# Should churches that refuse to perform gay marriages lose tax exempt status? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [February 19, 2014, 11:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-churches-that-refuse-to-perform-gay-marriages-lose-tax-exempt-status/681742 "2014-02-19T23:54:47Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 6
**Author:** ![What\_Exit](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/what_exit/32/10652_2.png) [@What\_Exit](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/What_Exit)\ **Post date:** [February 21, 2014, 7:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-churches-that-refuse-to-perform-gay-marriages-lose-tax-exempt-status/681742/101 "2014-02-21T19:35:37Z")
> [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](#): > > Because it’s not income. “Why should it be exempt?” is not how taxation works. You can’t just point at money and say, “give me a good reason not to tax that.” > > God, you’re making me sound like a Republican. They collectively have vast untaxed land holdings. This should not be taxed why? ---
**Author:** ![Munch](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/munch/32/5281_2.png) [@Munch](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Munch)\ **Post date:** [February 21, 2014, 7:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-churches-that-refuse-to-perform-gay-marriages-lose-tax-exempt-status/681742/102 "2014-02-21T19:36:20Z")
> [@What\_Exit](#): > > Why should it be exempt? Because just like many other 501(c)(3) non-profit organizations, churches provide valuable opportunities for the community to gather, build relationships, engage in other cooperative ventures to benefit society, etc. The reason we exempt non-profit organizations from taxation began with the importance of religious institutions in these activities, and in the role these institutions play in the lives of the American population. Churches have long been the incubators of civic involvement, and that has tremendous value - even if you disagree with many churches’ beliefs and activities. ---
**Author:** ![lance\_strongarm](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/87869e/32.png) [@lance\_strongarm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lance_strongarm)\ **Post date:** [February 21, 2014, 7:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-churches-that-refuse-to-perform-gay-marriages-lose-tax-exempt-status/681742/103 "2014-02-21T19:39:07Z")
> [@Steophan](#): > > “Atheists” aren’t an organisation that someone joins, so that doesn’t make any sense… I didn’t say atheist, I said an “atheist group.” Atheists do form groups specifically for promoting or associating with atheism and fellow atheists. Stop dodging the question. > [@](#): > > As long as the actions of the KKK members or the Nazis aren’t discriminatory, then they should be allowed to, yes. Obviously. Because the point is _not to discriminate_. Yes, this would destroy religions. That’s kinda the point, as you can’t have religion without discrimination. Wow. At least you admit you want to destroy religion. Of course, you’ve ignored my example of the NAACP admitting KKK members. Do you want to destroy ALL groups, associations, clubs, etc? > [@](#): > > I’m making perfect sense, as you and others have understood what I’m saying clearly. That you disagree with me doesn’t make my argument nonsensical. You’re just content to let people use religion as an excuse for discrimination. You have this goofy idea that “discrimination” is wrong. Discrimination simply means making a choice. We discriminate all the time. Usually it’s a good thing. We discriminate between good and crappy restaurants for instance. And if you join, say, a hockey league, you’re discriminating against other sports. Duh. Should hockey leagues be forced to admit surfers? It makes absolutely no sense to insist that a group admit people who don’t qualify for membership on a rational basis. Your hatred for that group doesn’t justify it. Discrimination isn’t just “don’t let the blacks in our store!” There’s more to it than that, as you’re learning. Why don’t you form a group to advocate your views? Don’t discriminate against those who completely disagree with you though - you have to let them in too. Good luck with that. ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [February 21, 2014, 7:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-churches-that-refuse-to-perform-gay-marriages-lose-tax-exempt-status/681742/104 "2014-02-21T19:41:36Z")
“RELIGION’S BAD!” doesn’t work as an argument in this context, and I don’t know what “anti-human” even means. I can also see this is useless. I’ll post the following only because I’d already typed it: As bad as religious discrimination is, there are important reasons we give people a lot of freedom to practice their religion as they see fit. It’s part of our society’s view that people should be free to follow their own consciences unless there’s a very compelling reason to stop them from doing that, and it’s also born of centuries of experience that taught the West that very very bad things happen when government mixes with religion. I’ll say it again: nobody should be more aware of that than atheists because if we’re saying it’s OK for the government to dictate religious practice, we’ll end up with _more_ enforced religion in public life, not less. And we already have plenty. ---
