Deductions for Charitable Contributions to Churches are Unconstitutional

I was reading this article "Is Trump’s Tax Plan Revenue Neutral?" By Robert Farley Posted on October 1, 2015 at http://goo.gl/r5ji9L . In it I found the mention of tax deductions for charitable contributions. I wondered if donations to religious organizations are allowed deductions? I found that indeed they are.

"A church, synagogue, or other religious organization;" [sic]

I object to this except under one condition. In my opinion, allowing a tax deduction for religious organizations amounts to the government promoting religion except if all of the funds are used exclusively for charitable purposes, and without any hint of the promoting of the religious organizations faith who are engaged in charitable activities. I've been on the street a few times. I've ate at soup kitchens a few times. I've slept in the safety of a shelter for the homeless a few times. I've seen how the ones run by religious organizations work.

When you go there, you have to go through the routine. Most people most certainly would not go to a soup kitchen or homeless shelter unless you were really in need, so they take advantage of that need with their routine. The first part of it is to have you sit and listen to a sermon before you get a meal. This requirement, whether real or implied, is a tax payer funded promotion of religion. If even one slice of bread is obtained by the monies donated, and deducted, then it is taxpayer supported religion in that case.

Some of them pass out fliers to their captive hungry audience. All of this is really nefarious use of the human motivation to take care of their basic needs. About the only motivation Humans have that is stronger than the motivation to eat and drink is to breath. I wager if some religious persons could figure out a way to use the motivation to breath as a tool to convert, they would do it in a heartbeat, and even if the breather suffocates as a result. The use of hunger and homelessness to promote religion is not the allowance of humans to use their free will in these matters, and should never be publically funded. It is manipulation of a most heinous kind.

I remember sitting there hungry and cold waiting for the long winded preacher to finish. I surely was not thinking about any of the words coming out of his mouth. His diatribe did remind me about people who like to hear themselves talk many words. I guess they feel important in at least that part of their lives. Maybe pumps up their ego a little. I'm sure there are a lot of reason for the preacher to go on and on while we sit there hungry. Indeed, I was not taking in the words he offered of Gods and spirits. The only thoughts going through my mind was that my belly hurt from being empty for too long. I only wanted him to get done, and shut up. I'm hungry, please give me food soon.

I think if they would just go ahead and feed people without the sermon first, people would actually listen to the sermon they VOLUNTARILY attended using their FREE WILL, after their basic need was fulfilled. That is not the way the givers of charity, who use that to promote their faith operate or think.

They think that if they feed the hungry first, they will not stay for the sermon. They are partly right too. I think if they feed the hungry first, some will enter their chapel to hear their words, and some will not. It is wrong though to give charity with the expectation of a return. If even one got upset because there was no "thank you", then it no longer is a charitable act because in your mind there was the expectation of that payment of a "thank you". When I see that type of thing, I have to ask for whom they do the charity, the needy or their own gratification?

I would disallow charitable contributions to religious organizations unless they comply with a few rules, and prove it first. Their charitable activities should be separate from their religious activities at all times. No requirement of attendance of a religious, political, or any other indoctrination session or meeting in order to receive charity. No passing out of fliers, or the posting of religious promotion posters within or outside the building in which the needy receive any services offered.

Only if the needy/hungry person approaches the religious organization under the guidance of their own free will, and with absolutely zero coercion or manipulation, may the organization give them the offering of their faith. Otherwise, no tax deduction as a charity.

Obama Halts Sermons during Soup Kitchen Meals

Friday, November 26, 2010

"Faith-based organizations that accept federal funding cannot proselytize while providing social programs to the needy, under a new executive order signed by President Barack Obama. The order changes the original initiative, adopted by President George W. Bush in December 2002, which allowed faith-based social programs to receive tax dollars." [sic]