Skip to main content

View Diary: Organized Religion is a Protection Racket (69 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  How doesn't that apply to other nonprofits? (0+ / 0-)
    One has to pay some level of tax just to be in a state of economic neutrality.  Ergo, religious organizations receive free services from society without contributing anything back...
    No more than any other nonprofit. Other nonprofit organizations don't have to justify their existence by demonstrating that they "contribute something back" to society; they simply have to prove that they are, indeed, not for-profit commercial ventures, and that they're not engaging in any partisan political activity.

    Again, you seem to want to give religious organizations a higher bar to clear than any other nonprofit organization—in effect, creating a governmental presumption against religion. How doesn't that violate the Establishment Clause?

    Further, that still doesn't at all address the content of my previous comment, which regarded the "no religious test" clause, and its (lack of) applicability to individuals' voting decisions or to our constitutionally-protected speech about political issues. How does your above comment apply to that conversation thread?

    "When I give food to the poor, they call me a saint. When I ask why the poor have no food, they call me a communist." --Dom Helder Camara, archbishop of Recife

    by JamesGG on Tue Nov 20, 2012 at 01:56:31 PM PST

    [ Parent ]

    •  What financial disclosure? (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      NonnyO

      Check it.

      Sorry, it looks like you're mistaken.  Let's give religious organizations the same bar a non-religious charity has to pass.

      To do otherwise would be to endorse religion.

      •  That's about IRS reporting... (0+ / 0-)

        ...not about any organization having to justify their existence.

        I don't see anything on there that indicates that any other nonprofit has to demonstrate that they "contribute something back" to society in exchange for their tax exemptions.

        So it comes back to Troubadour wanting religious organizations to have to do something more than any other nonprofit organization does—in having to explicitly justify why they should be allowed to continue to exist.

        As for the "endorsing religion" part... while the Constitution doesn't endorse religion, the Free Exercise Clause does specifically protect religion from the state just as the Establishment Clause protects the state from religion.

        "When I give food to the poor, they call me a saint. When I ask why the poor have no food, they call me a communist." --Dom Helder Camara, archbishop of Recife

        by JamesGG on Wed Nov 21, 2012 at 06:45:38 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Looks like they're justifying it to me. (0+ / 0-)

          What part of reporting one's finances to the IRS isn't justifying those finances?

          Non-profits have to report their finances, unless it's a church.  Why do they not report their finances?  Why is that fair to the atheist nonprofit group?

          We're supposed to be equal, but right now people who want to spread nonsense and hate have favor over those who don't.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

  • Recommended (174)
  • Community (70)
  • Baltimore (50)
  • Civil Rights (42)
  • Bernie Sanders (39)
  • Culture (34)
  • Elections (26)
  • Law (26)
  • Economy (25)
  • Freddie Gray (23)
  • Education (23)
  • Labor (22)
  • Hillary Clinton (22)
  • Texas (21)
  • 2016 (21)
  • Rescued (21)
  • Environment (20)
  • Racism (20)
  • Media (20)
  • Barack Obama (19)
  • Click here for the mobile view of the site