This site is not maintained. Click here for the new website of Richard Dawkins.

← Should Churches Get Tax Breaks?

Should Churches Get Tax Breaks? - Comments

crookedshoes's Avatar Comment 1 by crookedshoes


Thu, 10 May 2012 16:25:17 UTC | #940876

Anvil's Avatar Comment 2 by Anvil

yes, no.

Thu, 10 May 2012 16:31:46 UTC | #940880

Peter A Bell's Avatar Comment 3 by Peter A Bell

The question should surely be, "Why should churches get tax breaks?". The onus would rightly be on the churches to justify the privileges afforded them.

Thu, 10 May 2012 16:38:26 UTC | #940883

Rob_Pm's Avatar Comment 4 by Rob_Pm

The short answer is 'no'. The long answer is' f**k no!'

Thu, 10 May 2012 16:39:13 UTC | #940884

Vorlund's Avatar Comment 5 by Vorlund

They should pay additional taxes to offset the effort we have to put into re-educating and rehabilitating their victims.

Thu, 10 May 2012 16:40:44 UTC | #940885

dsmcdon's Avatar Comment 6 by dsmcdon

No. The amount of money that would be collected for taxes would definately help reduce the deficit. Tax exempt statuses need to be removed from all religious oganizations. Churches today are nothing more that businesses and should be treated as such.

Thu, 10 May 2012 16:42:18 UTC | #940887

strangebrew's Avatar Comment 7 by strangebrew

Nope!...And what is more they should be forced in to pay back in weekly instalments any and all back taxes accrued going back 2000 years...Yes Benny baby I am looking at you specifically snookums!!

Thu, 10 May 2012 16:49:22 UTC | #940890

Schrodinger's Cat's Avatar Comment 8 by Schrodinger's Cat

Yes ! I'm going to start up my own church.......The Church Of The Holy Snake Oil. I'll need tax breaks and money so I can afford the Limousine, the 3000 seat church, and lawyers so I can sue anyone who says they once saw me in a gay bar.

Thu, 10 May 2012 17:01:29 UTC | #940892

scottishgeologist's Avatar Comment 9 by scottishgeologist

Comment 5 by Vorlund - Brilliant! Wonderful idea!

:-) SG

Thu, 10 May 2012 17:03:32 UTC | #940893

iPother's Avatar Comment 10 by iPother

Churches shouldn't be able to make a profit to begin with, the mere thought of somebody making money in the name of "God" is immoral in its self and goes against so many aspects of the bible does it not? No..

Thu, 10 May 2012 17:05:57 UTC | #940894

Ignorant Amos's Avatar Comment 11 by Ignorant Amos


Only kidding. I've been reading a lot about these wackaloons recently. Multi-millionaire wackaloons admittedly....but that's because the simple that pay into this crap are bigger wackaloons.

Seems that a bit of a family rift is opening up their multi-million dollar snake oil business and to the scrutiny of the undesirables...the IRS being one such undesirable. The family members are all employees of the big rip-off, that's the problem with nepotism.... you can't pick who are your family. The two old goatskins in charge are near jossing it age and the young pretenders are all lining up to divvy the spoils. It seems some just can't wait that long.

I really hope they get hammered. Feathering ones nest like that off the back of the gullible who may not be able to afford it, is worse than being a banker. Their illegal wealth is unsightly, if they were Mafia dons they'd have their assets stripped.

As for that monstrosity of a theme park...tear it down ta feck.

Thu, 10 May 2012 17:09:49 UTC | #940895

ZenDruid's Avatar Comment 12 by ZenDruid

No. Furthermore, the definition of 'charity' for taxation purposes ought to be revisited as well.

Here's the 501(c)(3) definition.

Thu, 10 May 2012 17:20:56 UTC | #940896

tomta's Avatar Comment 13 by tomta

The simplest way to resolve this dilemma would be to abolish tax rebates for charitable activity. Charity should be just that - not a calculation based on profit and loss.Those who are truly charitable, whether religious or non-religious, would presumably still donate to their preferred causes. And many of the loopholes for the unscrupulous, religious or non-religious would be closed. I have no idea waht the consequences would be but I suspect that those who care about the plight of their fellows would still try to help them and those who don't would not.

Thu, 10 May 2012 17:30:17 UTC | #940899

ConservativeAtheist's Avatar Comment 14 by ConservativeAtheist

As they are (Non-Profit) organizations I would have to say yes…

Thu, 10 May 2012 17:53:08 UTC | #940902

cheesedoff17's Avatar Comment 15 by cheesedoff17

@comment 13 by Tomta

And I suspect that many who support the church don't care a damn about the plight of their fellows but are hoping to buy the doG's good graces.

