]
***************************************************************
. . . You can't understand a phrase such as "Congress shall make no law
respecting an establishment of religion" by syllogistic reasoning. Words
take their meaning from social as well as textual contexts, which is why "a
page of history is worth a volume of logic." New York Trust Co. v. Eisner,
256 U.S. 345, 349, 41 S.Ct. 506, 507, 65 L.Ed. 963 (1921) (Holmes, J.).
Sherman v. Community Consol. Dist. 21, 980 F.2d 437, 445 (7th Cir. 1992)
. . .
****************************************************************
THE CONSTITUTIONAL PRINCIPLE:
SEPARATION OF CHURCH AND STATE
http://members.tripod.com/~candst/index.html
****************************************************************
.
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
