Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: Notesfiles $Revision: 1.7.0.8 $; site cdp
Path: utzoo!linus!decvax!decwrl!Glacier!cdp!scott
From: scott@cdp.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.politics
Subject: Re: "Tax Supported" Churches.
Message-ID: <12700001@cdp>
Date: Sat, 12-Oct-85 03:33:00 EDT
Article-I.D.: cdp.12700001
Posted: Sat Oct 12 03:33:00 1985
Date-Received: Tue, 15-Oct-85 08:12:48 EDT
References: <584@k.cs.cmu.edu.ARPA>
Lines: 20
Nf-ID: #R:k.cs.cmu.edu.ARPA:-58400:cdp:12700001:000:981
Nf-From: cdp.UUCP!scott    Oct 12 00:33:00 1985


> If the police mistreat a suspect, should they then mistreat all suspects in
> order to be consistent?  You seem to be saying a similar thing with respect
> to religions:  if the government mistreats (taxes) one religion, it should
> mistreat (tax) all religions in order to be consistent.

This "mistreatment" is no different than the "mistreatment" of citizens
who pay taxes (except in non-profit cases).

> I don't think that simply declaring that churches are subject to the same
> rules as anyone else is the right answer.  For instance:  suppose Congress
> decided to start taxing non-profit organizations for who knows what purpose.
> Overnight, the government would acquire the power to destroy *all* religions.

The "destruction" of religion would be no different than the "destruction"
of non-profits; personally, I woul care more about the latter.

Scott Weikart
Community Data Processing: 415-322-9069
{ihnp4,decvax,ucbvax,cbosgd,hao,purdue,duke,...}!hplabs!cdp!scott