Debate: Church Exemptions

Opp Choice: Should religious institutions or groups who endorse candidates or donate money to candidates or parties retain their tax exempt status?

YES

Legal Philosophy
Asymmetry of power
Government has responsibility to keep itself contained. As such, two values show
Free Speech
Money is speech
Government incentivizing an institution not to speak violates the spirit of the freedom of speech
Democratic government instead should remove barriers to constructive speech
Social Contract
We don't give up our right to religion, so the government doesn't have power to exercise power over religion, and by extension, religious institutes
Practical
Religious observance should be cheap
poor perversely affected by establishing a tax on religious institutions
Church attendance gives people positive benefits that the gov't likes
hope
charity
purpose
moral guidance that emphasizes things the government likes
i.e. peace, order, etc.

1)Philosophy
a)Separation of Church and State
i)We maintain it when the two aren't mixing
ii)Church violates this when it interferes with estate
(1)no longer a special institution, no longer needs protecting
b)Churches should not have a political component
i)They can set up separate institutions committed to political action, which sets up their mission as religiously inspired, but not religious doctrine.
c)People shouldn't be forced to support religion
i)a certain amount of money is required. Money will come from members of society who have been taxed. If religious institutions aren't taxed, every member of society has to pay for stuff instead. If you pay for something and another person doesn't as a direct result, you are supporting them. Given that taxes are required, a person doesn't have the choice. Therefore atheists and nonbelievers, not to mention those not of each faith supported, are being forced to pay for religions they don't believe in.