just another update on 1 australian senators quest to squash the tax free status of scientology/jw's and other cults:.
http://www.theage.com.au/national/call-for-independent-charities-commission-20100912-1570g.html.
now the election is over, hopefully wont take too long for legislation to pass.
Isaac
You prove my point, Australia isn't stopping scientology "harming" individuals they are just saying they need to pay for the right to carry on harming individuals in there country.
Taxation is a very dishonest greedy way to sanction a religion.
just another update on 1 australian senators quest to squash the tax free status of scientology/jw's and other cults:.
http://www.theage.com.au/national/call-for-independent-charities-commission-20100912-1570g.html.
now the election is over, hopefully wont take too long for legislation to pass.
Bohm
My answer is No to the second because taxing a religion that is simply funding the luxury lifestyle of a leader is not stoping them doing it. It is just saying "We want a slice of it too".
It's like legalising brothels it doesn't stop them it just makes governments pimps themselves.
But you are drawing away from the topic at hand.
just another update on 1 australian senators quest to squash the tax free status of scientology/jw's and other cults:.
http://www.theage.com.au/national/call-for-independent-charities-commission-20100912-1570g.html.
now the election is over, hopefully wont take too long for legislation to pass.
Hi bohn
What definition of abuse? your biased one that you have put on witnesses from your opinion?
Then I can happily say No.
Taxation has nothing to do with what a religion teaches or preaches.
just another update on 1 australian senators quest to squash the tax free status of scientology/jw's and other cults:.
http://www.theage.com.au/national/call-for-independent-charities-commission-20100912-1570g.html.
now the election is over, hopefully wont take too long for legislation to pass.
Hi bohm
Alright I'll say a qualified "Yes" because It is open to mis-use if a Government decides to redefine established understandings of what surplus can be spent on. Which france is clearly doing.
It is one thing to say "You can't spend money on palaces, and jewels for leaders usage and enjoyment and clearly nothing to do with your religious goals."
Quite another to say "I don't like what you preach so I will tax you to stop you".
I think I have said my case and I hope a few agree, that no secular government has a right to use taxation or other unscrupulous methods to curtail people's right to choose their religious Identity or lack of it.
just another update on 1 australian senators quest to squash the tax free status of scientology/jw's and other cults:.
http://www.theage.com.au/national/call-for-independent-charities-commission-20100912-1570g.html.
now the election is over, hopefully wont take too long for legislation to pass.
To be honest MMXIV
While I think that sweeping statement is true it is unprovable as most general statements are. But then arguing the effect of bible morality on people is always a difficult topic because people will always point to the exceptions who ignore it in a religion rather than the normal one that put it into practise.
I reiterate (subject to our abiltiy by society's standards) Witnesses pay taxes like anyone else our religious identity has nothing to do with this.
We have 3 men working at a office in france, all doing the same type of job and on the same wage level. They all pay taxes as per governmental requirement.
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?
just another update on 1 australian senators quest to squash the tax free status of scientology/jw's and other cults:.
http://www.theage.com.au/national/call-for-independent-charities-commission-20100912-1570g.html.
now the election is over, hopefully wont take too long for legislation to pass.
Hi bohn
The official definition of non-profit is as follows...
A non-profit organization (abbreviated as NPO, also known as a not-for-profit organization [1] ) is an organization that does not distribute its surplus funds to owners or shareholders, but instead uses them to help pursue its goals.
I can see you are trying to say just having surplus funds means profit but this clearly goes against the meaning of the word.
All of witness funds get ploughed into our goals and that includes people right to hear the bible's message. (other religons I think do abuse this clearly giving surplus funds to the leaders to enjoy in personal pleasure and if countries looked at this, the last religon that would qualify would be witnesses). You may not like our message from the bible but our money gets spent on sending it around the world not buying jewels or palaces or bodyguards.
France is using personal dislike of a religion to redefine who they tax. They do not tax other religions that preach messages they do actually like.
They are clearly picking and choosing in a very arbitary undemocratic and discriminative way against witnesses that has very little to do with taxing.
just another update on 1 australian senators quest to squash the tax free status of scientology/jw's and other cults:.
http://www.theage.com.au/national/call-for-independent-charities-commission-20100912-1570g.html.
now the election is over, hopefully wont take too long for legislation to pass.
Hi MMXIV
Your point cannot be used as a reason to tax our religion unless you can say that the preportion of witnesses who don't qualify to pay taxes is because they are witnesses not because they fall into the set catagories that society allows for that don't pay taxes.
just another update on 1 australian senators quest to squash the tax free status of scientology/jw's and other cults:.
http://www.theage.com.au/national/call-for-independent-charities-commission-20100912-1570g.html.
now the election is over, hopefully wont take too long for legislation to pass.
Hi bohn
I am not a scientolgist, I'm not even sure they qualify as a religion from their belief which seem to be a mix of vague ritual with aliens instead of God at the end of it.
I am a witness and I know that every penny we get donated gets ploughed back into our religion and spreading Jehovah's message.
What is your definition of abuse? that someone doesn't preach what you personally believe in?
France is clearly picking and choosing which religions they tax and which religions they don't. One of france's most popular religions Catholism openly uses donations for feathering the nests of it leaders including palaces, jewelry, rich clothing, private jets, servants.
The community has an unalienble right to religion and witnesses provide that. If you are saying that is not enough why aren't other religions taxed for the same reason?
France is victimising Witnesses because they don't like their faith and Scientology for the same reasons. I think scientology is a nuts religion but I uphold any humanities right to choose for themselves what to believe.
If a religion breaks the law that is different but a human rights court upheld our rights as a religion on every count.
Our shepherds get flats in a building block and enough money to live on and not even huge wage packet that most recognise official religions give their church leaders.
Once you go down the strawman of comparing religions especially monetarily, witnesses come out better than the majority. Even property, can our kingdom halls and bethels compare to the vast landholdings of other churches? catholics own their own country, mormons their own city and both charge rents and taxes on them.
You are pointing a finger at witnesses that you are clearly not doing for other religions.
just another update on 1 australian senators quest to squash the tax free status of scientology/jw's and other cults:.
http://www.theage.com.au/national/call-for-independent-charities-commission-20100912-1570g.html.
now the election is over, hopefully wont take too long for legislation to pass.
MMXJV
Are you saying people without jobs are only found in the witness faith? Taxation allows for a certain percentage of society to be not working for various reasons due health, age, lack of jobs etc. I'm sure a percentage of witnesses fall into this catagory and they reflect the percentage found in any given group so again why are you saying that jobless witnesses mean they should pay taxes on their faith but a jobless catholic, Mormons or baptist members shouldn't?
First other than your clear bias, you offer no prove that witnesses in anyway pay less taxes and given our adherence to biblical teachings to render "Caesars's things to Caesar" and not play illegal games respecting authority. I could probably argue we pay more taxes than most who have no moral teachings to encourage them not to tax dodge.
France is being illegal by not treating Witnesses the same as any other religion. They will have to recognise this and my thoughts are they will end up taxing all religions rather than give up the money.
Like I said this is France doing slyly what Russia is doing publically. Both are saying as secular governments they have the right to dictate our religious identity as a people.
just another update on 1 australian senators quest to squash the tax free status of scientology/jw's and other cults:.
http://www.theage.com.au/national/call-for-independent-charities-commission-20100912-1570g.html.
now the election is over, hopefully wont take too long for legislation to pass.
Hi black sheep
I'm a witness because I have read the bible the hebrew scriptures as well as the greek scriptures. No other christian religion reflects the bible's actual teachings.
The problem with france and maybe now Australia is trying to treat one religion differently than another. Witnesses have been upheld in a human rights court as being an established religion that people have a right to hear about and judge for themselves.
The right to proselytise is an Unalienable right All individual's have unalienable rights to believe in what the choose and hear the options. Why would you support curtailing this. Either by the side door of taxation or full-frontal attack like Russia.
