Should churches that don't perform gay marriages lose their tax-exempt status?

[DC Al Fine]

I try to be only as much of a culture warrior as is actually necessary, so of course not.

All churches should lose tax exempt status.

People who hold this position tend to have a poor understanding of why they have it in the first place.

And are completely ignorant of how taxation works to boot.

[DC Al Fine]

To answer the OP, no of course not. Churches like all other non-profits should be tax exempt. I also support extending the property tax and sales tax exemptions to all non-profits.

[DC Al Fine]

I try to be only as much of a culture warrior as is actually necessary, so of course not.

All churches should lose tax exempt status.

People who hold this position tend to have a poor understanding of why they have it in the first place.

I am curious, in your view, why do they have it in the first place?

Because they're nonprofits.

Let me explain my position on the issue.  Small churches like my local one should have it, but these large mega churches who's pastors make hundreds of thousands a year, taking money from the poor, they don't need to be non-profit, they are making a profit, in false truths to the people.

Tax accountant here.

Would you care to suggest how the IRS would differentiate between the two kinds of churches without giving the government power to arbitrarily tax churches it doesn't like?

[DC Al Fine]

Absolutely not. No church should be forced to hold gay weddings. In 20 years, eh maybe. Are churches allowed to forbid interracial marriages today?

But they should lose tax-exempt status if they campaign on political issues.

That's status quo.

That's the legal status quo. Not the status quo in reality.

Fair point. The Mormon Church should've gotten their exemption revoked after the shenanigans they pulled in 2008.

No that's not remotely how the regulations work.

[DC Al Fine]

Interestingly, if you made churches pay property taxes it would be the Evangelical-type suburban megachurch model that would most easily acclimate, not the smaller, older churches (predominately Catholic or mainline) that were built 100+ years ago in the middle of cities that would survive. Pretty much every church would need to be a suburban (or rural) type of place if that happened.

Indeed. Property tax in my area is roughly 1% of assessed value. This would hurt my church a bit but wouldn't affect our day to day operations. On the other hand, the local Anglican cathedral is across the street from my downtown office. I shudder to think what they would have to pay

Oh blimey, didn't think of that. Of course, I am on record as stating that there is no literally no point in religion in *ugh* modern buildings. Why people insist on building new churches I'll never understand.

Perhaps some sort of eyesore tax on the modernist dens?

You Brits have a peculiar relationship with Christianity that never ceases to fascinate me.

[DC Al Fine]

You're seriously missing something if you think that the Supreme Court is going to rule that a gay couple has a right to walk into a church and be married by a pastor of their choosing.

Churches don't recognize civil marriages or bestow the secular benefits that accompany them, so I fail to see how a church's unwillingness to wed two people in a ceremony is a hindrance to their Constitutional right to getting married.    

And what was Hillary Clinton's spokesperson suppose to do?  Say "yes" in the face of a First Amendment that obviously protects the free exercise or religion? or say "no" in what could be construed as a negative statement about LGBT rights on what was suppose to be a momentous day for the cause?  

The concern trolling is real.  

How is a baker's refusal to bake a cake for a gay marriage a hindrance to their Constitutional right to get married?  Yet bakers must shut up, bake and deliver gay wedding cakes under penalty of law in some states.

This is an outrage and massive infringement on the personal freedom of these bakers! What's next, they'll be forced to bake cakes for blacks and Hispanics, because of a religiously justified opposition to their skin color!?

I'm waiting for the case where a shop refuses to do flowers or a cake for an interracial marriage based on religious grounds. Or a Jewish or (more likely) Muslim marriage based on their bride and groom being unable to accept Jesus Christ as their savior--(the Bible arguably says a teensy bit more on this subject than homosexuality). Or a Catholic florist that refuses to deal with a divorced couple remarrying.

And yet we don't see those scenarios. At all. I wonder why......

Well for one how many sects are proclaiming their eternal opposition to two Jews getting married?