Taxation For Religious Discrimination

Why should my tax dollars go to support ANY group that discriminates in its hiring practices?

Years ago I volunteered at a detox center that was run by a religious organization and was not asked my religious preference or lack thereof - worked at another large religious homeless center as medical office manager and was not asked my religious affiliation or lack thereof - now voluteer at a Salvation Army thrift store and they have not and will not ask my religious affiliation.

If they are going to discriminate in hiring practices or in using volunteers, then they need to start discriminating in taking tax dollars from those who do not belong or believe in their particular brand of religion.

Nonprofit status for religious institutions must end, and with it, faith based funding.

It makes as much sense for me to subsidize a religious institution as it does for me to defray the expenses of a Japanese restaurant. (Less, actually)

Believers are invited to assume the burden of their faiths' finances. (Alternatively, they could dine out more frequently, buy books, give the money directly to those in need--highly recommended--join gyms.)

Once this theft of tax dollars, particularly unacceptable in light of our current economic distress, ends once and for all, the government should set up service delivery systems following the model of successful NGO's.

And they must begin in the areas most desperately in need, e.g., Indian reservations, Appalachia, etc.

I suppose all religious organizations discriminate against some group for some blasphemy or unrighteousness. Under those circumstances, it seems reasonable to take away all government funding and tax deductions from all religious institutions. What's fair for one is fair for all.

Mr. Silverman,
You are not taxed in order to support a religious institution. Your tax money is used to support a community need in which a faith-based organization can do it better and cheaper than any alternative.

Discrimination is beside the point in this issue. Religious organizations should not receive tax dollars OR tax exemptions under any circumstances.

Once we eliminate all government support of organized religion, the discrimination issue will solve itself.

Ending tax breaks that support religious discrimination is a no-brainer, but let's think twice about ending tax deductions for contributions to charitable organizations that don't discriminate, just because they are religious. It can be argued (I want to think some more about whether I agree with this argument) that the tax structure should encourage, or at least not discourage, donations to charitable and public-spirited causes. It can also be argued that, if there is a tax deduction for such donations, the donor's choice of a religious organization as a conduit is a First Amendment right.

I agree completely with Professor Silverman's line of reasoning. Let's hope that the Attorney General does the right thing.

Faith-based initiative violate church-state separation, but to allow groups receiving money to discriminate simply compounds the error. I hope the Obama administration hears the calls of the SCA and other groups to end this practice.

Let's put an end to government support of religious discrimination. I am all for individuals to worship as they please, and to have freedom from religion if they so choose. Let's leave it at that and make sure the tax breaks that churches receive, be as much government subsidy that they get.

The "faith-based initiative" did not always allow discrimination. Organizations that received government grants all had to agree to not to discriminate in hiring. Only under the Bush administration did faith groups begin to receive special privilege to discriminate in hiring for tax-funded programs. Unfortunately Pres. Obama has not lived up to his campaign promise to eliminate this injustice. His administration has indicated they will consider problems on a case-by-case basis, but there have been no proposals for monitoring grantees.

So consider this irony. If a ministry received tax dollars to run a program offering prisoners college-level course credits, it would be perfectly legal for this faith group to hire one of their deacons as a math professor, despite his complete lack of credentials to teach a college level math course, while refusing to hire Professor Silverman, who is highly qualified to teach math but not a member of their church. Without any penalty to the ministry, your tax dollars could be used to provide an inferior education to the prisoners being served. However, if the Secular Coalition were to receive a similar government grant, it would not be permitted to hire an unqualified secularist over a qualified religious believer. It would be required to hire based on credentials.