3
3
0
Religious Liberty Scores a win,
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances."
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances."
I0M01My0ejubrs3p080HT00
Posted from click.heritage.org
Constitution
Religion
Freedom
Supreme Court
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 5
3
3
0
There is a lack of details here but I have significant concerns with this ruling. States have limited funds and to spend those funds on a private or religious institution that does not pay taxes is questionable. In this case there was not a law respecting the establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof. It was that state funds can not be used to support a religious institution ie a church. The church is still free to have Sunday services and they are free to have people over any time to do fund raising to pay for the playground out of their own funds, especially since they do not pay taxes.
"When the government announces competitive programs to the public, including to improve public health, safety, and security, it must allow religious communities to compete on the basis of merit for those benefits." This is just it, a church is a private non-tax paying institution and therefore should not be competing with public institutions for tax dollars.
It has nothing to do with forcing the church to renounce or shed it's religious identity in order to compete for state funds, it should not compete for state funds period because it is a non-tax paying private institution.
A secondary issue at hand is that if you start to support one religious institution with state funding then you run into the issue that now you either have to fund all religious institutions equally with state funds or you favor one religious institution over the others and have a defacto state religion like in the middle east and else where. The very thing the pilgrims tried to get away from as well.
"When the government announces competitive programs to the public, including to improve public health, safety, and security, it must allow religious communities to compete on the basis of merit for those benefits." This is just it, a church is a private non-tax paying institution and therefore should not be competing with public institutions for tax dollars.
It has nothing to do with forcing the church to renounce or shed it's religious identity in order to compete for state funds, it should not compete for state funds period because it is a non-tax paying private institution.
A secondary issue at hand is that if you start to support one religious institution with state funding then you run into the issue that now you either have to fund all religious institutions equally with state funds or you favor one religious institution over the others and have a defacto state religion like in the middle east and else where. The very thing the pilgrims tried to get away from as well.
(3)
(0)
3
3
0
I would look at this as a State issue and not a Religious Issue first. Why is the State giving away money? The State does not make a profit. It must take money from the People via taxes. The State then uses the money to pay for playgrounds via grants. Maybe the State is taking in too much money to be concerned with playgrounds. I think the real issue to be focused on is this belief that a government is better suited to plan and implement a playground than the People of the State. Reduce State taxes and let the People put up and pay for their own playgrounds should have been the ruling.
(3)
(0)
CDR (Join to see)
I think the problem reducing taxes is that we all act in our own self interest whereas the state is supposed to look out for the collective good. So if you reduce taxes and allow citizens to pay for their own playgrounds you would never get a playground. But you would also never get better roads, sports complexes, schools, libraries or any other civic items as those who do not ever use them would not want to pay for them.
The issue with the state is that they are supposed to look out for the common good but that does not always happen and as citizens we don't redress representatives for that often enough.
The issue with the state is that they are supposed to look out for the common good but that does not always happen and as citizens we don't redress representatives for that often enough.
(1)
(0)
SSG Robert Webster
LTC (Join to see) - I do not know how much you know about this particular issue, but here is where the 'rubber meets the road' (pun intended):
Nonprofit organizations are not exempt from the tire and lead-acid battery fees, but tires and batteries used for agricultural purposes are exempt if owned and operated by family farms or family farm corporations.
Since they are not exempt from the fee (tax if you like)(I believe that it is considered both, especially since it is in a since an upfront disposal fee), why should they not be eligible for a portion of the funds generated like any other entity? Denied only because the organization is a church? Either they are exempt or they are not; anything that they are not exempt from, they should be eligible to participate.
http://dor.mo.gov/business/tirebattery/
Nonprofit organizations are not exempt from the tire and lead-acid battery fees, but tires and batteries used for agricultural purposes are exempt if owned and operated by family farms or family farm corporations.
Since they are not exempt from the fee (tax if you like)(I believe that it is considered both, especially since it is in a since an upfront disposal fee), why should they not be eligible for a portion of the funds generated like any other entity? Denied only because the organization is a church? Either they are exempt or they are not; anything that they are not exempt from, they should be eligible to participate.
http://dor.mo.gov/business/tirebattery/
Tire and Lead-Acid Battery Fee
The Missouri Department of Revenue administers Missouri's business tax laws, and collects sales and use tax, employer withholding, motor fuel tax, cigarette tax, financial institutions tax, corporation income tax, and corporation franchise tax.
(0)
(0)
2
2
0
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google