I must admit I greatly enjoy the conversation.
Foreigner4: The RCC in Poland seems to operate on a for-profit basis in practice, until I see otherwise, that's how I'm gonna see it.
You don't seem
to present any proof. But maybe my seem
is wrong too? I stated this many times in at least two threads. If church declares itself as an NGO, it should have proper, transparent financial records just like all other NGOs do. If everything is non-profit, then no taxes and no problem. If any part of it is for-profit, it should be taxed like other for-profit entities.
No is not but if the Church is attacked as whole then there is only right to point out positive and heroic deeds and its positive role on a whole in the Polish history.
Your logic is flawed. If you attack Hitler for what he's done, is it only right to point out the positive things he's done for his country?
I did not snip, cut or change your expressions in any way.
What shortcomings? Compare my posts and sentences to the parts you have been quoting.
My words are based on the knowledge of multiple charitable organizations and action run by the Church in Poland and abroad.
Well, unfortunately, that's not how the tax law works. Companies, organizations and citizens are obliged to submit their declarations every year. Church doesn't declare anything. There are no statistics. Yet we can see more and more money being spent by church and on the church and its ministries. Instead of making assumptions on both ends, let's force the church to disclose this information and show the books. This way we'll know for sure if the church should or should not owe any taxes.
jkb: Also, have you been to any polish church recently?
True, but polish churches are built with a huge pomp, and a lot of money is being spent on them.
jkb: And how did the "owners" get the money? Income. Taxed? No.
I'll explain. Officially, the possessions belong to the diocese. The diocese is being funded, in part, by our government from our tax money. Hence, we buy them these possessions.
You claim to support a unobtrusive state who tax people a little.
And let me that explain again to you, because you keep demonstrating a complete lack of understanding of the key problem. Everyone should be treated equally by the law. I would support a situation where everyone
is taxed very little. And I can't emphasize this enough: everyone
. I absolutely do not support the situation where there is such a great disproportion between how citizens and organizations are taxed so much, and the church not only is exempt from tax, it also receives the taxpayer's money. The RCC should be operating under exactly the same rules as any other NGOs (and if they happen to do for-profit stuff, as any other company). If the state decides to set tax laws, it should make them the same way for everyone, without favoring any churches.
jkb: The only problem that I have is that these services should be taxed just like any other services performed by other parties.
I don't complain about the services. I don't care about the quality of the services provided by the church. I complain about the fact that the church, by organizing a wedding, is clearly a service provider, for which it takes payment, and according to tax law it is a taxable transaction. Well, for everyone else, because apparently the church is exempt.
Here I don't have to explain that to you, do I?:
Of course you don't. And this document only proves that churches are exempt from taxation and bookkeeping on way too many occasions, that no other entities in our country can enjoy. Make it equal for all NGOs.
As long as their are fools those sum will rule in Poland.
Your vote is as good as their votes. For some, citizen duties are important, for others personal freedoms are more important. You can't always measure others against yourself, because people have different priorities.
jkb: You still failed to disclose how much does the state still owe to the parasite that our church is.
So what, do you propose that we just keep the money flowing until the end of time? We have to draw the line somewhere. When do you suggest is that going to be? How much more money do we need to give (oops, sorry, "return") to the church before enough is enough? To know that, we need to know how much exactly do we owe (or maybe that we don't owe anything anymore and haven't for a long time). Where are the calculations?
jkb: 'm being awkward? So, you're telling me the tax money I pay don't go to church or its ministries?
And again. Calculations about how much do we still owe. Where are they?
jkb: That is not up for you to decide. I, as an atheist, am a minority in Poland. I'm definitely not best protected by "moral" and "ethical" "teachings" of the Church.
No, but if I want to marry another guy, I can't (can't do taxes together, can't inherit, nothing). If my wife wants to have an abortion, she can't. If we want to have a baby using the in-vitro method, we can't (or soon we won't be able to). There's plenty of examples where morals imposed by the bible followers and state laws intertwine. Any morality-related laws that do not infringe freedoms of other people should be abolished completely.
Are Protestant not Christan?
My bad. I read Catholic.
Those countries started as Christan countries and that is my point. Christianity as a cradle of modern democracy.
That doesn't mean we have to hold on to christianity so tightly or write it into law. The highest value of the western world is freedom. Everyone should be able to do as they please, as long as it does not limit freedoms of others. Or are you a supporter of the socialist state, where freedoms are limited?
jkb: War on civilization? Interracial relationships used to be just that. Working women used to be just that
Progress is the only right path. I also never said RCC was denying these rights. I only said that these - now obvious - rights used to be considered what you called a war on civilization. The civilization did not fall. It thrived. And it will keep on thriving, whether conservative bigots want it or not.
jkb: But no one is preventing you from following your moral code as a Christian.
That's why, as I stated before, all moral-related laws should be abolished. Then there won't be a problem. If my wife wants to have an abortion, she should be able to walk into a clinic, pay for it, and have it performed without any legal actions taken against her or anyone "assisting" with it. Just like almost everywhere in the EU. If I want to marry another man, I should be able to. Remove all harmful laws like these and everyone will be able to do according to their will/faith/religion.
jkb: If it's Christian values, then following your logic, most of the western, civilized Europe is not democratic. That is obviously false.
It obviously is.
jkb: If you keep on imposing your christian morals on others who don't want to accept them, you are the dangerous idiot here.
No, they are not trying to impose anything on you. They simply want to exercise their rights as citizens. No one will be forcing you to marry another man if gay marriage is ever signed into law. On the other hand, they are not allowed to get married, because there is an ideological provision of law blocking it. For the gazillionth time - abolish all ideological laws so everyone can enjoy their values and freedoms.
jkb: How about we follow the German path then
Unfortunately, however similar these concepts seem to be, they are completely different. In German version, each year the state collects X in taxes plus Y in church taxes. It forwards Y to respective churches and still has X for its spendings. In the proposed Polish version, each year the state collects X in taxes, and it forwards Y to respective churches, having only X - Y left for its spendings. It means the missing Y will have to be funded by other means. So basically, all remaining taxpayers will still be funding the church by filling the gap.