I hate it when it turns out I'm not a paraoid nutjob...

**Tribesman** · 06-19-2008, 15:13

The U.S. doesn't pay money to build Mosques or Churches like our French and Canadian allies.

Yes it does

**ICantSpellDawg** · 06-19-2008, 15:18

Originally Posted by Tribesman

Yes it does

Where?

I agree with Don. I'm not defending the Methodists in question. They were skirting the line and attempting to write their own govt policy. Government spending through grants should be kept tightly under control. They have every right to say "which is it?"

The fact is that they did because the reality was their status was questionable. Where do you see subsidy of religion that isn't being reviewed and ended? The things you might mention are services rendered and tax breaks which are not subsidies.

The statement is kind of like saying the government subsidizes "murder" when a teacher is discovered to be a murderer. The murder wasn't the intent of the salary and the situation will be sorted out legally. Maybe a bad analogy, but I just came up with it.

**Tribesman** · 06-19-2008, 15:38

Where?

All over the States churches are eligible for exactly the same building grants as are available in other countries . Though you do have certain church and non-church groups uniting in protest against those grants which they see as a violation of the constitution.
Would you like some links or are you able to do a simple search on building grants for churches in the US

**ICantSpellDawg** · 06-19-2008, 15:57

Originally Posted by Tribesman

All over the States churches are eligible for exactly the same building grants as are available in other countries . Though you do have certain church and non-church groups uniting in protest against those grants which they see as a violation of the constitution.
Would you like some links or are you able to do a simple search on building grants for churches in the US

You are right!

This link describes some reasons for and against such practices.
http://www.nacba.net/Article/federalgrant.htm

I'm not sure how I feel about that. The Hebrew day school example was pretty good, but obviously the acceptance of government money puts a church into a bizzarre limbo which it shouldn't be in for its own sake. This is a subsidy outright, though most churches don't take the government up on the offer. I don't support the government giving building grants in general.

**Don Corleone** · 06-19-2008, 16:02

I'm 100% against it. The day you take money from the government, you are a slave to the government.

**Adrian II** · 06-20-2008, 02:32

Originally Posted by Don Corleone

I'm 100% against it. The day you take money from the government, you are a slave to the government.

Like I said earlier, all American churches do.

The Supreme Court in Regan v. Taxation With Representation of Washington (1983) ruled that tax exemption and deduction are 'form of subsidy that is administered through the tax system'.

Exemption is even better than subsidy, because recipients of the first are not accountable to the government for they way they spend the money, whereas recipients of the second are.

**Don Corleone** · 06-20-2008, 02:54

Originally Posted by Adrian II

Exemption is even better than subsidy, because recipients of the first are not accountable to the government for they way they spend the money, whereas recipients of the second are.

You say that like I'm ceding the point that an exemption is a gift from the government. I'm not.

**Xiahou** · 06-20-2008, 06:12

Originally Posted by Adrian II

The Supreme Court in Regan v. Taxation With Representation of Washington (1983) ruled that tax exemption and deduction are 'form of subsidy that is administered through the tax system'.

I don't know about you, but I think that's a pretty astonishing statement. They're saying that the government not taking your money by force is no different than the government giving you money.