Why should religions be tax exempt?

Right from the start religions were money-making enterprises – if not fortune builders then at least a way for shamans, prophets and priests to avoid doing hard work – and it’s high time that governments examined their tax-exempt status.

Whenever there are vested interests, it is natural that business needs to be drummed up and patronage needs to be entrenched. It's basic marketing skills. However, in an industry such as religion, this becomes a problem because there is something immoral about inciting fear and promoting ignorance for the sake of making money or keeping one's job – and wangling tax exemption as well!

Because fear is a basic human instinct and the ancient world was a fearful place, it is obvious that ancient religions developed from a real need and performed beneficial services - such as those performed by Shamans - but there came a stage at which religions dropped spiritual guidance in favour of manipulative money-grubbing, promising wealth and mundane joys for their services. This stage, of course, was reached when civilizations were established and more people had money to spare.

Any religion that requires priests, temples and rites is a money-making industry and as such provides jobs not only for priests but also for manufacturers of idols and their traders - such as Abraham's father, Terah.

Even the prophets, like Jesus, who lived simple lives and preached against the love of money, earned their living - their food, clothes and accommodation - from those who came to listen to them.

However, religious services - the rites and the burnt offerings - were the domain of the rich who could afford them, not the poor who could not pay.

The great teachings of the Jewish Prophets - especially Jesus - were against these practices. The people most in need, the poor, were being ignored by those they relied upon to help them.

One of the memorable stories in the life of Jesus was his rampage at the Temple, overturning the tables of the money-lenders. A place of worship was not to be defiled with money and mundane aspirations, but after his death even the humble religion he founded became similarly tainted.

Preaching is a job, a way of earning a living, and while nobody begrudges any minister his dues, those religions that stoop to the lowest means imaginable in order to increase their wealth - and build bigger and better churches - through exploiting converts and robbing them of a tenth of their income, by a system of 'tithing', are to be deplored.

In today's world, there are many converts who became exhausted and penniless and nearly lost their mind in reverence of their religion - even to the point of swallowing poison in order to please their religious leaders - and this sort of hysterical behaviour was even worse in the ancient world.

Basically, religions can't operate without money, and the practice of tithing - giving ten percent of one's earnings to the church - on top of being manipulated into buying church merchandise and giving freely of one's time and expertise to help build or maintain church property - runs parallel to civil government practices.

In the time of Jesus, as well as in modern times, heavy civil taxes were imposed leaving many in abject poverty. After paying government taxes and church tithes, what is left to live on, support a family and save for old age?

Why are citizens taxed by the state, but religions are not?

Jesus won followers by love, healing and living a simple life provided for by his converts, and this type of true Christianity died out when the disciples died. From the middle of the first century until the Roman Emperor Constantine embraced Christianity in 313 - and promoted it as a state religion, a way to retain Roman power over the provinces - the humble faith of Jesus had already undergone radical changes and many more changes were to come.

The worst of these changes was the practice of 'indulgences' where huge sums of money were extracted from 'sinners' in payment for forgiveness and a place in heaven.

What passes for Christianity today in the mainstream, as well as the breakaway sects, is mostly a travesty of what Jesus preached.

There's a huge difference between faith and religion. Everyone needs a faith, but nobody needs a religion except for those who profit from it.

Removing tax exemption from religions won’t affect faith, but it will definitely affect those who use religion to abuse the faithful for profit.

Breivik, Christ’s Knight

When Dakota read the manifesto of Anders Behring Breivik, it was quite plain that he considered himself to be a Justiciar Knight Commander of the Knights Templar of Europe fighting a war to preserve European Christendom against a Marxist-Islamic alliance, and viewed his massacre not as a spree killing of innocent civilians but a biblical act of retribution against a Norwegian political party that welcomed Muslim immigrants and was therefore anti-Christian.

“Breivik described himself as being 100% Christian and on Day 41 of his countdown preparation for the July 22 massacre he prayed to God for the success of his mission,” says Dakota. “He described the church in Europe as being ‘fanatically egalitarian, self-loathing and suicidal’ – and spiritually bankrupt; and traced the fall of Europe’s Christendom back to events in the late 19th century – particularly Great Britain’s appeasement of Turkey.”

“Great Britain was once Turkey’s most powerful ally,” explains Dakota, “and its so-called Christian politicians sold out fellow Christians living in the Muslim Ottoman Empire, centred in Turkey, in order to safeguard the balance of power in Europe and block Russia from advancing further into Europe.”

“Knowing full well from Consul James Zohrab’s report from Sarajevo in 1860 on July 22 that the Christians living under Muslim rule were being treated very badly, the British politicians allowed the Muslims to get away with the lie that Turkish rule over the Christians in the Ottoman Empire’s European provinces was just, fair, tolerant and lawful.’

