Experts project an estimated 100,000 churches in the US will close or be repurposed over the next decade.
Many churches will be unable to escape this “tsunami” of closings — a grim trajectory one pastor described as, “Every year the pews are getting emptier and the collection plates getting lighter.”
I drive by three empty old churches every day and about ten fully functioning ones complete with a huge tax funded metal sided auditorium/gym. They don’t pay taxes but they sure do spend them.
There is a difference between tax funded and tax exempt. I say this because we should be specifically asking that the tax exempt status for religions be removed from the tax code.
If you don’t understand then let me explain. The church is tax exempt and the facilities they have built are tax funded. Hope this clears that up.
Thats not how tax funded works. Tax funded is when the gov uses tax money to pay for something. What you are describing is paying for something using tax savings from tax exempt status. If you supported a bill banning tax funded religous buildings, I don’t think it would stop anything currently happening right now.
I’m sure you wont understand it but here it is.
I don’t need your flawed opinion. At the time when it first got started in 2005 I was working part time for a company and we went in and wired several of the metal barn style buildings with ethernet and wlreless. Everyone involved knew where the money came from. It came from the government in the form of a grant or as I like to call it welfare. Every President since then has supported it and trump has made it all about christian white haters.
You are making a good point, and providing at least somewhat of a source for your assertion is great.
But your delivery sucks. You would be more persuasive with less abrasive.
I understand his anger in general. They just doesn’t differentiate freind or foe when they vent their anger. That said, I explained in a direct response to them how it’s still not technically tax funded. They actually alude to that when they say “everyone involved knew where the money came from”. The organizations used loopholes to indirectly pay for those building. Those loop holes would ensure they are not technically tax funded. So a ban on tax funding religious buildings wouldn’t apply.
I’m not trying to convert anyone. I just put the information out there as it is.
Edit: If it abrades then it its hitting the mark.
In other words, your opinions and your words are useless
hahahahahaha. Just like yours. hahahahahahha
So if I assume those building you speak of were paid for by the grants the link mentioned. What are theynused for. Cause the grants are to pay an organization to provide social services.
If you pay an organization with tax money to provide a service, assumably with some profit built in. And they use the profit to build a building… you are stretching to call is tax funded. And my point holds up to this. A ban on tax funded religious building would not legally ban this.
Your pretty antagonistic to someone who litterally wants the same thing as you. I just want to be sure people are rallying around something that will actually achieve the goal. I want religious organization to recieve no special treatment compare to any other. Removing their tax exempt status is the goal with the biggest impact. Entirely getting rid of the office of faith based … is also a great goal. And I support doing that too. Banning tax funded structure for religious organizations wouldn’t do anything.
Think about it. They could sell the land and buildings to a charity they control that rents the church back to them. Then get the grants to build the gyms and such. Their core finances are still under a religious organization, but the buildings are technically owned by a non-religious organization.
lol. I’m not reading that. There is no amount of discourse that will get you to quit being so obtuse and out right confrontational. You have to be either a troll or some god botherer who doesn’t like that they are getting welfare.
Good to know your true colors.