Search Results: should churches pay taxes

The Supreme Court agreed on Friday to consider a high-profile case that could open the door to allowing public dollars to directly fund religious schools.

The widely watched case out of Oklahoma could transform the line between church and state in education, and it will come before a court whose conservative majority has broadly embraced the role of religion in public life.

The case centers on a proposal for the nation’s first religious charter school, St. Isidore of Seville Catholic Virtual School. The school would be online, and its curriculum would embed religious teachings throughout lessons, including in math and reading classes.

As a charter school, it would be run independently from traditional public schools. But public taxpayer dollars would pay for the school, and it would be free for students. The question of whether the government can fully finance a religious school has proved especially divisive within the school choice movement and across Oklahoma.

They urged the Supreme Court to take up the case, believing the conservative-leaning court would decide in the school’s favor.

A coalition of religious leaders, advocates of public schools and some other state Republicans say the proposal is unconstitutional. Oklahoma’s Republican attorney general, Gentner Drummond, argued it would “open the floodgates and force taxpayers to fund all manner of religious indoctrination, including radical Islam or even the Church of Satan.”

The OK SCOTUS wrote in a majority opinion that the school would “create a slippery slope” that could lead to “the destruction of Oklahomans’ freedom to practice religion. Still, as more Republican state legislatures move to support school vouchers and other options for parents to use public money to educate their children in private schools, including religious schools.

The case will present new education questions for the 6-to-3 conservative majority, which has shown an openness to religion in the public sphere.

I have a question I would like to ask everyone here that stems from an argument I had in one of my college courses.

Should Churches in The United States Pay taxes? When our professor asked this question, hands shot up across the room with people waiting in unison to scream "No way Jose!" Out of 27 people, I was the only one who said yes. I was then asked to present my thesis as to why. (Keep in mind I attend a university in the deep south, where the majority of students are devout, southern Baptists.) With this type of audience, I knew I had my work cut out for me.

#1. I think that all religions have been getting over on the tax man since the beginning of time. Christianity, for example asks for a "tithe" or tenth of your income if possible. What happens to my 10% after I give it to the church? The uniform answer is that the money goes to do the work of God. If God is an all powerful deity, then why does he need money? He created everything in existence, but somehow he needs a little helping hand from the ATM? Nice try, but I don't agree.

#2 If Religious leaders of any faith can perform legal changes to a person's life (i.e. Marriage), then they are in my opinion performing a service to the state and should pay taxes based on their recognition as a ordained matrimony service that they provide to the general public. Basic economics. If you have a good or provide a service, then you pay taxes.

#3. This is my big one, Religious Legislative lobby groups. I have a big problem with groups that pool their tax free money together to influence law makers. Their are so many laws passed that are tainted with religious influence and undertone that it's amazing how we can have any audacity to call ourselves a truly "free" country. I don't have a problem with you when you worship your god, I have a problem with you when you and your god make the laws that tell me how I should live. At this point, I'm not a citizen of a free state, I'm now a hostage of a religious based puppet regime. So, In this instance, if religious groups want to lobby "our" Government, then pay your taxes first. I thought that the American government was liable to it's tax paying citizens. In fact I do recall us having a little issue with England about "taxation without representation", only to give churches representation without taxation? hmmm?

Those were my 3 biggest points or argument and I was suprised to find that I was'nt burned at the stake for my beliefs. So now I want to turn it over to you.What are your thoughts?