Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

ProgressiveProfessor

(22,144 posts)
40. I generally believe that even non-profits should pay their fair share of community costs
Thu Feb 28, 2013, 04:22 PM
Feb 2013

and right now in most places they, especially churches, do not. They add to peak loading though average low use. They bring noise into areas at a level where no one else is permitted.

I actually want them treated like any other business and not get special treatment like RLUIPA provides.

All I want is a burka for Christmas!! La, La, La, La, Puzzledtraveller Feb 2013 #1
Oh, the fun we could have rewriting Christmas songs for other faiths riqster Feb 2013 #2
Why would atheists celebrate Christmas? HappyMe Feb 2013 #7
For the gifts, dummy! Jeff In Milwaukee Feb 2013 #10
Here's one! Still Blue in PDX Feb 2013 #23
Not to cause a resurgence of the (theoretical) war on Christmas, but . . . Still Blue in PDX Feb 2013 #27
Here's one from Tom Lehrer riqster Feb 2013 #28
Then why are businesses required to accommodate religious objection as practical? ProgressiveProfessor Feb 2013 #3
Are you saying the United States is NOT a secular nation? MNBrewer Feb 2013 #4
Its a hybrid, mostly historical roots ProgressiveProfessor Feb 2013 #9
Do, Please, Sir, Expound Further On This.... The Magistrate Feb 2013 #5
It depends on the level and degree ProgressiveProfessor Feb 2013 #12
That Does Not Advance The Conversation, Professor.... The Magistrate Feb 2013 #13
Tax exempt status has nothing to do with "reasonable accommodation to popular feelings" ProgressiveProfessor Feb 2013 #16
If You Think It Has Nothing To Do with Popular Feelings, Professor The Magistrate Feb 2013 #18
Churches are considered charities under the tax code Jeff In Milwaukee Feb 2013 #11
That is mostly a legacy from medieval times ProgressiveProfessor Feb 2013 #14
Not really... Jeff In Milwaukee Feb 2013 #17
Further to this I believe the lack of taxation is seen as part of the separation of Church and State ieoeja Feb 2013 #39
Yes - But some of them cross the line regularly Jeff In Milwaukee Feb 2013 #41
Because the 1st amendment establishes freedom of religion. cbayer Feb 2013 #22
That only applies to the government not private individuals ProgressiveProfessor Feb 2013 #24
What only applies to government? Non-profit status applies to all non-profit cbayer Feb 2013 #29
Agree with lax IRS enforcement of the 501(c)3 standards. pinto Feb 2013 #31
Localities can control Costco much more than a churches ProgressiveProfessor Feb 2013 #33
What has it done to neighborhoods, for better or worse? pinto Feb 2013 #38
I generally believe that even non-profits should pay their fair share of community costs ProgressiveProfessor Feb 2013 #40
Exempt Purposes - Internal Revenue Code Section 501(c)(3) pinto Feb 2013 #30
That exemption is also extended to property taxes in most jurisdictions ProgressiveProfessor Feb 2013 #34
Yeah.....and? HappyMe Feb 2013 #6
You must teach me, George Michael. You must teach me the ways of the secular flesh. nt Tommy_Carcetti Feb 2013 #8
The nation is, but a lot of the people aren't slackmaster Feb 2013 #15
Another clue: the US census magellan Feb 2013 #19
One side of my ancestry got here in 1774, the rest in the 1800's riqster Feb 2013 #20
I hear you magellan Feb 2013 #21
Same here on the French side riqster Feb 2013 #25
Certainly. I would be outraged if Congress passed a law respecting the establishment of religion, Nye Bevan Feb 2013 #26
Constitutionally it is decidedly neutral in regards religion. Neither supporting nor obstructing. pinto Feb 2013 #32
Correct. riqster Feb 2013 #35
Yet we have Federal laws like RLUIPA ProgressiveProfessor Feb 2013 #36
I'm unfamiliar with RLUIPA, but for background found this via Wikipedia, fwiw - pinto Feb 2013 #37
Which is exactly why I'm 10000% against a new constitutional convention. Initech Feb 2013 #42
Fuckin' hell, NO! riqster Feb 2013 #43
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»The United States is a se...»Reply #40