Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Lazarus_Long who wrote (148473)	10/21/2004 6:09:35 PM
From: TimF	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

OT If a church acts as a church it can't get all its money in the form of grants for welfare purposes, at least if the rules are actually enforced. For it to hold worship services, pay clergy ect. it needs money. Government money can't be used for those activities. I suppose you could get a charity group (or really welfare distribution group) calling itself the Church of Something or Other getting all of its money from the government but if so it would be a church in name only. I guess you could get a real church (with an actual religious ministry, church services ect.) that gets more money from the government for "welfare purposes", then it gets and spends on other purposes from other sources, so it would get most of its money from the government, but then that money would have to be spend on actual "welfare purposes". One downside of government money going to religious organization for charitable purposes is that the governments requirements may interfere with the religious ministry and also with the elements of charitable service that made the religious program effective in the first place. If the organization becomes just another welfare distribution center there might not be much point. This would be a consideration if there is a lot of regulation put on the religious organization for receiving money, and perhaps even if it just gets tons of money from the government and alters itself to please its new paymaster. The more the organization's religiously inspired charitable efforts become secular bureaucratic welfare distribution the less point there is to the whole scheme. Tim P.S - This really is off topic. Perhaps we should post it elsewhere. I'm posting my replies here today because other people are in on the conversation, but if we continue there are better places for this dicussion.