Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site analog.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxl!ihnp4!zehntel!hplabs!analog!kim
From: kim@analog.UUCP (Kim Helliwell          )
Newsgroups: net.legal,net.religion
Subject: Re: Re: Moon Gets the Slammer
Message-ID: <130@analog.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 18-May-84 16:12:38 EDT
Article-I.D.: analog.130
Posted: Fri May 18 16:12:38 1984
Date-Received: Mon, 21-May-84 03:41:19 EDT
References: <1371@unc-c.UUCP>
Organization: Analog Design Tools, Menlo Park, Ca.
Lines: 32

This is in re an article (signed only "dya") in which the writer expressed
happiness that Moon is going to jail, and then went on to suggest that
a general investigation of the use of money by churches be launched, and
that churches should pay property tax.

     I for one would be very distraught to have Congress or any governmental
organization begin a general investigation of how churches use money.  This
is tantamount to suggesting a witch-hunt, a far different thing from 
responding to specific complaints against a specific organization. This sort
of government supervision of religion is precisely what *IS* proscribed in
the Constitution, and in our tradition of religious freedom.

I am the treasurer of the church I belong to, and my church *DOES* pay a
certain amount of property tax--the assessment is on the parking lot, not the
building proper.   We also pay the normal amount of tax on the home used
for housing the pastor.  So it is not strictly true that churches pay NO
property tax (in California, at least).  We also pay vehicle tax on the 
vehicles we own, and sales tax on all purchases, and FICA for the pastor's
and secretary's salary, and  . . .   Property tax is a small part of the
picture.

Most church finances are fragile, at best, and would not stand any major
changes in the current tax status.  Therefore, suggesting such a change is
tantamount to asking that most churches be put out of business, or at least
severely curtailed in their activities.  If this is what the writer of the
article wants, it is certainly his right to express it, but I question whether
that is what he had in mind.



						Kim Helliwell
						hplabs!analog!kim