I went long in my last post so now we’ll address…<\/p>\n
On Churches Allegedly Being State-Supported Institutions<\/strong> There is also the issue of how one would tax a church because the government has no jurisdiction over them due to the separation of church and state. Clergy are self-employed — we pay our own FICA, taxes, and such instead of having payroll taxes. Unless we are eligible for food stamps or Medicaid or WIC, the government does not give us any money or assistance. Clergy salaries come from the churches they serve just as the salaries of employees for a charity or foundation come out of donations to that organization.<\/p>\n Having said all that, I fail to see how religion is state-supported fiscally because the state has no jurisdiction over churches, synagogues, mosques, and temples.<\/p>\n There is another aspect however. There’s the National Prayer Breakfast<\/a>, the National Day of Prayer<\/a>, Governor Rick Perry asking Texans to pray for rain… These are things that fall under what are referred to in church polity as “local options”, meaning that observances happen as local custom dictate. <\/p>\n The Republican presidents tend to hold gatherings for the National Day of Prayer<\/a> whereas the Democrats don’t. (The wiki article even talks about the lawsuits associated with it.) I don’t think I have ever participated in it for the simple reason that it’s usually on a Thursday morning and I have other things to do. I’ve seen and heard of occurrences where faiths other than Christians participate and this would honestly be the best way to do it IMHO. However, how it is done really does depend on the culture of the place where the occurrence is taking place. If it’s a place like the Midwest or the South, it’s going to be all the Christian clergy there unless there’s a synagogue or mosque in town. I have never lived in a place where attendance has been required of all citizens and where it’s the only thing on the radio, so I really don’t know how it’s government-imposed religion. (I just saw this<\/a> which shows a good atheist alternative to that day.)<\/p>\n The National Prayer Breakfast<\/a> is actually pretty benign and has a social justice focus rather than a “praying for the infidels in the nation” one. [\/tic] The focus is more on addressing the problems of the nation and the world and truthfully, it’s not one of those battles that atheists\/non-theists should fight. You *want* our government to address social issues and this is a means to that end.<\/p>\n As far as Governor Rick Perry asking Texans and the rest of the country to pray for rain, it’s another place where local customs dictate the response. Is God going to magically produce rain because the people prayed? Not necessarily but it probably wouldn’t hurt and it gives people something that they can do. Is it the government forcing religion on the atheist communities in Texas? I wouldn’t say that the governor is forcing religion on them — they have the option to say “screw this!” and roll their eyes.<\/p>\n I know that one argument of some atheists reading this is that I have no right to address this because I’m in the majority. Actually, I’m not. Other than living in the rural Midwest and Ohio, I’ve never necessarily been the majority. Even when I lived in Newark, only 50% of the town actually identified with a particular church. Most people would probably be classified as culturally Christian or may identify with a faith group but not attend worship services.<\/p>\n I’m sure my argument is probably circular and not all that great but I’m writing this late at night to try and get myself tired enough to sleep. My contention is this: religion is not state-supported<\/strong>. The only way it could be truly stated that the state supports it is if we had a national church like the Church of England and one paid church taxes. <\/p>\n The next post will be on the contention that atheists have no morals (which I don’t believe) and why atheist politicians have a hard time being elected.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" I went long in my last post so now we’ll address… On Churches Allegedly Being State-Supported Institutions Churches are classified by the IRS as “501(c)3 religious organizations” which puts them in the same class as charities and foundations, making all … Continue reading
\nChurches are classified by the IRS as “501(c)3 religious organizations” which puts them in the same class as charities and foundations, making all donations tax-deductible. They are this way as a result of LBJ trying to shut them up<\/a>. How does this “shut them up”? Well, churches cannot preach against anything the government deems “legal” such as abortion, homosexuality, the war in Iraq, or tell their parishioners how to vote. Doing so can jeopardize their 501(c)3 standing. Recent examples include a church in southern California who either lost their standing or were threatened with it for preaching about the idiocy of the war in Iraq as well as the petitions that went around trying to get the LDS’s 501(c)3 status revoked after their efforts to get Prop 8 passed in California. (This wouldn’t happen because the LDS has a HUGE presence in Washington with the delegations from Utah, Idaho, and Nevada.) Another example would be Catholic churches denying the Eucharist to those who vote for pro-choice politicians — it’s a sneaky way to get around the 501(c)3 issue. (Not trying to pick on Catholics or Mormons here — I’m citing examples that I know of that have been in the media.)<\/p>\n