“In 1875 Bosnia revolted against Turkish rule and Bulgaria followed in 1876, leading to a massacre of Christians over the Balkans by the Turks,” says Dakota. “Amazingly, Britain defended this massacre and it was Russia that declared war on the Ottoman Empire in 1877-78, defeated the Turks, and assisted Romania, Serbia, and Montenegro to gain independence.”

“In exchange for the strategic island of Cyprus – and the return of two Armenian provinces – Britain promised the defeated Ottoman Empire protection from Russia,” says Dakota, “and as a result of this shameful horse-trading 250,000 Armenians met a terrible fate in 1896.”

“With the collapse of the Ottoman Empire after WWI – and the loss of 1.5 million lives – the British politicians then sold out their fellow Christians in Arab lands by promoting a National Arab Movement in which Muslims and Christians were to live in ‘harmony’ under Arab rule,” says Dakota, “and, fearing for their lives, there followed a stream of Christian refugees from Turkey, Iraq and Syria – and then the Jewish / Palestinian conflict added to the mix.”

“The oppression, massacre and / or displacement of millions of Christians under Muslim rule is something that neither the European powers nor the Muslim world wish to acknowledge,” says Dakota. “It was all swept under the carpet by those with national and economic interest to promote and protect, but it was never forgotten by those that suffered the most – in Armenia and the Baltic states.

“When Breivik’s Norwegian government involved itself in the NATO bombing of Serbia in 1999, killing his Christian ‘brothers’, he believed the time had come for the Knights Templar to plan for the resurrection of European Christendom.”

Read more by Dakota:
Was Breivik a secret Israeli operative?
The ethics of politicizing children
Breivik’s online fantasy world
Breivik’s social contract betrayal
Breivik’s July 22 Sarajevo Code
immigration promotes white shame?
Breivik the white knight
Dating psychos like Breivik
Stepfamily loners
be proud of your race!

See also:

Breivik’s Aquarian Humanity?
Age Secrets of Anders Behring Breivik

globalized murder

Like most Christians, if not most people of any faith, Adrienne -- a working wife and mom -- was raised to negotiate her way through conflict, to turn the other cheek if necessary and to focus her charity at home. She is totally against war of any kind and believes globalization -- other than spreading Christianity -- is evil.

"Life's too short to make enemies," says Adrienne, "but the conduct of this war against terror has overturned everything I was raised to believe."

"Either I have been lied to all of my life -- in which case I have been a victim of pacifist propaganda," says Adrienne, "or our government is run by evil people and in not protesting this war and stopping it we are all accessories to a terrible crime."

"As I see it, the weapons inspectors were doing their job in Iraq, the regime was complying with UN requirements and no 'smoking gun' was found that indicated Iraq was producing weapons of mass destruction."

"By refusing to allow the weapons inspectors the time they needed to complete their task and prove to all concerned that Iraq was, indeed, no threat to anyone," explains Adrienne, "Bush proved that he wanted a violent conflict and had no intention of allowing peaceful negotiations to work."

"Just imagine how this scenario plays out in our private lives," says Adrienne. "If we had a dispute with a neighbor, for instance, and we took the matter to court and were told to give the neighbors six months to remove whatever offensive material they had on their property, do we have a right to ignore what the court says -- claiming six months is too long to wait -- and go in there and murder them all?"

"Don't tell me that we have one law for individuals, and another for governments," says Adrienne.

"Civilization is built upon civility or it isn't, and if it isn't then I need to reassess everything I was brought up to believe."

"No matter how much I may despise my neighbors because they are brutal people, had a religion that differed from mine and stored material offensive to me on their property," says Adrienne, "I have no desire to invade their property and murder them. I trust in legal negotiations to work the problem out, and if it doesn't pan out to my satisfaction then I would be prepared to move rather than kill them."

"Does this mindset make me a fool?" asks Adrienne.

"Apparently so," she answers, "because my government wasn't even prepared to let legal negotiations run their course!"

"Instead, my government got fed up waiting for the weapons inspectors to do their work and took the law into its own hands."

"I don't believe Iraq ever had any weapons of mass destruction, and if it did then it certainly wasn't planning on using them on us in a country half a world away with more weapons of mass destruction than the rest of the world put together."

"All of which means," sighs Adrienne, "that my government invaded Iraq because it didn't like Saddam and his regime and wants to overthrow the regime and set up a puppet government it can manipulate."

"If my government can do this," reasons Adrienne, "then my neighbor can invade my property because it doesn't like me and my family, and it can murder us, too, for the same reasons."

