Oz Govt following UK & French lead on Tax/Charity status

by Mattieu 153 Replies latest watchtower scandals

  • Doubting Bro
    Doubting Bro

    They all have a surplus 10 Euro's

    Mr A (an atheist) puts it in his bank getting interest. (doesn't pay further tax on it)

    Mr B ( a catholic) Puts it in a passing donation plate at his church. (Doesn't pay tax on it)

    Mr c (a witness) puts it in a donation box at the back of the kingdom Hall. (The money gets taxed because france doesn't like witnesses)

    how is this scenario in anyway fair and honest?

    First of all, Mr. A does pay further tax on the 10 Euro's because interest (read profit) is taxable income.

    My particular arguement is that both B & C organizations should pay taxes on their profits. Advocating a particular belief system is not a charitable act that should be subsidized by the government by giving preferential treatment. I think all religious organizations should be held to the same standard for sure. If you're going to place a tax on profits of Scientology, JW, LDS, then you should also do so for Catholic, Baptist, Hindu, Muslim, etc.

    There is a huge difference between taxing a corporate entity and taxing a belief system. If a world wide tax were placed on the WTS, would that change your JW belief? Would it stop you from getting together and worshiping? Maybe it would need to be smaller groups in private homes but I fail to see how that would stop an individual's belief system.

    People can have whatever spiritual goals they want and can talk to whoever would like to listen about whatever they want. But, why should they be given preferential treatment by being exempt from paying taxes.

    I know, let's tax all religions except for the WTS since all of their clergy are living a lavish lifestyle!

  • isaacaustin
    isaacaustin

    Reniaa Reniaa you false prophet you! LOL

  • debator
    debator

    Isaac

    My name is debator!

    Does a cat sanctuary feed the poor? Does a childcare facility rescue lost ponies. Does a cancer charity provide water in africa? They each fulfill the need they aim for. Religions provide for spiritual needs as their goals. There is room for all our needs and we don't have to start doing each others to prove ourselves.

  • isaacaustin
    isaacaustin

    Yes, but it is obvious you are the one who previously posted as Reniaa. You haven't even denied that.

    And you perhaps need to do some research on different social programs of different churches///and compare it to the pitiful peddling of Wt rags from door to door.

    You said:Does a cat sanctuary feed the poor? Does a childcare facility rescue lost ponies. Does a cancer charity provide water in africa? They each fulfill the need they aim for. Religions provide for spiritual needs as their goals. There is room for all our needs and we don't have to start doing each others to prove ourselves.

    My reply: go tell that to the Australian government, if you see fit.

  • isaacaustin
    isaacaustin

    I know of one church, for instance...that spends one weekend in June going thruout the community to assist the elderly at nursing homes as well as those who are homeowners and need help with household chores...they have missionary outreach programs where they go to other geographical locations to assist the underprivelaged- no strings attached- while sharing the message.

  • debator
    debator

    Hi doubting bro

    Mr A's money is profit since he spends it on himself. Donations to a religion are non-profit because the surplus is used to further the religious goals of that religion.

    You clearly do not see spiritual goals as a charitable need but it has been established as one for centuries in fact the word "charity" is from the bible simply meaning love which encompasses all humans needs not just physical ones. It is only that Governments are changing their mind on this (as you have) that this might change. And as I originally said Governments backing away from supporting religions then eventually turning on them is a biblically predicted thing and it is sad to see it coming to harvest.

  • isaacaustin
    isaacaustin

    Ren/Bator:

    You clearly do not see spiritual goals as a charitable need but it has been established as one for centuries in fact the word "charity" is from the bible simply meaning love which encompasses all humans needs not just physical ones. It is only that Governments are changing their mind on this (as you have) that this might change. And as I originally said Governments backing away from supporting religions then eventually turning on them is a biblically predicted thing and it is sad to see it coming to harvest.

    My reply: However, if the org does not provide a social need for the community that the govt would otherwise have to rpovide..and is found to actually be harmful then the govt certainly can and should remove its subsidation. Ah, you false prophet you....govts wil turn on all relgions and all will disappaer except the JWs due to Jehovah's backing. LOL LOL

  • debator
    debator

    Isaac

    Is a religion still a religion if they no longer preach? they do "missions" but no missionary work? It's devaluing the need for us to preach God's word.

    The irony is that if some on here would have their way 2000 years or so ago. Government officials would have been in a room with a group of men and a woman just about to pour oil on one mans head and taken the oil off her as a taxible income because it isn't being used for the poor. The government officials then would have gone home and poured the oil on their own heads arguing that they represent the people and it is a tax deductable perk.

  • Scully
    Scully

    Excellent.

    One more opportunity to show the WTS's leadership opposing Jehovah's Agenda toward The Great Tribulation™.

  • isaacaustin
    isaacaustin

    R/Bator:

    Isaac

    Is a religion still a religion if they no longer preach? they do "missions" but no missionary work? It's devaluing the need for us to preach God's word.

    The irony is that if some on here would have there way 2000 years or so ago. Government officials would have been in a room with a group of men and a woman just about to pour oil on one mans head and taken the oil off her as a taxible income because it isn't being used for the poor. The government officials then would have gone home and poured the oil on their own heads arguing that they represent the people and it is a tax deductable perk.

    My reply: Re-read what I wrote. They do preach. But they assist others NO STRINGS attached. Unlike the JWs who preach their false gospel and simply move on to the next door...which is truly devaluing to the word of God. Looks like you have been knocked down pretty badly on this debate and the other one on blood as well.

    Any other gibberish or false prophecies you want to utter?

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit