JAHS Posted March 11, 2016 Posted March 11, 2016 In a unanimous decision by the Supreme Court today, the eight justices ruled in favor of revoking the Church of Scientology’s tax-exempt status in the United States. Under the ruling, Scientology will still be able to operate as a business but no longer as a non-profit religious organization. http://abcnews.com.co/united-states-revokes-scientologys-tax-exempt-status/ I am sure many are wondering(hoping) if the LDS Church is next. Do not post false information.
cinepro Posted March 11, 2016 Posted March 11, 2016 (edited) Just so we're all clear, that's not real. This is though. Scientology had a big win in court in Belgium today. Edited March 11, 2016 by cinepro
deli_llama Posted March 11, 2016 Posted March 11, 2016 (edited) Are you sure about your news source there? Sarah Bradley, spokeswoman of Sock It Forward, not only managed to find herself quoted in this fine abcnews.com.co article, she was also quoted in the equally well received article from abcnews.com.co concerning Mr. Trump tweeting a picture of his penis. Now tell me, what are the chances of that? (The chances of Sarah being quoted twice in unrelated articles, and not the chances of Trump tweeting a photo of his genitalia, which wouldn't surprise anyone anyways.) I will say this though, thumbs up for Sock It Forward, an actual charity. Edited to add: Interestingly, it seems Sarah is a busy gal. She was also quoted in the article about Bill Murray unwittingly breaking up a bank robbery. Phew. Edited March 11, 2016 by deli_llama
JAHS Posted March 11, 2016 Author Posted March 11, 2016 27 minutes ago, cinepro said: Just so we're all clear, that's not real. This is though. Scientology had a big win in court in Belgium today. Right. It is not real but there are many who wish it was. 1
rockpond Posted March 11, 2016 Posted March 11, 2016 I think that our Church's lawyers are much too smart to let our business dealings get in the way of the religious exemption for the church. What I think could give us a problem is the statements regarding legislation that seem to carry so much weight in Utah.
Thinking Posted March 11, 2016 Posted March 11, 2016 45 minutes ago, rockpond said: I think that our Church's lawyers are much too smart to let our business dealings get in the way of the religious exemption for the church. I don't even have to respond to this.
Thinking Posted March 11, 2016 Posted March 11, 2016 This should have been a clue that the story was fake. Quote The investigation, along with an extensive audit, found the group to be a “criminal operation with a sole purpose of making money”. Making money is not criminal, and if the court really did determine that the organization was criminal, tax exempt status would be the least of its concerns. 1
rockpond Posted March 11, 2016 Posted March 11, 2016 21 minutes ago, Thinking said: I don't even have to respond to this. I'm not sure if that came across wrong... It wasn't meant to be a criticism. The Church has for-profit entities but they are structured such that the for-profit funds are not commingled with the tax exempt entities. (in response to the goofy article's claims about scientology)
Thinking Posted March 11, 2016 Posted March 11, 2016 4 minutes ago, rockpond said: I'm not sure if that came across wrong... It wasn't meant to be a criticism. The Church has for-profit entities but they are structured such that the for-profit funds are not commingled with the tax exempt entities. (in response to the goofy article's claims about scientology) I knew exactly what you meant, but when you use smart, lawyer, business, church, and exemption in the same sentence, there's no need to respond.
The Nehor Posted March 11, 2016 Posted March 11, 2016 46 minutes ago, Thinking said: I knew exactly what you meant, but when you use smart, lawyer, business, church, and exemption in the same sentence, there's no need to respond. In a litigious society it would be gross negligence not to be so prepared.
Recommended Posts