In the past three years (since the Vatican sex scandals) I've received numerous solicitations from the RCC. Some sneaky person is putting them in my letterbox. The first claimed that it wasn't true that the Church was wealthy and begged me to help because Frère Jacques had to pay his own heating bill! - photo of young, handsome Frère Jacques included - I had to stop myself from replying to the effect that he, unlike some of the old pensioners sending in their contributions, received free housing and what's more he was young enough to go jogging to keep himself warm.

Thu, 10 May 2012 18:02:12 UTC | #940903

jbkaffe's Avatar Comment 16 by jbkaffe

If churches get tax breaks so should football(soccer) clubs. A church is nothing but bussiness no matter how many prayers they cling on to.

Tax 'em and tax 'em the way you would tax any other company.


Thu, 10 May 2012 18:24:06 UTC | #940906

Wray's Avatar Comment 17 by Wray


Thu, 10 May 2012 18:28:46 UTC | #940907

Peter Grant's Avatar Comment 18 by Peter Grant

Religion should be taxed more, like alcohol and cigarettes.

Thu, 10 May 2012 18:33:24 UTC | #940909

Nordic11's Avatar Comment 19 by Nordic11

If churches are providing social services for people that governments do not need to provide, then they should certainly receive tax benefits. If churches are directly involved with political organizations and candidates, they should absolutely not receive tax breaks. Everything else in between needs to be examined and evaluated.

Thu, 10 May 2012 18:44:43 UTC | #940911

ConservativeAtheist's Avatar Comment 20 by ConservativeAtheist

I think the difference between myself & the other comment posters which would explain our different takes on this issue is that they are in my opinion openly anti-Religion whereas I am not I just simply don't believe in SuperNatural things which includes God…

Thu, 10 May 2012 19:16:56 UTC | #940916

achromat666's Avatar Comment 21 by achromat666

Let's start with the obvious, from the pic in the OP:

Does the Trinity Broadcasting Network's Holy Land experience, a theme park in Orlando, really deserve a tax break?

Not even remotely.

As if the uncalled for tax exempt status for churches wasn't bad enough, to ask for allowances in the form of tax breaks to spread fiction theme parks is insane from the word go. Do other theme parks get tax breaks, or is this just because it is theistically related? I lean toward the latter.

If churches are providing social services for people that governments do not need to provide, then they should certainly receive tax benefits.

Do not need to provide? like what exactly? Humanitarian efforts should receive allowances perhaps, but the term government does not need to provide is highly suspect. There are a great number of things the government needs to provide that it doesn't so clarification here would be helpful.

Regardless of the function of the church to its parishoners, it is a business and should be subject to the same tax code as any other business.

Thu, 10 May 2012 19:20:28 UTC | #940918

Jonathan Dore's Avatar Comment 22 by Jonathan Dore

"Room for Debate"? Barely. Absurd posturing and shameless special pleading is about the only thing there'd be room for if your answer to the question was "yes".

Thu, 10 May 2012 19:30:07 UTC | #940920

MilitantNonStampCollector's Avatar Comment 23 by MilitantNonStampCollector

I like Bill Maher on this:

"If churches don't have to pay taxes, they also can't call the fire department when they catch fire. Sorry reverend, that's one of those services that goes along with paying in. I'll use the fire department I pay for. You can pray for rain."

Thu, 10 May 2012 19:30:12 UTC | #940921

inleaguewithsatan's Avatar Comment 24 by inleaguewithsatan

Comment 12 by ZenDruid :

No. Furthermore, the definition of 'charity' for taxation purposes ought to be revisited as well.

Here's the 501(c)(3) definition.

I agree with this. The definition of charity reaches too far. Donating to the Red Cross is one thing, but your local church choir? That's unacceptable to equate the two and undermines the entire concept of charity.

Thu, 10 May 2012 19:34:18 UTC | #940923

Runicmadhamster's Avatar Comment 25 by Runicmadhamster


Thu, 10 May 2012 20:45:25 UTC | #940928

All About Meme's Avatar Comment 26 by All About Meme

I'll go with Dan Barker's excellent response.

Thu, 10 May 2012 20:54:31 UTC | #940930

Agrajag's Avatar Comment 27 by Agrajag

Well, if they do get tax breaks, those should disappear instantly the minute the clergy person voices a political recommendation from the pulpit.

Thu, 10 May 2012 21:41:14 UTC | #940931

Sample's Avatar Comment 28 by Sample

Why not ask God? Tax exemptions have nothing to do with Him you say? Oh, well, this a joke?


Thu, 10 May 2012 21:59:43 UTC | #940934

Blackaddera's Avatar Comment 29 by Blackaddera

short: no!, long: HELL NO!

Thu, 10 May 2012 22:00:12 UTC | #940935

Wokkie's Avatar Comment 30 by Wokkie

Yes, of course. Everyone should get one.

Thu, 10 May 2012 22:08:39 UTC | #940936