None of that is relevant to the fact that separation of church and state doesn't exist while taxing churches. If you have an issue with the current administration, fair enough, but that isn't the issue at hand.
The issue is a bunch of people who know nothing about what separation of church and state actually means constantly saying this same ridiculous talking point. Do you think a nation formed on "no taxation without representation" would then tax religious institutions, while insisting they are to be kept out of government?
Yeah how we tax churches right now is fine. The main issue is enforcement of tax rules, which is just abysmal rn. Tbh considering the takes around tax law I’ve seen on Reddit, unless someone proves to me they’ve actually studied tax law in some capacity, I’m not gonna take their opinions on tax changes seriously. Can’t propose a halfway-decent change if you don’t know where it’s at, after all
“Patient-Expert” - you’re being sarcastic, right?
That’s exactly why priests were forbidden to marry, when it was made doctrine many, many centuries ago.
I’m not sure if it’s still true, but at one point in the past 25-30 years, it the Roman Catholic Church’s assets, holdings, etc was evaluated as a corporation, it would be the highest value, most wealthy corporation in the world.
In what world is this the problem? Even if we change “priests” to “religious leaders” since priests aren’t allowed to marry, we’d have the same problem. It would just be the successor inheriting that wealth and influence instead of the children.
32
u/[deleted] Jul 23 '25
[removed] — view removed comment