Surviving as a Christian business owner when targeted by LGBTs

[Barrd]

A acquaintance that runs a ministry slash soup kitchen deals with the tax filing status all the time. In the case of church ministries he says there is two ways one can file for tax exempt one is a old school way and there is another that is just about the only way today’s gov will recognize. This status (sorry I don’t know what it is) is the way gov has gained control, by filing this status you can’t preach on politics nor anything that is specified by the gov or you loss that status and probably brake some law. In other words, a man like Martin Luther King wouldn’t be able to use the Churches to rally the civil rights movement today, he would be braking the law. See, the Gov has learned it’s lesson, and uses its ability to keep the cash flow a little more prosperous to manipulate the opponent into an unfavorable agreement, corrupting the purpose of a thing like the church or a foreign government. It has become SOP on the church’s part, to value the money more than the freedom to speak and preach and act freely on any subject.

I say, pay the tax like anyone else, and then you have the right as anyone else. The issue disappears. If the church doesn’t do that, then it willingly agrees to the terms of the agreement, to receive the tax brake.

If filing taxes as everyone else does, hurts financially, then maybe you are doing it incorrectly. The Lord doesn’t require you to go in over your head, just so you can focus on avoiding bankruptcy, by modifying the Gospel Truth to keep your head above water. Money is the way the secular will silence the Spirit, if those who have been given charge thereof bow to the money.

Uh...no.
The church, and every other charitable organization is already tax free...we need not apply for tax free status.

http://hushmoney.org/501c3-myths.htm

The IRS has acknowledged for decades that it is completely unnecessary for any church to apply for a tax-exempt status. According to IRS Publication 557, as well as IRS Code § 508, churches and church ministries are “exempt automatically.” Application for an exempt status is not only superfluous, but to do so subordinates that church to the IRS. Churches in America have always been nontaxable anyway. It simply makes no sense for a church to go to the IRS and seek permission to be exempted from a tax the government can’t impose in the first place.

Oh, and your deductions are also automatically tax deductible....no 501c3 needed:

Whether or not a church or church ministry applies for and receives a “501c3 tax-exempt recognition letter” from the IRS, any contributions made to a church are “automatically qualified” as a tax write-off to the contributor, pursuant to IRS Publication 526, and IRS Code § 170(c)(2)( B). A church does not have to be a "nonprofit charitable organization" to be tax deductible, nor does it need IRS authorization to be tax deductible. According to the IRS, churches have that status “automatically.”

LOL...as cute as that lil smiley is, that is supposed to be ( B )

 

[Barrd]

Well, as it stands now it's extremely difficult to follow a conversation with you. The easiest way to use the quote function is when you're ready to reply to a post, just copy the text of the post you're replying to and paste it into the reply box at the bottom of the thread. Then all you have to do is highlight the portion of the text you want to quote an hit the quote button (the one that looks like a little cartoon word bubble with a quotation mark inside). Then you can post your response to that right underneath. Then when you're ready to reply to another part of a post, repeat. You can start your post like a letter, so we all know who you're talking to.

Hey, thanks, River!
----Now why didn't I figure that out on my own....

 

[Barrd]

From what I've seen over the last few months, conservative Christians are doing a pretty good job of undermining themselves.


Exhibit A

I dunno, River. It's a very touchy issue.
I know that, for a devoted Christian who believes the Bible, homosexuality is an abomination. It doesn't matter how many secular laws are passed legalizing it, it is still a sin.
And, of course, there are going to be Christians who are uncomfortable with participating in something that God has called an abomination.
Besides, why would someone who was about to get married want to have their wedding catered by someone who doesn't want the job? I mean, shouldn't they want someone who will share in their joy? Personally, having had to work in the food service industry, and having seen what an angry chef or waiter/tress can and will do to food, I'd be very reluctant to have someone serve food at my wedding after I had ticked them off by insisting that they do something that is against their principles. I mean....there are loads of caterers who would be thrilled to have my business! Why would I not go to one of them?

I do like this guy's idea:
http://www.gopusa.com/commentary/2015/04/17/a-way-out-for-christian-wedding-businesses/?subscriber=1
Yeah, I can see me doing that sort of thing...and having a ball with it, too...

 

[epostle1]

The Barrd,

I'm glad you brought that up.

