The gay lobby is going after the tax exempt status of churches:
Churches that oppose same-sex marriage legislation have good reason to fear for their charitable status, a leading gay-rights advocate is warning.
“If you are at the public trough, if you are collecting taxpayers’ money, you should be following taxpayers’ laws. And that means adhering to the Charter,” says Kevin Bourassa, who in 2001 married Joe Varnell in one of Canada’s first gay weddings, and is behind www.equalmarriage.ca.
“We have no problem with the Catholic Church or any other faith group promoting bigotry,” he said. “We have a problem with the Canadian government funding that bigotry.”
Several Liberal backbenchers have been pressuring Prime Minister Paul Martin to amend the controversial gay-marriage bill, which is now before the House, to protect the tax status of churches that refuse to perform such marriages.
Under current rules, donations to religious groups are tax-privileged as long as the church refrains from partisan political activity.
“They can’t connect their views with any political candidate,” said Peter Broder, the director of regulatory affairs at Imagine Canada, an umbrella organization for charities and non-profit groups.
My recommendation to churches is that they fight back. Here, for example, is a non-proft organization that receives a ton of funding from several levels of government and obviously engages in partisan activity. Check out the ‘Left of centre’ links section complete with an outdated outbound link to “Svend Robinson, MP”. Promoting an individual MP is verbotten for a tax-exempt charity (yes, I saved a screen shot as I’m sure the offending link will disappear soon).
I’m sure there are many more examples of pro-gay charities that have crossed the line.
Update:
Kathy Shaidle has a comment as well.
[Full disclosure: I am not in favour of tax exempt status for any group and have spoken out about this in the past. My feelings are that taxes are evil, but if we must pay them, I’m annoyed by the fact that the government puts the screws to me while passing over others. With all this being said, I see no reason why churches should take abuse from gay groups without fighting back. What’s good for the goose…]
While we’re at it, can we cut off anything Maude Barlow is attached ot, as well as the Status of Women, which reflects the views of absolutely nobody but their executive and maybe Sheila Copps?
Sean – more evidence to the statement I made yesterday. Silence the dissenting views. Gotta go, have a good day.
I wonder: Are the activists in question trying to start a civil war of sorts with the churches (why not the mosques as well?) that they fail to realize they will ultimately lose?
your screen shot doesn’t work – comes up “you are not authorized…”
Forgot that hotlink protection was turned on for images. I’ve fixed it now by adding SDA to the authorized list.
Special interest groups should raise their own money and stop relying on the gov’t (i.e. Cdns) for handouts. Gov’t wasn’t designed to hand out money to groups that appeal to very few of the electorate, as a whole.
If Mr. Bourrassa has a problem with churches having tax exempt status, then I’ve got real problems with funding programs that do nothing to promote traditional families.
You can’t have it both ways Mr. B.
As a homosexual myself, I’m just thankful that I don’t attach myself to the “gay rights movement.”
As a heterosexual myself, I’m just glad I don’t attach myself to any movements.
(I’m not attacking, anything that can be described as a “movement” should only properly be applied to bathroom activities)
Here’s one that will put them into a hissy fit,for the last few years the Pride parade has allowed pedophiles to join in and get their rocks off by walking naked in front of children to flaunt their penis and have a better orgasm
later,Jack Layton and Olivia condone this and mayor Miller announced a 200,000 grant to help
the parade and the Police are ordered to allow the laws against pedophilia to be void that day
and don’t make arrest.
Since child abuse by pedophiles isn’t dealt with a class action suit against the parade,Police,City,Police Chief,NDP,and mayor should be launched and stop the closet kiddie porn gays from breaking the laws and harming children by portraying pedophilia as a sexual preference as the APA has declared.
Last year just befor the Election Paul Martin gave 100,000 tax dollars to fund the pedophiles
exposing themselve to children while the Police stood by to provide security.
The usual rant by militant gays is to leave Toronto that weekend and go where you’re wanted,but that would only increase the child to man ratio for the nambla members that sneaked into the parade.
How sad that the parade uses the same street where a boy was raped and murdered by gay men
that dumped the body on the roof of a store to rot in the sun.
No pride in that history,and don’t expect a statue of the men to be put in the gay neighbourhood. The NDP sure has a odd logic for moral standards and social values.
Pardon my French, but… WTF kind of parent takes their child to a pride parade? I don’t care if it’s straight pride or gay pride, I guarn-damn-tee you that I won’t be taking my little girl to watch a parade celebrating awfully good sex rolling through our neighborhood. This ought to be a no brainer.
Sean, you are naive on this count — it’s considered ultra-chic by the I’M-not-a-homophobe brigade to demonstrate their ‘tolerance’ by taking the kids to these kinds of events. “We don’t want our kids to be intolerant… they must be exposed (excuse the pun) to all kinds of love… the human body is nothing to be ashamed of…” yada, yada, yada. Post-modern parenting — it’s a beautiful thing.
