But I'm not against all tax-exemptions. Tax-exemptions can be a useful tool to spur activities that benefit the nation. For example, when I remarked how much in need of repair many of the landmark cathedrals in France appeared to be, I was told by many Frenchmen that donations were sparse because there is no equivalent to our tax exemptions in France. If true, then that's one thing to consider.

Related to this is the argument that churches provide services that answer needs where government can't reach. I would agree, but a church is much more than the humanitarian services it provides, It also spends a lot of money on simply expanding its own brand of religious influence. Tax payers should not underwrite proselytization.or its equivalents.

It appears to me, then, that tax-exemptions according to what an organization dioes, not accoridng ot what it is (church, etc) can be useful.
The risk is, however, that when such exemptions become automatic and are not periodically reviewed, they may end up encouraging activities that are out of date and no longer necessary.

We need to develop a more sophisticated way of looking at this. To begin, granting tax-exempt status to any group.should never be automatic according to classifications such as religion.

I don't know enough to make a judgment about government lands and buildings.
A first reaction, though, was to wonder if this wouldn't be like asking a landlord to pay rent to himself.

Eventually, these issues will be determined by the courts. Federal Judges receive a lifetime appointment, once confirmed.

Elections have consequences.

I've got no problem with tax-exempt status for churches as there are for all apolitical non-profits. As non-profits provide services that augment what the government is capable of doing, and as they are obviously not making a profit, I think it is reasonable to not assess taxes on them. Every tax dollar assessed is one less that they can provide in services. To assess taxes on a church just because of its religious nature while not doing so on other non-profits would be a clear violation of equal protection. Their employees are not exempt from income tax or Social Security, so we're not missing out on anything there.

If, however, a church engages in actual electioneering, bring the hammer down. But the overwhelming majority of churches, synagougues, mosques, meeting houses, etc. do not do that.

Asking Churches To Violate Federal Tax Law Is Deplorable, Says AU's Lynn

A Religious Right group’s plan to ask churches to violate federal tax law on electioneering is deplorable, according to Americans United for Separation of Church and State.

The Wall Street Journal reported today that the Alliance Defense Fund (ADF) is urging clergy to defy the tax-law ban on candidate endorsements by tax-exempt groups. Ministers are being pushed to use their pulpits on Sept. 28 to preach about candidates and spark a showdown.

The ADF, a theocracy-minded legal operation founded by right-wing religious broadcasters, hopes the Internal Revenue Service will launch investigations of these churches, thus opening the door to a federal test case of the constitutionality of the law……

http://www.au.org/site/News2?abbr=pr&page=NewsA...