Skip to main content

View Diary: Mitt Romney jumps on the anti-birth control bandwagon, attacks Obama (136 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  No. What feeding of the poor they do might (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    a gilas girl, Eyesbright, BPARTR

    or might not fall to government. There are tons of secular charities that also do such things. They don't provide medical care, which is part of what this is about. They do run some hospitals, partly funded by the government, and partly paid for by customers, which provide such limited services as they feel to be appropriate. They in no way make better citizens, and, in fact, teach disrespect for both science and secular governments and laws.

    Their contributors don't get a charitable deduction. Such deductions are for those payments made with no quid pro quo to organizations meeting certain requirements. If you carefully parse the revenue Code and regulations, you find that Churches are a special case off by themselves and need perform zero charitable activities in order to qualify.

    "The ability to tax is the ability to destroy", hence the secular government should not tax churches in order to preserve religious freedom is the idea underlying that deduction.

    That, in its essence, is fascism--ownership of government by an individual, by a group, or by any other controlling private power. -- Franklin D. Roosevelt --

    by enhydra lutris on Tue Feb 07, 2012 at 11:53:47 AM PST

    [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site