URGENT: Please Sign White House Petition to "Protect Americans from Dangerous Cults: Modify USC Title 26 § 501 Tax Exemption Requirements" (page 12)

apostatethunder

I know cofty, that doesn't appeal to me either.

The problem is not religion or not religion, beligerant atheits can be as much of a problem, and wouldn't be nice to live where they were the majority if you were a believer. At the end is a question of respect to the individual. When determining if a religion is damaging to individuals, we can ask if it dignifies them or if it disempowers them or worse? And within the religion is people allowed to keep their freedom of conscience and freedom of speech? Are they allowed to decide for themselves in personal matters without fearing being marked? Do they need to be afraid as if they were living under a police-state system?

Maybe the best way to judge a group is to see how they treat the people that don't agree with them.

cofty

beligerant atheits can be as much of a problem, and wouldn't be nice to live where they were the majority if you were a believer

Do you mean like in secular states in Scandanavia where everybody is free to believe or not believe but religion gets no special privledges? Why would that not be nice?

apostatethunder

That depends on the government you have now and the one you will have in the future. In Europe religion may have less privileges than in America but the state covers that void and in some countries not so exemplarily as in Scandinavia. Not sure is the right solution, think about whom has seen religion an obstacle in the not so long distant past, and if you would like them ruling your life.

cofty

think about whom has seen religion an obstacle in the not so long distant past, and if you would like them ruling your life.

Please don't resort to hackneyed arguments that pits totalitarian states v theocracy as the only two possible options.

apostatethunder

I didn't mention theocracy, not sure what you are trying to say exactly.

Religions that help the community and individuals, are doing a service. Religions/cults/groups/organizations that use individuals for their own benefit are not the same and don't deserve to be put into the same cathegory.

Any group has the right to decide who they want in or out, but they have to respect the ones that don't think like them and the ones that just want to decide for themselves what to do with their lives, without robbing them their good name and their family and friends relationships.

Governments shouldn't decide which religions are right or wrong, but if a religion/cult/group/organization, religious or not, doesn't respect basic human rights, it shoudn't get tax priviliges at the very least.

cofty

But as many have pointed out in this thread and another 2 or 3 related threads who gets to make that judgement?

Islam would not pass any test regarding intimidation of "apostates" Do you think the American govt should remove their privledges? What would be the fallout from that?

The peace-loving Amish practice shunning, should the IRS target them too?

My objection is a pragmatic one. The only possible solution is removal of all privledges from all religions and nobody is going to get elected by doing that.

ABibleStudent

JeffT - Robert, although many, if not most of us on this board have read Hassan, we don't need to. We LIVED it. No one is arguing that the WTBS's treatment of its members is justifiable, or morally correct. You can stop throwing one man's books at us like they are holy writ. We get it. A few months ago I wrote my own article about it (its on freeminds).
What you refuse to even attempt to understand is that your proposed solution scares some of us more than one whacked out religion.
I have tried to show you respect,
No you haven't, and I think you owe her an apology.

Hi JeffT, I don't refuse to understand that the White House petition scares some people more than one whacked out religion. I just wonder the following:

Why some people, who are against this White House petition, would sign a petition to revoke tax exempt status for all religions?
Why some people, who are against this White House petition, cannot understand that a dangerous organization (formally referred to as a dangerous cult) can be a secular organization also?

As far as your comment that I should apologize to Band on the Run, I do not feel that I owe Band on the Run an apology for explaining why I question her posts. I would owe Band on the Run an apology if I thought that her comments were correct about being a woman.

Peace be with you and everyone, who you love,

Robert

JeffT

Why some people, who are against this White House petition, would sign a petition to revoke tax exempt status for all religions?

Because it is not judgemental. I do not want the government to take it upon itself to determine what religions are allowed, or what they are allowed to do or not do.

Why some people, who are against this White House petition, cannot understand that a dangerous organization (formally referred to as a dangerous cult) can be a secular organization also?

Beats me. You'll have to ask somebody that believes that. In one of my articles on freeminds I specifically include some business and poltical organizations as potentially toxic social groups. The businesses don't enjoy tax exempt status as it is, and I'm even less inclinded to have the government targeting poltical organizations it doesn't like. As many of us keep asking; who decides?

ABibleStudent

Cofty - But as many have pointed out in this thread and another 2 or 3 related threads who gets to make that judgement?
Islam would not pass any test regarding intimidation of "apostates" Do you think the American govt should remove their privledges? What would be the fallout from that?
The peace-loving Amish practice shunning, should the IRS target them too?
My objection is a pragmatic one. The only possible solution is removal of all privledges from all religions and nobody is going to get elected by doing that.

Hi Cofty, The simple answer as to who gets to make that judgment would be the IRS would make an initial judgment and an organization would be able to appeal the IRS judgment through the U.S. Courts. Since this is only a petition, any enacted law would be debated, created through the Congressional process, and would define which organization would pass judgment. If this petition was able to inspire an enacted law, the following process would occur: the IRS would research and promulgate regulations; members, employees, former members, and former employees could file complaints with the IRS; the IRS would investigate those complaints; the IRS would suspend an organization's tax exempt status when sufficient complaints showed that an organization’s was not promoting freedom of religion and speech to its members; and an organization would be able to appeal the IRS decision. What would be sufficient to suspend an organization's tax exempt status? I feel that if at least 25 people from diverse areas of the America felt afraid of reprisals for disagreeing with their organization’s leadership or of leaving an organization that would prove that an organization was not promoting freedom of religion and speech to its members and employees.

Although your solution of removing tax exempt status for all religions would cripple many religions to function as they do now, it would also take away any incentives for dangerous organizations to change, as well as ignor secular dangerous organizations, and would be politically difficult to do in America. I tried to explain this to another poster in the thread http://www.jehovahs-witness.net/watchtower/beliefs/225398/5/Please-sign-the-petition-to-remove-tax-free-status-from-religious-cults-that-shun .

I hope that I answered your questions.

Peace be with you and everyone, who you love,

Robert

cofty

the IRS would suspend an organization's tax exempt status when sufficient complaints showed that an organization’s was not promoting freedom of religion and speech to its members; and an organization would be able to appeal the IRS decision.

So ultimately somebody has to make a judgement on a case by case basis that JWs lose, Mormons win (friends in high places) , Muslims win (otherwise they will make a lot of noise) Amish lose because they are powerless and so on.

Your proposal still gives govt the legal power for religious discrimination.

Although your solution of removing tax exempt status for all religions would cripple many religions to function as they do now, it would also take away any incentives for dangerous organizations to change

Since when was it the role of govt to give religions an incentive to play nice?

URGENT: Please Sign White House Petition to "Protect Americans from Dangerous Cults: Modify USC Title 26 § 501 Tax Exemption Requirements"

Share this