Waivers for religion?

[nathanm]

You didn't answer the questions.

You asked a really stupid question.

[Conan71]

What I take away from yours is just spiteful, anti-administration garbage meant to start arguments.

What's wrong with that?  That's 1/2 the fun on political forums.

[Gaspar]

Jesus Gaspar, you really think your political posts are helpful?

Typically there is conversation, but there are always the Haiku posters that feel it necessary to get a line in.  Kinda like that guy at a party who walks into the middle of a conversation that is above his head, and starts talking about his Corvette, or automatically offers disagreement on the subject matter as a juvinile means to inclusion.

If you feel that these posts have no importance, then ignore them, or if you do feel that the subject matter is worth discussion, please participate.  You stuck your foot in the pool when you offered the related topic of taxing religious institutions.  I was thrilled that you were actually going to pose a position, so I engaged your line of reasoning.  Unfortunately the water was not to your liking so you went back to discussing your Corvette.

[Townsend]

Typically there is conversation, but there are always the Haiku posters that feel it necessary to get a line in.  Kinda like that guy at a party who walks into the middle of a conversation that is above his head, and starts talking about his Corvette, or automatically offers disagreement on the subject matter as a juvinile means to inclusion.

If you feel that these posts have no importance, then ignore them, or if you do feel that the subject matter is worth discussion, please participate.  You stuck your foot in the pool when you offered the related topic of taxing religious institutions.  I was thrilled that you were actually going to pose a position, so I engaged your line of reasoning.  Unfortunately the water was not to your liking so you went back to discussing your Corvette.

You're giving me crap for making fun?    Putting yourself up on some pedestal saying you're having some amazing conversation is nuts.

These conversations are all Corvettes.

[Gaspar]

You're giving me crap for making fun?    Putting yourself up on some pedestal saying you're having some amazing conversation is nuts.

These conversations are all Corvettes.

So, lets forgive and re-engage then.  Do you think that the administration will reverse the mandate, push forward, or create a waiver program as they have done with other burdensome regulations?

If you don't wish to answer the follow up questions on your post about taxing religious organizations, I will leave that alone.

[Townsend]

Interesting, IMO point of view.

Catholic Birth Control Fight About Healthcare, Not Just Religion

http://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs/susan-milligan/2012/02/09/catholic-birth-control-fight-about-healthcare-not-just-religion?s_cid=rss:susan-milligan:catholic-birth-control-fight-about-healthcare-not-just-religion

Casting the issue as an assault on Catholicism or faith is insulting to people of faith. For people who believe in God, the faith is personal, deep, and unshakeable. It provides guidance during times of tumult, comfort during times of tragedy. For someone who truly believes in God, nothing can take away that faith—certainly not a coworker whose birth control pills are covered under their employer's insurance plan.

Critics have argued that the rule allows the government to dictate rules to a religious institution, and there is some truth to that. But 98 percent of Catholics have used birth control, despite the teachings of the church. If Catholic-affiliated institutions are allowed an exception, is that not arguably asking the government to try to buttress a religious rule the church has not been successful in enforcing?

[Townsend]

So, lets forgive and re-engage then.  Do you think that the administration will reverse the mandate, push forward, or create a waiver program as they have done with other burdensome regulations?

If you don't wish to answer the follow up questions on your post about taxing religious organizations, I will leave that alone.

I really have no idea what these guys will do.  It never seems, to me, decisions are made for the betterment of us all but for elections.

The lobbyists will make the decision.

I have no faith in organized religion to do the right thing unless it's to their own benefit.  Do I believe they should be taxed?  Yes.  Did the Komen thing bring some of that mess to light?  Yes.  If things are done for political or financial gain then tax them.

If the organization gets big enough, look for taxable income and tax it.  If I make enough money, I'm taxed.  I am charitable and I'm still taxed.

I feel as though many of these organizations do good for society but I also feel as though they have been serving to the humans on the top of the organizaions.  Tax 'em.

[Gaspar]

Interesting, IMO point of view.

