- 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
re: The REAL reason for this "new gay marriage" push? MTG Tweet, so I dunno.
Posted on 11/17/22 at 3:10 pm to Mickey Goldmill
Posted on 11/17/22 at 3:10 pm to Mickey Goldmill
I think what concerns people who've read the bill is that it seems it may be interpreted to mandate a cake shop 'write phrases on the cake which it disagrees with', by applying the "arise from a marriage" clause in the bill.
0
Posted on 11/17/22 at 3:12 pm to j1897
quote:
Paying taxes isn't persecution. They should revoke all their exempt status'
Didn’t take you for one that was against the separation of church and state.
Posted on 11/17/22 at 3:24 pm to j1897
quote:
Paying taxes isn't persecution. They should revoke all their exempt status'
Churches do more for their communities on a weekday than every virtue signaling liberal on Twitter has done in they/thems lifetime.
Just tax multi-millionaires like Obama, Hillary, Bernie, "middle class" Joe, etc. at 99% instead...
Posted on 11/17/22 at 3:37 pm to BBONDS25
This is the $7 million "parsonage" for Kenneth Copeland's "church." By law, no property taxes are paid on this modest lakefront abode.
This post was edited on 11/17/22 at 3:40 pm
Posted on 11/17/22 at 4:07 pm to AggieHank86
quote:
This is the $7 million "parsonage" for Kenneth Copeland's "church." By law, no property taxes are paid on this modest lakefront abode.
Didn’t take you for one to be against the separation of church and state.
Posted on 11/17/22 at 4:13 pm to BBONDS25
quote:Well, I don't think that the state should be subsidizing the churches, if that is what you mean.
Didn’t take you for one to be against the separation of church and state.
And exempting churches from property tax is damned-sure a subsidy, IMHO.
This post was edited on 11/17/22 at 4:15 pm
Posted on 11/17/22 at 4:18 pm to AggieHank86
quote:
Well, I don't think that the state should be subsidizing the churches, if that is what you mean.
quote:
And exempting churches from property tax is damned-sure a subsidy, IMHO.
Yikes.
To you not collecting taxes is subsidizing? You sound like the IRS attorney in my first tax trial. He told me “BBONDS25, your clients problem is that they are thinking of this money like it is theirs”.
It was an insane, but enlightening comment. Much like yours. You and I will never see eye to eye when you come from the thought that all assets are the governments, and they just allow us to keep some.
Posted on 11/17/22 at 4:23 pm to j1897
quote:
Paying taxes isn't persecution. They should revoke all their exempt status'
What up glowie!
Posted on 11/17/22 at 4:25 pm to AggieHank86
quote:
Well, I don't think that the state should be subsidizing the churches, if that is what you mean.
And exempting churches from property tax is damned-sure a subsidy, IMHO
You have a backward look at taxes.
I think taxes should be opt-in...for each expenditure.
Posted on 11/17/22 at 4:29 pm to BBONDS25
If the word "subsidy" bothers you, we can use another.
If you and I have identical homes and incomes, yet the county taxes my home and does not tax yours, the county is providing you a "financial benefit thru preferential treatment" ... in the sense that you now have thousands more dollars per year in your pocket than I, which you can spend in any manner you wish.
Providing that sort of "financial benefit thru preferential treatment" to a church certainly strikes ME as running afoul of the Establishment Clause.
From a less-jurisprudential and more-pragmatic perspective, Tarrant County needs x-number of dollars to operate per year, a large part of which comes from property taxes. If Copeland is not taxed on that home, every other taxpayer in the County is paying more in taxes to cover the sum that the County needs and that Copeland is NOT paying.
If I wanted to subsidize that fricker's lifestyle, I would join his so-called "church."
If you and I have identical homes and incomes, yet the county taxes my home and does not tax yours, the county is providing you a "financial benefit thru preferential treatment" ... in the sense that you now have thousands more dollars per year in your pocket than I, which you can spend in any manner you wish.
Providing that sort of "financial benefit thru preferential treatment" to a church certainly strikes ME as running afoul of the Establishment Clause.
From a less-jurisprudential and more-pragmatic perspective, Tarrant County needs x-number of dollars to operate per year, a large part of which comes from property taxes. If Copeland is not taxed on that home, every other taxpayer in the County is paying more in taxes to cover the sum that the County needs and that Copeland is NOT paying.
