- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
#TaxTheChurches is trending on Twitter
Posted on 7/19/21 at 11:55 am
Posted on 7/19/21 at 11:55 am
Reading through the posts just makes me shake my head at how ignorant so many people are about the finances of a typical church.
News flash: Joel Osteen is not “typical”.
News flash: Joel Osteen is not “typical”.
33
Posted on 7/19/21 at 11:58 am to Ag Zwin
Yea even small Catholic churches struggle to keep the lights on and often times have to borrow from the Diocese to do so.
Posted on 7/19/21 at 11:59 am to Ag Zwin
Will this include the Church of Climate Change and the Branch Covidians?
Posted on 7/19/21 at 11:59 am to Ag Zwin
quote:
News flash: Joel Osteen is not “typical”.
Neither are most AME churches...
Posted on 7/19/21 at 12:04 pm to Ag Zwin
Over 50% of the churches average less than 100 in their service each week. These churches are not rolling in money.
This post was edited on 7/19/21 at 12:08 pm
Posted on 7/19/21 at 12:04 pm to Ag Zwin
A bunch of people who hate God want churches to be taxed? Color me surprised. 
But yeah, those who think Joel Osteen is even a Christian much less a representative of the typical pastor are woefully misled.
But yeah, those who think Joel Osteen is even a Christian much less a representative of the typical pastor are woefully misled.
Posted on 7/19/21 at 12:04 pm to Ag Zwin
Why tax the churches?
Posted on 7/19/21 at 12:05 pm to Ag Zwin
Saw a meme saying churches should shelter the homeless at night, the level of ignorance is real, envious people always think they know how to spend others capital, yet they’re broke arse bitches themselves. The money has obviously already been taxed and is normally a group of people trying to pool all ready taxed money in an effort to help others, but the anti Christian libs just can’t deal with leaving it alone.
This post was edited on 7/19/21 at 12:06 pm
Posted on 7/19/21 at 12:05 pm to Ag Zwin
Devils gonna do what Devils gonna do.
They want to tax Churches but not stop money piling in to kill babies.
They want to tax Churches but not stop money piling in to kill babies.
Posted on 7/19/21 at 12:06 pm to Ag Zwin
The church and private charity are an obstacle to government charity (wealth re-distribution).
Posted on 7/19/21 at 12:09 pm to Jack Carter
quote:
Why tax the churches?
Is the push to tax the property?
Any employees pay income tax. There is no profit to tax because churches are non profit. So it has to be property tax.
Posted on 7/19/21 at 12:11 pm to Ag Zwin
quote:
News flash: Joel Osteen is not “typical”.
For real. Every church I know operates in the red.
Maybe start taxing all not for profits, too. Planned Parenthood comes to mind.
Posted on 7/19/21 at 12:11 pm to Ag Zwin
McCulloch v. Maryland (1819)
In the landmark Supreme Court case McCulloch v. Maryland, Chief Justice John Marshall handed down one of his most important decisions regarding the expansion of Federal power. This case involved the power of Congress to charter a bank, which sparked the even broader issue of the division of powers between state and the Federal Government.
In 1816 Congress established the Second National Bank to help control the amount of unregulated currency issued by state banks. Many states questioned the constitutionality of the national bank, and Maryland set a precedent by requiring taxes on all banks not chartered by the state. In 1818 the State of Maryland approved legislation to impose taxes on the Second National Bank chartered by Congress.
James W. McCulloch, a Federal cashier at the Baltimore branch of the U.S. bank, refused to pay the taxes imposed by the state. Maryland filed a suit against McCulloch in an effort to collect the taxes. The Supreme Court, however, decided that the chartering of a bank was an implied power of the Constitution, under the “elastic clause,” which granted Congress the authority to “make all laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into execution” the work of the Federal Government.
This case presented a major issue that challenged the Constitution: Does the Federal Government hold sovereign power over states? The proceedings posed two questions: Does the Constitution give Congress power to create a bank? And could individual states ban or tax the bank? The court decided that the Federal Government had the right and power to set up a Federal bank and that states did not have the power to tax the Federal Government. Marshall ruled in favor of the Federal Government and concluded, “the power to tax involves the power to destroy."
In the landmark Supreme Court case McCulloch v. Maryland, Chief Justice John Marshall handed down one of his most important decisions regarding the expansion of Federal power. This case involved the power of Congress to charter a bank, which sparked the even broader issue of the division of powers between state and the Federal Government.
In 1816 Congress established the Second National Bank to help control the amount of unregulated currency issued by state banks. Many states questioned the constitutionality of the national bank, and Maryland set a precedent by requiring taxes on all banks not chartered by the state. In 1818 the State of Maryland approved legislation to impose taxes on the Second National Bank chartered by Congress.
James W. McCulloch, a Federal cashier at the Baltimore branch of the U.S. bank, refused to pay the taxes imposed by the state. Maryland filed a suit against McCulloch in an effort to collect the taxes. The Supreme Court, however, decided that the chartering of a bank was an implied power of the Constitution, under the “elastic clause,” which granted Congress the authority to “make all laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into execution” the work of the Federal Government.
This case presented a major issue that challenged the Constitution: Does the Federal Government hold sovereign power over states? The proceedings posed two questions: Does the Constitution give Congress power to create a bank? And could individual states ban or tax the bank? The court decided that the Federal Government had the right and power to set up a Federal bank and that states did not have the power to tax the Federal Government. Marshall ruled in favor of the Federal Government and concluded, “the power to tax involves the power to destroy."
Posted on 7/19/21 at 12:12 pm to Ag Zwin
Good, they are a damn business.
Posted on 7/19/21 at 12:12 pm to Ag Zwin
quote:
News flash: Joel Osteen is not “typical”.
Scientology thinks JO is rookie
Posted on 7/19/21 at 12:14 pm to LSU Coyote
quote:Mine isn't.
Good, they are a damn business.
Posted on 7/19/21 at 12:16 pm to LSU Coyote
quote:
Good, they are a damn business.
Maybe if you went to church, you'd recognize the foolishness of your post.
Posted on 7/19/21 at 12:20 pm to LSU Coyote
quote:
Good, they are a damn business.
99.9999% of churches are not. They're barely able to cover their expenses. Guys like Joel Osteen and other mega-chruches are not representive of the overwhelming majority of churches around the country. If churches were taxed, most churches would be forced to shut down.
Posted on 7/19/21 at 12:21 pm to Padme
quote:
Saw a meme saying churches should shelter the homeless at night
There are multiple churches in Downtown Atlanta that do just that, I've volunteered at some of them.
Posted on 7/19/21 at 12:22 pm to lsufball19
quote:...which is why so many want them taxed. They want government to have a monopoly on truth and charity.
If churches were taxed, most churches would be forced to shut down.
Page 1 of 5
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News