Bill Donohue comments on how the legalization of gay marriage will not be enough to satisfy radical activists:
There aren’t enough homosexuals to wage war on religious institutions—they comprise only 1.6 percent of the population—but they have plenty of support among elites. From Wall Street to Wal-Mart, the corporate elite has gone lavender, embracing the gay-rights movement with as much gusto as exercised by elites in education, the arts, the entertainment industry, and the media. Will they now take the next step and attempt to shut down the churches?
Anyone who thinks that radical activists will stop with gay marriage is ignorant: The big prize has always been to force the churches to fall in line. Consider Mark Oppenheimer, who writes a biweekly column for the New York Times. His post of June 28, featured at Time.com, calls on the IRS to revoke the tax-exempt status of houses of worship.
The only difference between Oppenheimer and others in the lavender camp is his willingness to put down a marker right after the high court victory. Others will wait. Now if this becomes an issue in the presidential campaign—it is up to those opposed to gay marriage to make it one—it is going to be very hard for Hillary to make Oppenheimer’s case. Even so, this offers little comfort.
Stealth politics is what the left is good at, and on this issue they will have their unelected surrogates at the IRS do their bidding. There will also be legal challenges—the ACLU sued before trying to shut down the Catholic Church—so keep your eye on left-wing non-profits. Count on Americans United for Separation of Church and State to flex its muscles, along with a host of other militant foes of religious liberty. Surely extremists in the atheist community will relish the fight.
Religious leaders are going to be pressed on this issue like nothing we’ve seen before. They had better be ready—the other side is.
source

Well, that may be the opinion of one sociology professor...what does he know. But when you hear the same thing from different unrelated sources:

A member of the Obama administration says religious institutions could lose their non-profit status if they reject federally sanctioned sodomy.

If the country's highest court declares a constitutional right to same-sex marriage, religious institutions that don't accept that so-called right could end up losing their tax-exempt status — at least according to a member of the Obama administration.
Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito asked Donald Verrilli, the Obama administration’s Solicitor General: Could religious schools that accept marriage as a union of only a man and woman lose their non-profit status?

The solicitor general responded, “It's certainly going to be an issue. I don't deny that. I don't deny that, Justice Alito. It is … it is going to be an issue.”

source

 

[Barrd]

A very little known fact that, for some reason, most churches ignore, is that IRS law already declares the church to be tax exempt....without a 501c3 exemption.

http://hushmoney.org/501c3-facts.htm

 

[River Jordan]

I know that, for a devoted Christian who believes the Bible, homosexuality is an abomination. It doesn't matter how many secular laws are passed legalizing it, it is still a sin.

No doubt, and since we as Christians believe being gay and getting gay married are sins, then we shouldn't be gay or get gay married. But in a non-theocratic society, we don't get to stop non-Christians from doing those things.

And, of course, there are going to be Christians who are uncomfortable with participating in something that God has called an abomination.

We do all the time. Christ spoke out quite a bit about the evils of greed and the love of money, yet I don't see any Christian business owners refusing to provide services to the extremely opulent weddings of the super rich. In fact, I'd say there are likely plenty of Christian businesses that seem to have embraced the love of money. It saddens me to say this, but I've sided with those non-Christians who note that a lot of Christians seem to be picking and choosing which sins they take a stand against.

Besides, why would someone who was about to get married want to have their wedding catered by someone who doesn't want the job? I mean, shouldn't they want someone who will share in their joy?

In the cases I've read up on (e.g., the Oregon bakers), it didn't happen that way. The gay couple had sampled the bakers' goods before, liked them, and went into the store to see if they could hire them to provide a cake for their wedding. But before there was any discussion about any details at all, the bakers told them they didn't bake cakes for same sex weddings, and told the couple they (and their children) were abominations. Well, such discrimination is illegal in the state of Oregon, so the couple filed a complaint with the state, the state agreed, and fined the bakers.

But the point wasn't to force the bakers to bake a cake (they ended up getting a cake elsewhere), it was to bring them into compliance with the law and ensure that they didn't discriminate again in the future.

I do like this guy's idea:
http://www.gopusa.com/commentary/2015/04/17/a-way-out-for-christian-wedding-businesses/?subscriber=1
Yeah, I can see me doing that sort of thing...and having a ball with it, too...

First of all, that's horrible, hateful rhetoric at the start of the article. And that sort of nastiness is exactly why Christianity is taking such a public beating over this.