Sean – That’s not the point anyway. The city is just as much there’s to move about freely. If I were to engage in lewd acts in public I would get arrested (rightfully so)as should all, regardless of whether it’s a parade or a special kind of day.
What George Harden said is very disturbing, Is it really true?
What is the difference between Mr. William Whatcott printing his views on homosexual teachings in schools, for which he is convicted of “hate speech” and fined heavily, and Mr. Kevin Bourassa’s speech being printed, in which he says churches promote bigotry? I’ve spent a couple of days worrying about this before I realized I’m too stupid to be a lawyer & therefore need help in understanding this important distinction. Gord forbid I should say anything hateful by accident.
Linda: One of the reasons I support SSM is that I think that committed, monogamous relationships are a darn sight better than slutting around for both straights AND gays.
My wife and I are considering home schooling the kid because we’re not exactly wild that she could be getting ‘fisting‘ lessons in her sex-ed class. Blecch.
Vin: I have no idea if what George says is on the level or not since I don’t hang out with that crowd. I suspect that you’ll find pedos most anywhere there are kids (I’m always suspicious of vans with tinted windows parked where they have a good view of the playground). All I can tell you is that if one of them gets too close to my daughter, he’ll regret it.
Be a good parent. Know where your kids are. Teach them what good touching and bad touching is. Teach them how to fight free and run if someone tries to do anything funny. If we as parents do our jobs, the pedos don’t stand a chance.
And that means keep your kids away from public freak shows.
The real agenda.
Sean at Small Dead Animals notes that gay activists are going after the churches’ tax exempt status:”If you are at the public trough, if you are collecting taxpayers’ money, you should be following taxpayers’ laws. And that means adhering to…
What’s ironic is that the churches said “marriage is our business”. The government comes along and says “No, it’s our business, stay out”. Now, the tables are turned on the churches with this threat of losing tax exemption for “being political”. Meanwhile, the churches are saying, “Hey, who said we agreed that this is political, we’re still operating under the assumption that it is a religious matter.”
As a someone on the inside (a cleric), I say the religious in this country (15-20%) did not wake up for the unborn being slaughtered, they did not wake up for immorality in the schools and in the media or the perversion of marriage, but when you touch tax-exemption you are touching their pocketbook. Watch out! This giant is going to get rudely woke up and woe betide those who stand against her.
It took one of my readers to point this out:
Note that K is against “churches taking taxpayer’s money”. But they don’t take taxpayer’s money. In fact, many churches provide charitable services that we WOULD have to pay for via taxes, presumably, if the church didn’t provide them (ie, running a winter drop in for homeless people.)
How is being tax exempt the same as “taking taxpayer’s money”? Must be the new (Rabble.ca) math.
Jack – for a person who claims to be part of the clergy you sure have a low opinion of your flock. Not only that, your apparent disgust with followers inaction on certain social issues is in direct contrast with one of your previous posts on the SSM debate. It is not my intention to call you a liar but I do wonder if your proclaimed profession is really your true profession.
I can only hope my church wakes up Jack. [Anglican]
How many pro homosexual organizations get funding magazines, Universities, the united and soon to be other churches, Blogs, etc, etc,
Any one have a link to the article where the boy on the roof was killed?
The “boy on the roof” was Emmanuel Jacques who was a 12-year-old Toronto boy murdered by 3 men in the late 70s.
The next domino to fall…
SDA has a more-than-somewhat scary post on a story in the Ottawa Citizen which says that Canada’s most famous gay couple are trying to strip Canadian churches of their tax exempt status if they refuse to marry homosexuals. Their reasoning?…
Churches are entirely funded by citizens contributing post-tax dollars. That cash has already been taxed. And the money we give is entrusted to people who spend their entire lives working gratis, providing essential services to the entirety of society, but disproportionately to the neediest.
Governments gave favourable tax treatment to churches for the same reason that they gave it to families: the immense benefit to society and government that they provide. It’s hardly surprising that both notions are falling into disfavour at the same time.
John K. – the charitable deduction on your tax return means that the donations to your church revert back to pre-tax dollars when you file your return, unless you don’t pay tax. In fact, for most people it’s better than pre-tax dollars, because the tax credit is indexed more aggressively than the income tax rate is.
A quick search of the CRA Charities register showed dozens of charities that are blatantly “gay-positive”, including Integrity Canada which has ties to the Anglican Church. I’m certain that some digging could reveal hundreds.
Non-profit involvement in Public Debate
At least one religious organization looks to have violated tax laws. Should charitable tax laws be changed to provide more room to contibute to public debate.
…