If I wanted to subsidize that fricker's lifestyle, I would join his so-called "church."
This post was edited on 11/17/22 at 4:40 pm
Posted on 11/17/22 at 4:29 pm to Mickey Goldmill
quote:
(b) GOODS OR SERVICES.—Consistent with the First Amendment to the Constitution, nonprofit religious organizations, including churches, mosques, synagogues, temples, nondenominational ministries, interdenominational and ecumenical organizations, mission organizations, faith-based social agencies, religious educational institutions, and nonprofit entities whose principal purpose is the study, practice, or advancement of religion, and any employee of such an organization, shall not be required to provide services, accommodations, advantages, facilities, goods, or privileges for the solemnization or celebration of a marriage. Any refusal under this subsection to provide such services, accommodations, advantages, facilities, goods, or privileges shall not create any civil claim or cause of action.
Because I've seen how the state attacked Jack Phillips of Masterpiece Cakes, limiting such exemptions to non-profit organizations is not enough for me.
People who make custom items should always be allowed to reject such commissions without having to defend themselves from lawfare. I would apply this a Christian baker who doesn't want to make a cake for a same-sex wedding in the same way I would apply it to a black baker who doesn't want to make a cake for a Klan rally.
That's the essence of freedom of conscience and should be unquestioned in our society.
JMHO.
Posted on 11/17/22 at 4:30 pm to Thorny
Freedom from association is important.
Posted on 11/17/22 at 4:43 pm to AggieHank86
quote:
the county is providing you a "financial benefit thru preferential treatment" ...
Our entire tax code is nothing but preferential treatment.
Posted on 11/17/22 at 4:49 pm to GWM
quote:gonna be the same thing as always with a lot of these laws. Mostly ignored and forgotten but used when it’s time to grind an axe.
How is the IRS going differentiate between Churches that do/don't support Traditional marriage? Are they going to send every Church in the US a questionnaire, or send gay couples and request gay marriage ceremonies ?
Posted on 11/17/22 at 5:51 pm to Thorny
quote:
Because I've seen how the state attacked Jack Phillips of Masterpiece Cakes, limiting such exemptions to non-profit organizations is not enough for me.
People who make custom items should always be allowed to reject such commissions without having to defend themselves from lawfare. I would apply this a Christian baker who doesn't want to make a cake for a same-sex wedding in the same way I would apply it to a black baker who doesn't want to make a cake for a Klan rally.
That's the essence of freedom of conscience and should be unquestioned in our society.
JMHO.
I agree with what you're saying, but this bill doesn't provide an avenue for a cause of action against private businesses. This is solely about a State recognizing another state's marriage.
Posted on 11/17/22 at 6:02 pm to AggieHank86
quote:
If you and I have identical homes and incomes, yet the county taxes my home and does not tax yours, the county is providing you a "financial benefit thru preferential treatment" ... in the sense that you now have thousands more dollars per year in your pocket than I, which you can spend in any manner you wish. Providing that sort of "financial benefit thru preferential treatment" to a church certainly strikes ME as running afoul of the Establishment Clause.
Preferential treatment provided for in the 1st amendment??
The word subsidy doesn’t bother me at all. People who default to the government owning all assets and simply allowing us or entities or non profits to retain some of those assets is the exact opposite position that I take. There is no chance for agreement, because the beliefs are fundamentally opposite.
quote:
If I wanted to subsidize that fricker's lifestyle, I would join his so-called "church."
Ah. Here is the crux of it. Perhaps you should wonder if the government should tax less people instead of advocating they tax more, in violation of the 1st amendment, because you disagree with their religious beliefs.
Posted on 11/17/22 at 6:03 pm to Flats
quote:
Our entire tax code is nothing but preferential treatment.
Good point.
Posted on 11/17/22 at 6:03 pm to BBONDS25
quote:
You and I will never see eye to eye when you come from the thought that all assets are the governments, and they just allow us to keep some.
If churches don't pay property taxes, no one should.
Posted on 11/17/22 at 6:16 pm to DisplacedBuckeye
Agree that no one should pay property taxes.
Page 7 of 8
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News