Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!unc!mcnc!unc-c!dya
From: dya@unc-c.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.legal,net.religion
Subject: Re: Moon Gets the Slammer
Message-ID: <1371@unc-c.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 16-May-84 10:28:45 EDT
Article-I.D.: unc-c.1371
Posted: Wed May 16 10:28:45 1984
Date-Received: Thu, 17-May-84 05:36:28 EDT
Lines: 44

References: ihu1g.348


      OOOOOOOOHHH, Yipppeeeee! I don't think it was long enough, I hope
that he sees a jail cell for 18 YEARS.

      Folks, this has been a long standing flame with me. I can see the
intent of the Congress when it saw fit to exempt the income of your typical
minister, who has things tough trying to eat especially with a small
congregation. I don't think that Congress could have anticipated entire
TV networks, national churches investing heavily in the stock market, millions
of dollars of solicited contributions, the vast holdings of land which are
well above the requirements of any church whatsoever, and so on. Yeah, I
know that some of these activities serve useful purposes, and that profits
from playing the stock market by a church may actually go towards legitimate
things.  HOWEVER:

     Do TV stations who accept money for the playing of religious videotapes
over the air ( or carrying PTL live ) get taxed at a rate of (n-x)/n where
n is the total number of hours of broadcasting and x is the number of hours
of religious broadcasting ? Of course not. Prorating a TV station's income
taxes would be UNHEARD OF even if it were for religious broadcasting. On
the other hand, Jim Bakker and his infamous PTL Club can operate absolutely
tax free and broadcast the SAME material ( accepting compensation for same
from his TV audience ).

     The "separation of Church and State" clause which is often cited (and
does not even exist in the Constitution as dictating strict separation ) was
designed by the Founding Fathers to keep government out of the business of
watching who worships what. It was not designed to put religion above the law.
Quite frankly, I think it is high time that every church which has an annual
cash flow above a certain level per bona-fide member, and who does not put
that cash into bona-fide charitable deeds, should be TAXED. Similarly, I think
that all churches should have to pay property tax. Churches enjoy the same
comforts that I do ( running city water, sewerage service, polcie and fire
protection, etc. ) why should they all be subsidized when I am in general
going to go to only one of them ( if any at all )?

     It is high time that the US Congress conducted a national investigation
of all religious orginisations with a annual cash flow or property holdings
that are completely out of line with the costs of providing religious services
and/or church-operated education and chairitable deeds.

dya