Calm Posted April 7, 2022 Posted April 7, 2022 (edited) 22 hours ago, Amulek said: The honest answer is because they want the Church to be paying more, plain and simple. Also some few out there from what has been said want less tithing to be donated. They would be most content with none being paid. There is an assumption by many that if tithing is not deductible, less would be paid. Many also believe that even though it is not official, the Church wants to convey paying 10% on gross income is what is necessary to be obedient. This is practically impossible in some countries with high tax rates. Making it harder is seen as a good thing by some perhaps because some believe members will be frustrated at not being able to fulfill the commandment fully and give up thinking anything less than 10% on gross will be see as failing by the Church or God, so why bother trying at all as well as even those who could do it will think it too much and stop. Would be interesting to see if this is true, but not sure how to do it. Others see it as just a transparency issue, they believe it is appropriate to be able to track where donations of any kind go. Edited April 7, 2022 by Calm 1
Analytics Posted April 7, 2022 Posted April 7, 2022 21 hours ago, Amulek said: Why should they give a tinker's damn about whether or not some international organization wants to come in and subsidize charitable giving for a portion of their citizenry? When the government gives you a tax break for doing something, it is the government that is providing the subsidization. It is their right to decide whether or not they want to subsidize donations to religion. 21 hours ago, Amulek said: Well cry me a river. Maybe if the Australian government weren't so hostile to the advancement of religion such "schemes" would not be necessary. Not wanting to subsidize religion doesn't mean they are hostile to it. It just means they don't want to subsidize it. 21 hours ago, Amulek said: So, given those conditions, what's wrong with the Church coming in and telling its members, "Look, here's the deal - in order to receive the same treatment that your fellow Saints throughout the world receive (you know, those who live under governments less hostile to religion) we are going to ask that you simply assign all of your donations to our charitable trust, and let us worry about making sure the lights stay on down under." I like to play golf on Sundays, but my membership fees to the country club aren't tax deductible. Does that mean that the government is hostile towards golf? Of course not. It just means that the government (rightly) doesn't subsidize golf. Likewise, the government shouldn't subsidize religion. That isn't hostility to religion--it's an expression of my political philosophy of a small government with low taxes for all. Furthermore, the government shouldn't subsidize charities that don't actually spend very much on actual charitable endeavors.
Recommended Posts