"And if my government can do this," adds Adrienne, "then other governments can do this, too. North Korea can march into South Korea, China can invade countries to the south and west and all of the Arab nations can do the same."

"My government has set a precedent and because so few nations and individuals protested there is going to be no end to war and the sanitized murder that invading nations commit."

"I was brought up to believe that murder is murder when you know what you are doing, when you're aware of the consequences of your actions," says Adrienne, "and my government planned this war and whatever it says about collateral damage and other sanitized terms it's still murder to me."

"I can't be the only person perplexed by what my government has done," sighs Adrienne. "I can't be only person feeling ashamed to be part of a nation that is seen by most of the rest of the world as a nation of bullies and evil monsters."

"And yet I am aware that to think the way I do I am essentially expressing traitorous thoughts," muses Adrienne, "and this perplexes me even more because I love my country."

"Of course I am as concerned about the death of our troops in this war as I am about the Iraqi civilians that get killed," adds Adrienne, "and of course now that the war has gone on for long I want it to end as quickly as possible in our favor so that we don't end up being called losers as well as murderers, yet I will always regret that we didn't take the peaceful course set down by the United Nations."

"The weapons inspectors should have been given all the time they needed to find the weapons of mass destruction that Bush claimed Iraq was producing and stockpiling," says Adrienne. "And if such weapons were found then the war needed to be a UN mission, not a unilateral strike by the USA."

"What is a few months or even a few years when we are talking about human lives -- not just those of innocent civilians but also military personnel?" asks Adrienne.

"My kids are asking questions and I feel useless at explaining what is happening," sighs Adrienne. "This war goes against everything my husband and I have taught them."

"I'd like to know what sort of Christianity Mr Bush follows because it sure as hell isn't the same one we use to guide our lives," says Adrienne. "All that old testament stuff -- eye for an eye, stoning to death and other acts of brutality in the name of God -- isn't in our good book."

Adrienne's story first appeared as war is sanitized murder! and is reprinted with permission.

why do modern societies follow ancient religions?

The English Civil War of 1642 and the American Revolution of 1770 set a precedent in modern history by sweeping aside a dissolute aristocratic form of government and giving power to the people, but the French Revolution of 1789 and the Russian Revolution of 1917 went further - sweeping away not only a dissolute aristocracy but also a dissolute religion.

The French and the Russians succeeded in ending the ancient rule of kings, but they did not wholly succeed in ending the worship of ancient religions. The French Revolutionary Calendar of 1793, for instance, was intended to be aggressively new and anti-Christian, but it so confused the people that Napoleon abandoned it in 1806 - and the French, like the Russians a century later, lapsed back into their old religious ways.

Neither the free revolutionary humanist spirit of the French nor the communism of the Russians could supplant the people's belief in their ancient religions - and this is hardly surprising because all of the ancient religions themselves were based on an accepted need for human beings to worship a power outside the realms of mundane human existence.

Before Judaism, Christianity and Islam came into being there was Paganism - the worship of many gods - and having accepted a belief in one god, Jehovah or Allah, there was no way people could revert to Paganism. Neither communism nor humanism satisfied the wretchedly poor masses. They needed the spiritual comfort of the wonderful life after death that Christianity and Islam offered.

Unlike western civilization - which has sought at various times to sweep away not only ancient systems of government but also ancient religions that have little relevance to modern times - the other civilizations have, by and large, not dared to deny their people observance of their religious beliefs.

Democracy was adopted in India, but Hinduism - and its totally undemocratic caste system - carried on regardless. Communism was adopted in China, but Confucianism, Buddhism and Taoism also carried on regardless. Some Islamic nations have also adopted democracy, but Islam is stronger now than it ever was.

It is true that only a small percentage of western populations actually believes in and faithfully practices the teachings of their ancient religions. Many more, however, would claim to be Christian, Jewish, Moslem or whatever. The continued existence of ancient religions is largely related to rites such as marriage, christenings, comings of age and funerals - and celebrations that owe more to Pagan festivals than anything else - and without the opportunity to perform these rites most would flounder in a void.

Those who examine the ancient religions - and the wars and abuses they have perpetrated over the years - and turn away from them in disgust or despair, are similarly suffering a void that is either being filled by kindly eastern religions - such as Buddhism - or New Age beliefs, some of which lead them right back to Paganism.

It is, without doubt, very perplexing that ancient beliefs and laws pertaining to what god supposedly told - or did to - mere mortals thousands of years ago should remain believable whereas other ancient beliefs and laws in respect to medicine or astronomy, for instance, are universally shunned as ignorant rubbish.