And his "solution" to basically rub our Christianity in people's faces? All that does is make us look just as petty, spiteful, and full of hate as the people he claimed to be criticizing at the start. IOW, if he truly believes gays are being "fascists", then his response is to be just as bad.

Here's a thought.....how about rising above such childishness and use it as an opportunity to show the humility and love we're supposed to have as Christians? It saddens me how rarely that option even comes up.

 

[River Jordan]

The Barrd,

I'm glad you brought that up.

Bill Donohue comments on how the legalization of gay marriage will not be enough to satisfy radical activists:
There aren’t enough homosexuals to wage war on religious institutions—they comprise only 1.6 percent of the population—but they have plenty of support among elites. From Wall Street to Wal-Mart, the corporate elite has gone lavender, embracing the gay-rights movement with as much gusto as exercised by elites in education, the arts, the entertainment industry, and the media. Will they now take the next step and attempt to shut down the churches?
Anyone who thinks that radical activists will stop with gay marriage is ignorant: The big prize has always been to force the churches to fall in line. Consider Mark Oppenheimer, who writes a biweekly column for the New York Times. His post of June 28, featured at Time.com, calls on the IRS to revoke the tax-exempt status of houses of worship.
The only difference between Oppenheimer and others in the lavender camp is his willingness to put down a marker right after the high court victory. Others will wait. Now if this becomes an issue in the presidential campaign—it is up to those opposed to gay marriage to make it one—it is going to be very hard for Hillary to make Oppenheimer’s case. Even so, this offers little comfort.
Stealth politics is what the left is good at, and on this issue they will have their unelected surrogates at the IRS do their bidding. There will also be legal challenges—the ACLU sued before trying to shut down the Catholic Church—so keep your eye on left-wing non-profits. Count on Americans United for Separation of Church and State to flex its muscles, along with a host of other militant foes of religious liberty. Surely extremists in the atheist community will relish the fight.
Religious leaders are going to be pressed on this issue like nothing we’ve seen before. They had better be ready—the other side is.
source

Well, that may be the opinion of one sociology professor...what does he know. But when you hear the same thing from different unrelated sources:

A member of the Obama administration says religious institutions could lose their non-profit status if they reject federally sanctioned sodomy.

If the country's highest court declares a constitutional right to same-sex marriage, religious institutions that don't accept that so-called right could end up losing their tax-exempt status — at least according to a member of the Obama administration.
Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito asked Donald Verrilli, the Obama administration’s Solicitor General: Could religious schools that accept marriage as a union of only a man and woman lose their non-profit status?

The solicitor general responded, “It's certainly going to be an issue. I don't deny that. I don't deny that, Justice Alito. It is … it is going to be an issue.”

source

Do you see the bait-n-switch he just did? He started all that rhetoric about churches having the tax-exemptions revoked, but the quote he offered was about religious schools. That's either rank dishonesty, or plain incompetence.

 

[Barrd]

Do you see the bait-n-switch he just did? He started all that rhetoric about churches having the tax-exemptions revoked, but the quote he offered was about religious schools. That's either rank dishonesty, or plain incompetence.

I would call it rank dishonesty.
To quote a famous communist:


Give me four years to teach the children and the seed I have sown will never be uprooted.
~Lenin

 

[epostle1]

Do you see the bait-n-switch he just did? He started all that rhetoric about churches having the tax-exemptions revoked, but the quote he offered was about religious schools. That's either rank dishonesty, or plain incompetence.

It's not rhetoric but a very real threat to religious institutions. All of them. Yours included. ANY faith based school is also under serious threat. The theme is the same. Schools and churches. Homofascists are lobbying to control the government, That is the point. Both articles are posted in full text. Your insults are unfounded.

A school should not be taken to court because it refuses to reinstate an openly gay teacher, and they have the right to set hiring principles, not homofascists.

 

[Barrd]

It's not rhetoric but a very real threat to religious institutions. All of them. Yours included. ANY faith based school is also under serious threat. The theme is the same. Schools and churches. Homofascists are lobbying to control the government, That is the point. Both articles are posted in full text. Your insults are unfounded.

A school should not be taken to court because it refuses to reinstate an openly gay teacher, and they have the right to set hiring principles, not homofascists.

Kepha, I didn't see any insults in that post.
Did I miss something?

 

[River Jordan]

It's not rhetoric but a very real threat to religious institutions. All of them. Yours included.

