Should Churches lose their tax-exempt status because of SCOTUS' ruling on same-sex marriage?

Asked by: mystery_man43
  • NOT because of SCOTUS ruling

    First off I absolutely despise the LGBT movement. I believe many of it's members are immature individuals who may mean well, but are ultimately aiding in the creation of a politically correct world where "equality" is tantamount to government force quelling what does not fit the larger agenda.

    I agree that going after the churches tax exempt status because of gay marriage is absolutely absurd. The only reason certain LGBT members are attacking the church's long standing tax excemptions is because certain church members were attacking legalized gay marriage. Ultimately this whole nonsense between the two sides is nothing more than a battle of attrition where the winner is the one who has stripped the other of the most rights.

    With all that being said The church's tax exempt status needs to end. I say this not as a religion basher, but as an objective observer. Of the facts . There are plenty of well meaning people within this religious sphere who do greatly enrich the human experience. However, churches are providing a service in which ultimately money is being changed over from the members to the institution. Pretty much every other example of money being exchanged has a mandated chunk which Uncle Sam takes away. Those who run churches still use public roads, have access to public emergency services, and generally participate in our modern society. If they are not paying their fair share of the monetary social cost, then quite frankly they are being leeches on the system.

  • Here Are the Facts

    1) Supreme Court ruled on same-sex marriage in regards to non-religious institutions; this was really meant for public sector like court houses but the broad brush hit non-religious private sector as well

    2) What the Supreme Court did was a violation of the separation of powers as well as the responsibilities of the court. Their role is to hear cases regarding conflict of interpretation regarding the specific wording of laws by reading word for word what the law states and placing it plain English where needed. In this case, the Justices completely disregarded the written laws of each state and instead unilaterally created a new federal law to legalize same-sex marriage across the nation. So a non-elected subsection of a group of 9 judges just completely ignored the constitution they are supposed to uphold and bypassed the powers of government encapsulating hundreds of elected public officials whose job it is to create laws in order to shape the nation how they wanted it. The fact they haven't been hit for it yet is appalling on behalf of our congress.

    3) However, the second that an individual's life, health, well-being, religious beliefs are reasonably infringed upon or threatened, this ruling will be brought back into question and potentially a massive lawsuit against the Supreme Court will ensue. By the letter of the law, this suit will be upheld and the decision overturned leaving congress to do what we elected them to do. This challenge to the ruling will hold the very real potential of impeachment proceedings against the members of the Supreme Court that created this law.

    4) No matter what happens, the religious institution can NEVER be touched, especially not with this topic. Why? Because it would inherently violate Amendment 1 of the constitution. If the Supreme Court, Government, or any authoritative group of this nation violates or alters the first amendment to invalidate freedom of religion in anyway, it will be the end of the nation and the start of the next Civil War. The only way to avoid Civil War would be for every elected official that played a part in changing the constitution were to step down on their own, new elected officials put in congress, and the constitution returned to it's original state. The military wouldn't even be on their side as most of those guys are out there to protect the constitution and the first amendment in general. After all, the first amendment is the EXACT reason the pilgrims immigrated to the New World and laid the ground work for this amazing nation.....The English crown was oppressing their right to freely practice the religion of their choice.

  • Churches have the right to refuse to perform same-sex "marriages".

    Under the first amendment we have the right of freedom of religion. That means under the first amendment, Churches have the right to refuse to perform same-sex "marriages". It is unlawful and unconstitutional for the government to take away a Church's tax-exempt status for not performing same-sex "marriages". Companies also have the right to refuse baking cakes etc. for same-sex "weddings".

  • This doesn't make any sense...

    I'm not from the US and don't usually comment on related opinions, but this does not make sense at all. They ruled that gay marriage should be able to get married, but how does it follow that religious institutions are legally obliged to marry such couples against their will, or lose their tax-exempt status? I'm not saying churches should be exempt from taxes; I don't really have an opinion on that, and coming from a secular society, I can't say I care. However, the ruling that gay marriage should be legalised should have no impact on the tax-exempt status of any organisation.

Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
No comments yet.