Red is me. It is actually painful that there are people THIS uneducated about what the 1st amendment is.
(media.greatawakening.win)
Comments (21)
sorted by:
I think a civics test needs to be tied to Voter ID.
More than that, civics needs to be taught period.
It's still taught, but it a highly waters down version they only glosses over key parts in our political and governmental histories.
The rewrite started under Hussein.
I have kids that went to school and took Civics under W. and Hussein. I watched the Common Core bullshit go down firsthand.
You can thank the DS for this.
I graduated under obama. Never took civics
I don’t disagree with you!
But - we have about a generation and a half that are old enough to vote and don’t have a fucking clue.
I was thinking if you own a business or home/land you're allowed to vote. If not then you must take a 5 hour class or something, lazy and low info voters won't go
I may be mistaken here, but my understanding is that if you go 501 (c) (3), then you need to stay out of politics.
You have become part of the state, so to speak. Tax exempt. You are a corporation, not a separate, independent entity.
But churches that do NOT get set up that way means you can get as political as you like.
Tax dollars should not be supporting churches.
That includes the Church of Woke.
Church? Say what you want. 501 (c) (3)? Limited.
Mark Taylor explains it better. I still don't understand it fully, though.
And I'm not so sure I want the State sticking its nose in Church business, anyway.
Huh, would you look at that. Looks like you are right! The original point was the commenter was complaining how Q is talked about a lot in churches, so it doesn't really fit the bill
Meanwhile you have the evangelicals of Gab wanting state sponsored Christianity. ?
Kek. The amount of even conservatives who don’t understand why the founding fathers structured the government how they did is appalling.
Churches were deceived into thinking they needed to be a 501c in order to be a nonprofit. In that case the government does have say on what can be said. Truth is a church does not need to register as 501c. They are a church, hence a nonprofit.
So the usual IRS fuckery?
Yes. The 501(c) charters is how the Harris/Biden Admin is claiming that the various religions will now start working with the State thru "Federal partnerships."
Didn't GHWB start that ball rolling with his Thousand Points of Light bee ess?
There is tax-exemption for donors, and for the church itself.
Without 501(c) classification, donors will generally pay income taxes on the amounts they donate. Donations would not be "tax exempt".
Non-501(c) churches may not have to pay income taxes on donations they receive, but it's much more work to determine and defend this position than just having the IRS grant a blanket exemption under 501(c).
And that's just federal tax. IRC-conformity in various states, plus cross-references to IRC in property tax and other tax exemptions, makes tax matters more or less complicated depending on where the church is located.
Just like we were conned into getting drivers licenses. I don’t care. It’s just a fun fact.
There is no good reason for churches to be tax exempt, except that:
Churches are generally not-for-profit. As far as taxes are laid upon "income", it's hard to find taxable income amongst not-for-profit enterprises. As long a the government sees fit to "exempt" not-for-profit enterprises from taxes, it would be hard to not exempt churches in the mix, which is also a part of:
Taxing churches could be seen as "respecting an establishment of religion". There is no good way to tax churches that wouldn't be seen as favoring some churches over others, or potentially discouraging attendance, or otherwise punitive against some or all churches. There have been court cases to this effect.
The idea that tax-exempt churches shouldn't engage in political speech is flimsy. However, under the Internal Revenue Code, exempt organizations under 501(c)(3) cannot participate in various "campaign" activities, which has been interpreted broadly by the IRS and the courts, but only enforced rarely and selectively. This is ostensibly to prevent charitable and religious organizations from being used as fronts for laundering taxable political donations and/or contributions as tax exempt (for both the donor, and/or the receiving organization).
Give one name of a church that doesn't turn a profit on any of it's holdings
You can quibble semantics with the IRS. Have fun with that.
There are many so non-profits, not just churches that violate the rules surrounding tax free organizations. Nonetheless some churches have strong moral values like recognizing life at conception which leftists don’t recognize as sacred. Which is why the left probably believes churches violate non-profit rules. Some things just are not political issues, but moral values that are under church purview.