• RowRowRowYourBot@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    15
    ·
    7 days ago

    So you want fewer groups doing charitable work? Who do you think is picking up that slack since progressive candidates have not traditionally suggested creating new ones that aren’t religious?

    • AllPintsNorth@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      18
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      7 days ago

      If they are doing as much charity work as they claim they are, then there’s no issue, since it will all be deductible.

      No harm, no foul. Only hurts the liars and the cheats. Win, win.

      • RowRowRowYourBot@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        21
        ·
        7 days ago

        Except now you have the government deciding what constitutes charity for those religions which is a huge violation of the first amendment rights of those churches.

        • Bronzebeard@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          6 days ago

          This isn’t remotely how this works. It’s not based on the acts being done, it’s based on whether the organization is being run to make money, or of it’s spending all it’s revenue in pursuit of a purpose.

            • Bronzebeard@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              5 days ago

              Many of them ARE. That’s the problem.

              You chosing to ignore the abusers doesn’t mean it’s not happening. One would think you would WANT those taking advantage of the system to make the thing you like look bad to be fixed. But here you are defending them

        • AllPintsNorth@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          12
          ·
          7 days ago

          Sorry to be the one to break it to you, but they already do that.

          No violation of the first amendment at all.

              • RowRowRowYourBot@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                13
                ·
                6 days ago

                The 1A conflict is because they are religious and the government deciding what charity they can engage in violates the stablishment clause

                • AllPintsNorth@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  10
                  ·
                  6 days ago

                  That’s quite the claim, given there’s nothing in the 1A about charity or taxation. What case law/SCOTUS ruling are you basing that off of?

                  • RowRowRowYourBot@sh.itjust.works
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    2
                    arrow-down
                    14
                    ·
                    6 days ago

                    As I said the establishment clause. If the government can decide what constitutes charity for a religion then the state is establishing a religion.

                • Bronzebeard@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  4
                  ·
                  6 days ago

                  If they’re being treated the same as any other nonprofit, how is this in violation of the establishment clause?

                  NOT treating them the same, like they currently are, is the thing in violation of that clause.

        • Maeve@kbin.earth
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          5 days ago

          You’re not wrong, and neither are they. Non-profit charities should be able to pay taxes if income exceeds a reasonable amount and have deduction on FMV of benefits provided. Small charitable organizations should be exempt. Everyone should be required to keep records subject to unannounced auditing. Churches like Joel Osteen and creflo dollar should be under criminal investigation or simply go away.