It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Pastors try to pick a tax fight with IRS

page: 2
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 1 2011 @ 06:07 PM
link   
reply to post by DerbyCityLights
 


Oh, whoa. I think I see now. You're under the impression that there is a law that says that religious organizations are bound to not speak about politics? Yikes! No, that's not the case. The founding fathers limited government freedoms not private/personal freedoms.

Conversely, the government plays out it's current tax scheme by granting allowances for not paying forced taxes (their claims that it is a voluntary system is plainly a lie). But again, taxing the citizens is a right given to the government by the citizens for the facilitation of appropriate services (and taxes as a concept are not inherently bad, if you have any sort of sense of civility).

More recent tax laws are, obviously, contrary to the rights of the people, and that is why there are people not paying their taxes, but the bottom line is that the government has taken up taxes as an inherent right and will jail/penalize you if you don't pay. That's called a racket. To say otherwise is to misunderstand that "we the people" do have the duty, but also the right to warrant what taxes the government can issue. The current perversion of law is the traditional conduct of "empire."

And while societal spiritual/intellectual understanding is still in it's growth process, I tend to advocate paying off those running the racket, because they WILL penalize you. Whether by education of the people or self-destruction, a corrupt tax system will fall (even if replaced by a different scheme), AND taxes must be apportioned for the social good. It's balance/good judgment which eludes our species, not the general grasping of the related ideas.
edit on 10/1/2011 by Dasher because: (no reason given)




posted on Oct, 1 2011 @ 06:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by alonzo730
If the pastors want to preach politics then they can pay taxes too. Think of the tax revenues that could be generated from all those confounded mega-churches.


GREAT IDEA!!!!!!!

If there is anyone whom should be paying taxes it should be the churches. Those filthy no-good pastors and preachers are raking in mountains of cash foolishly given by the deluded church fools whom think that doing so will get them their free pass to some unearthly paradice or heaven in the afterlife. They wont admit it, but they KNOW deep down inside that they are only doing it for their 'reward' in the next life.


TAX THOSE CHURCHES NOW!!!!! MOUNTAINS OF REVENUE THERE!!!!!!



posted on Oct, 1 2011 @ 06:21 PM
link   
reply to post by HangTheTraitors
 


The issue here is not the verity of their teachings, but rather, their freedoms.
And as a directly related issue, whether the government has the inherent right to tax or is that a right that citizens give to the government in order to move society forward in different ways.

Obviously the founding of American government was premised on limited government, but we exist in a perverted form of America where governing is facilitated in an imperial manner and is very much settling into a kingship in which the people darn near beg the gov for basic freedoms.

The odd part is, while their destruction of education remains successful, a less limited government is warranted. However, we certainly have the right and ability to educate ourselves and conduct ourselves according to our own judgments (which should certainly include economically sustaining limited and local governing bodies along with possible "higher" organizations which are even more limited, but still empowered for the sake of facilitating certain and appropriate needs.).



posted on Oct, 2 2011 @ 12:41 PM
link   
reply to post by Jean Paul Zodeaux
 


Have you read the letter? He is trying to explain that the Government has no authority over the Church and the Church has no authority over Government. The Church can not use its influence on its members to try and influence the government. It's actually one of my favorite reads in regards to the Constitution.

Dasher, the point I am trying to make is, you can not have religion and politics mixed together. Not only is it a Constitutional violation but when you mix them, it usually ends up like mixing oil and water. Priest can not and should not try and sway a vote.



posted on Oct, 2 2011 @ 12:44 PM
link   
I always thought religious groups get a tax exemption or something, unless Canada's revenue agency is difference vs the IRS.



posted on Oct, 2 2011 @ 05:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by DerbyCityLights
reply to post by Jean Paul Zodeaux
 


Have you read the letter? He is trying to explain that the Government has no authority over the Church and the Church has no authority over Government. The Church can not use its influence on its members to try and influence the government. It's actually one of my favorite reads in regards to the Constitution.

Dasher, the point I am trying to make is, you can not have religion and politics mixed together. Not only is it a Constitutional violation but when you mix them, it usually ends up like mixing oil and water. Priest can not and should not try and sway a vote.


Whether you have read the letter or not, your understanding of what that letter says is erroneous at best. It matters not how much praise you heap upon this letter, it will not make your assertions that Jefferson, in this letter, is "explaining" that a church cannot use its influence on its members to try and influence the government. This assertion is not in anyway reflected in the letter to the Danbury Baptist. To be clear:


To messers. Nehemiah Dodge, Ephraim Robbins, & Stephen S. Nelson, a committee of the Danbury Baptist association in the state of Connecticut.

Gentlemen

The affectionate sentiments of esteem and approbation which you are so good as to express towards me, on behalf of the Danbury Baptist association, give me the highest satisfaction. my duties dictate a faithful and zealous pursuit of the interests of my constituents, & in proportion as they are persuaded of my fidelity to those duties, the discharge of them becomes more and more pleasing.

Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between Man & his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legitimate powers of government reach actions only, & not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should "make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof," thus building a wall of separation between Church & State. Adhering to this expression of the supreme will of the nation in behalf of the rights of conscience, I shall see with sincere satisfaction the progress of those sentiments which tend to restore to man all his natural rights, convinced he has no natural right in opposition to his social duties.

I reciprocate your kind prayers for the protection & blessing of the common father and creator of man, and tender you for yourselves & your religious association, assurances of my high respect & esteem.

Th Jefferson Jan. 1. 1802.


No where in this letter does Jefferson argue that churches do not have the lawful authority to use their sermon pulpits to influence their laity in regards to political elections. This is not what this letter is in response to, as I had all ready stated earlier. Jefferson is responding to the Danbury Baptists concerns that the State of Connecticut was threatening to become a state that establishes a religion. He does not address their concerns over the Connecticut legislature and keeps his response limited to the federal governments response and policy, which was to not do anything that could be construed as establishment of religion themselves. At no point does Jefferson, suggest or imply that churches have no right to preach political ideas, or endorse political candidates.

Jefferson would never have done such a thing, because Jefferson did not need the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment explained to them. The federal government has no lawful, nor any legal authority to regulate churches policies or political ideology. The only thing that has made it legal for the IRS to do so is that the churches and religious establishments have foolishly applied for a "tax exempt" status with the IRS, and in doing so have made a contract to abide by the rules and regulations of that administrative agency.

It has been foolish for churches and religious establishments to apply for a "tax exempt" status, because it is highly questionable that churches are liable for any so called "Personal Income Tax" to begin with. One who is not liable for a tax to begin with needs no exemption from that tax.

It is the law of contracts, and religions empty headed willingness to make this contract, that has given the federal government the lawful authority to regulate churches, not the First Amendment, (which gives no authority to the federal government), and certainly not a letter written by then President Thomas Jefferson to a group of cult Baptists in Connecticut.



posted on Oct, 2 2011 @ 05:37 PM
link   
reply to post by DerbyCityLights
 


JPZ does a great job of responding, so I will refrain for the moment.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join