Catholic Birth Control Fight About Healthcare, Not Just Religion

http://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs/susan-milligan/2012/02/09/catholic-birth-control-fight-about-healthcare-not-just-religion?s_cid=rss:susan-milligan:catholic-birth-control-fight-about-healthcare-not-just-religion

The only thing that that article fails to acknowledge is that the leaders of the faith consider it an assault on the faith, and stirs controversy that will hurt his campaign. Two groups are fighting behind the scenes.  Women's health organizations and religious groups (not just Catholic).  No matter how you stand on the issue, or what you view to be logical, the fact remains that it creates burdens for the religious institutions and it causes controversy for the president.

IMO he will do one of two things to silence this.  He will either reverse the mandate (unlikely), or he will offer another waver system (par for the course).
I just don't see him letting this thing fester as a symbol of the exact kind of intrusion that Republicans warned the people about.  Why would he want to subsidize ammunition for his opponents.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/02/09/us-usa-contraceptives-idUSTRE8181MX20120209

[Townsend]

I just don't see him letting this thing fester as a symbol of the exact kind of intrusion that Republicans warned the people about.  Why would he want to subsidize ammunition for his opponents.

It blows my mind that Republicans would say anything about "intrusion" on this subject.

[Gaspar]

I really have no idea what these guys will do.  It never seems, to me, decisions are made for the betterment of us all but for elections.

The lobbyists will make the decision.

I have no faith in organized religion to do the right thing unless it's to their own benefit.  Do I believe they should be taxed?  Yes.  Did the Komen thing bring some of that mess to light?  Yes.  If things are done for political or financial gain then tax them.

If the organization gets big enough, look for taxable income and tax it.  If I make enough money, I'm taxed.  I am charitable and I'm still taxed.

I feel as though many of these organizations do good for society but I also feel as though they have been serving to the humans on the top of the organizaions.  Tax 'em.

I find no reason not to tax the activities of a religious organization.  If they cannot offset that income with charitable expenditure then it gets taxed like any other organization.  Unfortunately there is a catch.

What would you consider "charitable"?  Organizations that provide educational enrichment programs are considered charitable. The time and resources devoted to many of those activities represent an offset to any taxes that they incur. Non-Profit organizations like Planed Parenthood, and others have numerous offsets as well as government funding, yet their "ministers" still make massive salaries, live in posh homes and drive fancy cars.

So the question becomes, do you abolish the 501(c)(3) designation, or abolish the entire 501 system and treat all sources of income and charitable activities equally?

Schools
Clubs
Veterans groups
Civic Legues
Social Welfare Organizations
Labor Groups
Churches

[Townsend]

The only thing that that article fails to acknowledge is that the leaders of the faith consider it an assault on the faith, and stirs controversy that will hurt his campaign. Two groups are fighting behind the scenes.  Women's health organizations and religious groups (not just Catholic).  No matter how you stand on the issue, or what you view to be logical, the fact remains that it creates burdens for the religious institutions and it causes controversy for the president.

It causes problems for religious leaders who are too stubborn to change a bad rule.

The burden is inflexibility.

The controversy is pushed by the religious leaders who are stubborn and inflexible.

[Townsend]

Non-Profit organizations like Planed Parenthood, and others have numerous offsets as well as government funding, yet their "ministers" still make massive salaries, live in posh homes and drive fancy cars.

Do their "ministers" pay tax on these items?

[Gaspar]

Do their "ministers" pay tax on these items?

Yes, as do "ministers" of churches.

Church ministers are required to pay Self-employment taxes and/or payroll taxes under the same levels as anyone else, unless they file form 4361 claiming that insurance programs such as Social Security and Medicare are against their belief system.  With that exemption they are still liable for taxes but not SS or medicare, and have no claim to those benefits in the future.  

[Gaspar]

If you are speaking of property only, churches do not pay property taxes, but only on property used "exclusively for worship activities."

[Red Arrow]

So the question becomes, do you abolish the 501(c)(3) designation, or abolish the entire 501 system and treat all sources of income and charitable activities equally?

501(C)(3) doesn't change my giving choice at all.  I don't have enough deductions to itemize.  If I give anything, it's because I want to, not because I get a tax break.