What is the Constitutional Congress rationality for not taxing Churches?

[Dixon Carter Lee]

I'm in another one of those arguments. Can anyone point me to a Madison argument, or something, in which the Founders discussed the value or peril of not taxing religious orgazniations?

 

[DarkAngel]

Because they fall under the non-for-profit group

 

[Dixon Carter Lee]

Thanks.

I'm not looking for legislation here, but argument.

 

[DarkAngel]

O, well I agree with you so.. Can't help you there.

 

[SimplySouthern]

Thanks.

I'm not looking for legislation here, but argument.

Argument as to why you would put Congress and rationality in the same sentence.

Temporary insanity?

 

[Problem Child]

Here Dix. It's all right here

 

[curious2c]

I am not positive but I do remember reading about this in 'The Federalists Papers' in doing some history reasearch in high school. I remember that Jefferson and Madison both had concerns with taxing the church. Mostly because if taxed then the government would 'owe' the church, or religious orginization 'help' in return for the collected taxes. They forsaw a day much like what happened to the King and the church way back when.
I think they wanted to make sure that the church and state were kept seperate so to exclude the church from taxation would also exclude the church from being able to get 'help' from the government in the future. I can't remember all of the arguments for and against, but I think all of the authors of the Federalist Papers were involved in the discussion at one point or another.

Remember, in those times the church had become as strong in levying taxes, rather, tithes, as the King had in his taxes.

 

[sunstruck]

Most churches are ligitimately non-profit. Ok maybe not most anymore, but that's the idea and I'm not sure I disagree with that.

If they were taxed I think we'd see a decline in the number of soup kitchens, shelters, family aide. I'm not sure it's worth it.

 

[Dixon Carter Lee]

Thanks PC. Not exactly what I'm looking for, though.

I'm looking for the original Founder arguments for making religion in the new Repulic a tax-free institution.

 

[Problem Child]

Thanks PC. Not exactly what I'm looking for, though.

I'm looking for the original Founder arguments for making religion in the new Repulic a tax-free institution.

That's what I gave you! Straight from the founding fathers of the Aloderian Empire!

They explain everything there, even down to why the 5,000 points for a cure light wound spell is non-deductible.

 

[curious2c]

Hmmm. Here is what I have on the federalists Papers.

http://memory.loc.gov/const/fed/fedpapers.html

Hope that this helps. I think you will have to read all of Hamiltons works on taxation to pick up on the religious aspects.

 

[Problem Child]

Here's another (serious) site

 

[RawHumor]

That's what I gave you! Straight from the founding fathers of the Aloderian Empire!

You didn't pay attention. He's looking for an argument, not for the facts.

 

[sunstruck]

I'm looking for the original Founder arguments for making religion in the new Repulic a tax-free institution.

Whoops! Thought you meant a personal argument. lol

 

[sunstruck]

I don't know PC, that doesn't look like a reputable source you right wing freak.

 

[KillerMuffin]

Probably because they didn't have income taxes back then. Public or private. The only taxation was on import and export tariffs and on private land ownership.

Either that or you can look on the fact that the Founders were all of some sort of Christian bent and they took separation of church and state to mean that the church didn't influence the government, not that the church wasn't to receive considerations because they were churches.. To them the Church was a way of life. If you did not go to church you weren't trustworthy. Being a "man of God" was important. Therefore, you gave God his due in government.

I dunno. I threw out my government history book.

 

[RawHumor]

I don't know PC, that doesn't look like a reputable source you right wing freak.

Don't forget Fascist.

 

[JazzManJim]

For taxation of churches:

"The divorce between Church and State . . . ought to be so absolute that no Church property anywhere, in any State, or in the nation, should be exempt from equal taxation; for if you exempt the property of any Church organization, to that extent you impose a tax upon the whole community." President James Garfield

"So vast a sum, receiving all the protection and benefits of the government, without bearing its proportion of the burdens and expenses of the same, will not be looked upon acquiescently by those who have to pay the taxes. . . . I would suggest the taxation of all property equally." President Ulysses S. Grant

"If the property belongs to God he is able to pay the tax." Robert Ingersoll


Against taxation of churches:

"By operating independently of government aid, the churches . . . avoid the resentment of those who do not want to be forced to contribute to churches to which they do not belong and of their own members who do not welcome being forced to contribute through government taxation." John M. Swomley


From what I've found thus far, the big decision that upheld the non-taxation of churches (using the separation clause, apparently) was Walz vs. Tax Commission, heard by the Supreme Court in 1970.

That's the direct stuff I have. Everything else, which I can summarize later, involves the rationale (which existed long before the Constitution) for not taxing churches.

 

[Dixon Carter Lee]

Thanks all. I've found some good stuff, too.

 

[Guest]

 

[Dixon Carter Lee]

I'm busy tomorrow. Can we do it Thursday?

 

[Guest]

 

[The Heretic]

I'm in another one of those arguments. Can anyone point me to a Madison argument, or something, in which the Founders discussed the value or peril of not taxing religious orgazniations?

I don't know of anything off hand by the Founding Fathers - most of the discussion seems to have come well afterwards from what I can find. However, I can state my position; since the correct purpose of taxation is to secure the equal distribution of the burden of civil society, then all organizations that incur a cost on society, including churches, whether they are profit or non-profit, should pay taxes. This is another reason why I feel a sales tax is more fair and appropriate than an income tax; whether you make a profit or not, in a business or organization, you still incur a cost on society by your existence and consumption of goods. A tax tied to your consumption of goods is more directly paying for the cost you incur on society.

 

[Dixon Carter Lee]

.

 

[ma_guy]

Re: Re: What is the Constitutional Congress rationality for not taxing Churches?

I don't know of anything off hand by the Founding Fathers - most of the discussion seems to have come well afterwards from what I can find. However, I can state my position; since the correct purpose of taxation is to secure the equal distribution of the burden of civil society, then all organizations that incur a cost on society, including churches, whether they are profit or non-profit, should pay taxes. This is another reason why I feel a sales tax is more fair and appropriate than an income tax; whether you make a profit or not, in a business or organization, you still incur a cost on society by your existence and consumption of goods. A tax tied to your consumption of goods is more directly paying for the cost you incur on society.

It seems that your own statements contradict each other here. If, as you state, the "correct purpose" of taxation is to enure equeal distribution of the costs of society then the only way to do that is to total up the entire cost of society and divide it by the number of people sharing that burden and they pay that share whether they can afford it or not.

Your sales tax doesn't provide that equeal distribution of the burden. It penalizes the high-level consumer while they non-consumer gets a disproportionate share of advantage.