No, not at all.

ANY faith based school is also under serious threat.

The only "threat" is that if they don't abide by the law, they may have to start paying taxes. I mean, it's pretty arrogant to expect to be able to break the law and then demand the government subsidize you.

Homofascists are lobbying to control the government, That is the point.

Sorry, not everyone shares your paranoia or hate.

A school should not be taken to court because it refuses to reinstate an openly gay teacher

But they can't expect the government to subsidize them either.

 

[Barrd]

I don't think we can expect our secular government to uphold God's law.
However, I do think that we, as Christians, should.

And I do want to remind everyone that the church is, by law, tax exempt, without any need to apply for a 501c3 tax exemption.

http://hushmoney.org/501c3-myths.htm

"The courts well-understand that “a church is not an entity recognized in law,” meaning that they have no jurisdiction over the church. However, organizing a church as a church is an especially difficult concept for attorneys to grasp. Few attorneys can comprehend that there are things and issues completely outside the purview and jurisdiction of the civil government, nor do they much care for the idea. After all, it’s hard to get many billable hours out of those churches that understand that the civil government has no jurisdiction over them. A free-church needs an attorney like a fish needs a bicycle."

 

[River Jordan]

I don't think we can expect our secular government to uphold God's law.

Exactly. That would make us a theocracy.

However, I do think that we, as Christians, should.

Definitely! :)

And I do want to remind everyone that the church is, by law, tax exempt, without any need to apply for a 501c3 tax exemption.

No one is coming after churches. I know of churches in Kentucky that are very openly racist, and no one is calling for their tax exempt status to be revoked.

 

[Barrd]

Exactly. That would make us a theocracy.

Definitely! :)

No one is coming after churches. I know of churches in Kentucky that are very openly racist, and no one is calling for their tax exempt status to be revoked.

I live in Alabama, River.
They don't get much more racist than folks in this small town.
And it goes both ways, I'm afraid....

 

[River Jordan]

I live in Alabama, River.
They don't get much more racist than folks in this small town.
And it goes both ways, I'm afraid....

No doubt, yet not one of those churches are being threatened with having their tax exempt status revoked.

 

[Barrd]

No doubt, yet not one of those churches are being threatened with having their tax exempt status revoked.

Perhaps, perhaps not.

However, had they not applied for the 501c3 charter, it wouldn't matter.

My point here is that the church does not need to apply for tax exempt status, because under IRS law, and by doing so, they put themselves needlessly under government control.

 

[River Jordan]

Good point!

 

[Barrd]

Did John refuse to marry the couple he denounced?

No.

Apples meet oranges.

I will ask you a very simple question.

God hates sin, why does he not withhold food from sinners?

Answer that for me.

Do you suppose that, if he were asked, John the Baptist would have performed the marriage for Herod?
Somehow, I seriously doubt it.
It is one thing to tolerate sin...
It is something else again to participate in it.

Are Christians supposed to be the light of the world?
How are we to do that, if we refuse to call sin what it is?
Are we supposed to be the salt of the earth? It looks a whole lot as if the salt has lost it's savor....

 

[heretoeternity]

No doubt, yet not one of those churches are being threatened with having their tax exempt status revoked.

These southern church organizations (or any church organization) should try speaking out and condemning homosexuality and abortion, then you will see how fast the government comes after their tax exempt status...it will be very quick....

 

[Barrd]

These southern church organizations (or any church organization) should try speaking out and condemning homosexuality and abortion, then you will see how fast the government comes after their tax exempt status...it will be very quick....

Churches Have a Mandatory Exception To Filing Tax Returns
Not only is it completely unnecessary for any church to seek 501c3 status, to do so becomes a grant of jurisdiction to the IRS by any church that obtains that State favor. In the words of Steve Nestor, IRS Sr. Revenue Officer (ret.):
"I am not the only IRS employee who’s wondered why churches go to the government and seek permission to be exempted from a tax they didn’t owe to begin with, and to seek a tax deductible status that they’ve always had anyway. Many of us have marveled at how church leaders want to be regulated and controlled by an agency of government that most Americans have prayed would just get out of their lives. Churches are in an amazingly unique position, but they don’t seem to know or appreciate the implications of what it would mean to be free of government control."

from the Forward of In Caesar's Grip, by Peter Kershaw​

​

​

http://hushmoney.org/501c3-facts.htm​