**Author:** ![lance\_strongarm](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/87869e/32.png) [@lance\_strongarm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lance_strongarm)\ **Post date:** [February 21, 2014, 7:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-churches-that-refuse-to-perform-gay-marriages-lose-tax-exempt-status/681742/105 "2014-02-21T19:42:10Z")
> [@Steophan](#): > > Are you refusing people who would otherwise be invited to play because of their race or gender? If so, then you’re discriminating, and that is wrong. > > To my knowledge, the Civil Rights Act doesn’t apply to private gatherings, so I doubt that even if you were discriminating with your invites, it wouldn’t be illegal. > > It should however be, if it were practical to do so. So now the law should require you to allow anyone who wants to come to your birthday party to be admitted? Not just based on race, now - ANYONE, because all discrimination is wrong, not just based on race. You don’t like someone? Too bad - you can’t discriminate against people you don’t like. Heck, you already think Nazis and the KKK have rights against discrimination. How far down this rabbithole are you going to take us? ---
**Author:** ![Miller](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/miller/32/481_2.png) [@Miller](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Miller)\ **Post date:** [February 21, 2014, 7:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-churches-that-refuse-to-perform-gay-marriages-lose-tax-exempt-status/681742/106 "2014-02-21T19:42:48Z")
> [@Steophan](#): > > Are you refusing people who would otherwise be invited to play because of their race or gender? If so, then you’re discriminating, and that is wrong. I didn’t ask if it was wrong, I asked if it was illegal. > [@](#): > > To my knowledge, the Civil Rights Act doesn’t apply to private gatherings, so I doubt that even if you were discriminating with your invites, it wouldn’t be illegal. Great. My church is now a private gathering, and I can exclude anyone I want to. > [@](#): > > It should however be, if it were practical to do so. Really? My D&D group doesn’t include any Nazis, either. If it were practical, should the law force me to allow Nazis to join my D&D game? ---
**Author:** ![doobs2](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/839c29/32.png) [@doobs2](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/doobs2)\ **Post date:** [February 21, 2014, 7:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-churches-that-refuse-to-perform-gay-marriages-lose-tax-exempt-status/681742/107 "2014-02-21T19:52:27Z")
> [@silenus](#): > > Churches should lose their tax exempt status period. There should be no tax exemption for any church of any religion. When one considers all the harm done in the name of some imaginary being they owe us all big time. If tax exempt status endures the it should be available for atheist. It is only fair. ---
**Author:** ![Munch](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/munch/32/5281_2.png) [@Munch](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Munch)\ **Post date:** [February 21, 2014, 7:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-churches-that-refuse-to-perform-gay-marriages-lose-tax-exempt-status/681742/108 "2014-02-21T19:54:22Z")
> [@doobs2](#): > > If tax exempt status endures the it should be available for atheist. It is only fair. In what way do you think it’s not? ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [February 21, 2014, 8:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-churches-that-refuse-to-perform-gay-marriages-lose-tax-exempt-status/681742/109 "2014-02-21T20:05:29Z")
> [@What\_Exit](#): > > They collectively have vast untaxed land holdings. This should not be taxed why? For the same reason that other nonprofits’ land holdings are not taxed. ---
**Author:** ![Steophan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steophan/32/9595_2.png) [@Steophan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Steophan)\ **Post date:** [February 21, 2014, 8:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-churches-that-refuse-to-perform-gay-marriages-lose-tax-exempt-status/681742/110 "2014-02-21T20:19:06Z")
> [@Miller](#): > > Really? My D&D group doesn’t include any Nazis, either. If it were practical, should the law force me to allow Nazis to join my D&D game? Nothing about what I said would suggest that, and Nazis aren’t a protected class. What I said, quite clearly, was that if you refuse entry to your game, to someone you would otherwise have invited, because of their race or gender or whatever, you are being bigoted, and that in an ideal world that would be illegal. Actually, in an ideal world it wouldn’t be necessary for it to be illegal, but my point is still clear. ---
**Author:** ![andros](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/e480ec/32.png) [@andros](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/andros)\ **Post date:** [February 21, 2014, 8:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-churches-that-refuse-to-perform-gay-marriages-lose-tax-exempt-status/681742/111 "2014-02-21T20:21:56Z")
> [@Miller](#): > > I have a group of people over to my house every week to play D&D. This group of people is entirely white and male. > > Am I in violation of the Civil Rights Act? Only if you choose to rigidly enforce the “no Kender” rule. Useless annoying squatties have rights too, you jerk. ---
**Author:** ![lance\_strongarm](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/87869e/32.png) [@lance\_strongarm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lance_strongarm)\ **Post date:** [February 21, 2014, 8:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-churches-that-refuse-to-perform-gay-marriages-lose-tax-exempt-status/681742/112 "2014-02-21T20:26:41Z")
> [@Steophan](#): > > Nothing about what I said would suggest that, and Nazis aren’t a protected class. Why not? So you’re saying sometimes it’s okay to discriminate? Or is it only about religion and race? What if two religions are at odds? Would you insist that, for instance, that Jews admit Muslims? Or that they admit members of a radical Jew-hating Christian group? > [@](#): > > What I said, quite clearly, was that if you refuse entry to your game, to someone you would otherwise have invited, because of their race or gender or whatever, you are being bigoted, and that in an ideal world that would be illegal. Actually, in an ideal world it wouldn’t be necessary for it to be illegal, but my point is still clear. Wait till my wife finds out she’s a bigot because she went on a “girl’s night out”! Oh, and if you specify a preferred race on a dating site - you’re a bigot. No, wait - you’re a bigot if you specify a preferred gender. That’s right, if you’re not bisexual, you’re a hater. You’re getting even more ridiculous. And that’s why the law doesn’t regulate these things. It would be stupid. ---
**Author:** ![lance\_strongarm](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/87869e/32.png) [@lance\_strongarm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lance_strongarm)\ **Post date:** [February 21, 2014, 8:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-churches-that-refuse-to-perform-gay-marriages-lose-tax-exempt-status/681742/113 "2014-02-21T20:27:49Z")
I find it disturbing that this site discriminates against non-members who haven’t registered with a username and password. How dare you, Cecil! ---
**Author:** ![Steophan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steophan/32/9595_2.png) [@Steophan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Steophan)\ **Post date:** [February 21, 2014, 8:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-churches-that-refuse-to-perform-gay-marriages-lose-tax-exempt-status/681742/114 "2014-02-21T20:29:41Z")
> [@lance\_strongarm](#): > > So now the law should require you to allow anyone who wants to come to your birthday party to be admitted? No. Try reading what I said. > [@](#): > > You don’t like someone? Too bad - you can’t discriminate against people you don’t like. No, again. Try reading what I actually wrote, not putting words into my mouth to fight the argument you wish I were making, because you can’t actually argue against mine without admitting you’re fine with religions getting a pass for bigotry. > [@](#): > > Heck, you already think Nazis and the KKK have rights against discrimination. Hell yes, a business shouldn’t be allowed to discriminate against someone based on their political views. Of course, a political party or… whatever you call the KKK to the extent they’re legitimate - a protest group? - should not be allowed to prevent, for example, Jews or Blacks joining. > [@](#): > > How far down this rabbithole are you going to take us? Only as far as it takes to remove any special protections for religions, and require them to behave to at least the minimum standards we expect of other organisations. You can’t on the one hand say people have freedom of religion, but on the other say religious organisations are allowed to discriminate based on religion. It’s an absolute contradiction. If I want to be married in a Catholic church, it’s no different to wanting to be married in Disneyland, and, should the offer that service at all, they should - neither of them - be allowed to discriminate on the grounds of race, gender, religion, sexuality, disability, or anything else that is or should be protected. They can have whatever meaningless private ceremonies they like, but they should not be marriages (for example), they should not be business transactions, and they should not be public, if such ceremonies are to be discriminatory in nature. Which would lead to an _actual_ separation of church and state, another thing that most people here claim to want. ---
**Author:** ![Steophan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steophan/32/9595_2.png) [@Steophan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Steophan)\ **Post date:** [February 21, 2014, 8:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-churches-that-refuse-to-perform-gay-marriages-lose-tax-exempt-status/681742/115 "2014-02-21T20:33:01Z")
> [@lance\_strongarm](#): > > Wait till my wife finds out she’s a bigot because she went on a “girl’s night out”! No, but a bar that offers favourable terms to women is discriminating. > [@](#): > > Oh, and if you specify a preferred race on a dating site - you’re a bigot. No, wait - you’re a bigot if you specify a preferred gender. That’s right, if you’re not bisexual, you’re a hater. No, but a dating site open only to certain races or sexualities would be. > [@](#): > > You’re getting even more ridiculous. And that’s why the law doesn’t regulate these things. It would be stupid. You’re getting even further away from what I’m actually writing and creating ever larger strawmen. ---
**Author:** ![andros](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/e480ec/32.png) [@andros](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/andros)\ **Post date:** [February 21, 2014, 8:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-churches-that-refuse-to-perform-gay-marriages-lose-tax-exempt-status/681742/116 "2014-02-21T20:40:43Z")
> [@Steophan](#): > > No, but a bar that offers favourable terms to women is discriminating. And “discriminating” is automatically bad? So you’d favor legal repercussions for a bar offering “Ladies’ Night” specials for women? ---
**Author:** ![Falchion](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/a88e57/32.png) [@Falchion](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Falchion)\ **Post date:** [February 21, 2014, 8:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-churches-that-refuse-to-perform-gay-marriages-lose-tax-exempt-status/681742/117 "2014-02-21T20:46:49Z")
> [@andros](#): > > So you’d favor legal repercussions for a bar offering “Ladies’ Night” specials for women? That wouldn’t be totally out there, would it? A place of public accomodation discriminating on the basis of sex? ---
**Author:** ![What\_Exit](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/what_exit/32/10652_2.png) [@What\_Exit](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/What_Exit)\ **Post date:** [February 21, 2014, 8:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-churches-that-refuse-to-perform-gay-marriages-lose-tax-exempt-status/681742/118 "2014-02-21T20:49:42Z")
> [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](#): > > For the same reason that other nonprofits’ land holdings are not taxed. That is not a reason, that is just inertia from ancient papal decrees. ---
**Author:** ![Ibn\_Warraq](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/e19b73/32.png) [@Ibn\_Warraq](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ibn_Warraq)\ **Post date:** [February 21, 2014, 9:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-churches-that-refuse-to-perform-gay-marriages-lose-tax-exempt-status/681742/119 "2014-02-21T21:02:59Z")
Nm ---
**Author:** ![Ibn\_Warraq](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/e19b73/32.png) [@Ibn\_Warraq](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ibn_Warraq)\ **Post date:** [February 21, 2014, 9:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-churches-that-refuse-to-perform-gay-marriages-lose-tax-exempt-status/681742/120 "2014-02-21T21:05:20Z")
> [@Steophan](#): > > Nonsense, again. They should offer exactly the same ceremony and ritual to everyone regardless of religion, or to no-one. The same as any other service offered by any other business. They are not being forced to do anything, they have every right not to offer marriages, and if their conception of marriage differs from society’s (as expressed by it’s laws), then that is what they should do. > > Exactly the same for an organisation that wants to serve people of only one race, gender, sexuality, or whatever. For some reason, people here, on a supposedly intelligent board, continue to treat religion as something special, rather than the anti-human, discriminatory bullshit that it is. “The same rituals”? Meaning of course they have to convert to Catholicism. You really don’t know much about this topic do you? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-churches-that-refuse-to-perform-gay-marriages-lose-tax-exempt-status/681742.md?page=5) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-churches-that-refuse-to-perform-gay-marriages-lose-tax-exempt-status/681742.md?page=7)