Government gives special benefits to religion

An article in the NY Times shatters the myth that religion is under attack. Just the opposite, religion is the beneficiary of a massive amount of special government benefits, benefits not available to secular non-profits, not to mention normal for-profit businesses.

Church run daycare is exempt for the licensing requirements of secular daycare. Religious organziations are exempt from IRS audits., exempt from civil rights laws, even exempt from zoning regulations.

All these special benefits for churches, on top of the unfair tax breaks not even mentioned in the article, amounts to the government taking money away from non-religious people and using it to subsidize religion.

Comments

[The Engineer]

What about this?

"Liberalism is indeed much like a religion, and in fact it already has it's churches. They're called Universities, and they are indeed part of a vast left-wing conspiracy which provides "leadership training or discussions on progressive issues." In fact, discussion on progressive issues is about all that one can get at many major universities."

Change "liberalism" to "atheism".

[The Engineer]

What is the cost/ benefit analysis? Membership in an organized religion is like home ownership. It is heavily correlated with other good outcomes (like less crime, whatever). The subsidy could be money well spent.

In old, decaying, liberal cities like Detroit and Cleveland, the property tax exemption for churches and non-profits is a huge burden. The ratio of viable businesses to non-profits is unsustainable. But that doesn't mean you get rid of the churches, or make them pay more. It just means you need to get more businesses.

[ChrisV82]

Membership in an organized religion is like home ownership. It is heavily correlated with other good outcomes (like less crime, whatever).

Really? I'd like to see the research for that.

Here's what we know for a fact: In the United States, the distribution of religion goes as Protestant 52%, Roman Catholic 24%, Mormon 2%, Jewish 1%, Muslim 1%, other 10%, none 10% (2002 estimate) [CIA]. That's 78% Christian (unless you're one of those nuts that doesn't consider Catholics and Mormons Christians), and 90% total for some kind of religious affiliation. With such a large religious population, I'm going to have to bet that the majority of criminals have some kind of religious affiliation.

Also, in regards to the first comment, you're quoting a Jonah Goldberg reader? Come on. Here's (a portion of) the second email Jonah quoted:

"The museum, as we know it, was invented in the eighteenth and nineteenth century as our intellectuals left God behind."

That's mega levels of retardation.

[superdestroyer]

I think the idea is not that having religious beliefs is correlated with positives outcomes but that activie membership in a church is correlated with positve outcomes. A quick look at the internet shows that studies have shown improved health, economic, and family life.

[TGGP]

A libertarian would respond that immunity from licensing, zoning and the I.R.S are things EVERYBODY should have. Eliminating these for religious organizations would just make things worse, even if it is unfair that not everybody can avoid Uncle Sam's more noxious emissions.

[Douglas Knight]

Eliminating these for religious organizations would just make things worse

In the local sense, that is correct, but a flexible system (I mean treating churches differently) encourages lobbying, which is probably a much bigger deal than the individual restrictions.

[The Engineer]

Obviously, I'm a Jonah Goldberg reader. Care to take on the substance of the quote, instead of shooting the messanger?

I personally feel that the tax exemptions given to higher education have more of a negative consequence than the one for churches. Universities are bations of atheism and liberalism. You libs get the universities, conservatives get the churches.

To report one side without the other is just bias.

[Douglas Knight]

Engineer,
care to provide evidence of the claim that religion is correlated with good outcomes?

[The Engineer]

http://www.nber.org/papers/w11377

This is right up youse guys alley. This guy uses GSS data.

[Austrian]

Religion isn't the only thing that is correlated with good outcomes - so is Q-Link. Saw a commercial for it today on the Golf channel, plenty of pros giving their testimony. Whole-hearted belief is a wonderful and powerful thing, independent of the veracity of the belief.

Or: There is no shortage of happiness among the ignorant.

http://www.q-linkproducts.com/

[ChrisV82]

http://www.nber.org/papers/w11377

This is right up youse guys alley. This guy uses GSS data.

From 1985 through 2001, the National Bureau of Economic Research received $10 million dollars in grants from only four foundations, all of whom heavily invest in conservative causes. It may indeed be true what this report says, but I reckon any other outcome would not have been published. Or, to put it another way, OPEC says oil is good for us? Surprising!

And, Engineer, I'd like to discuss the quote, but if you honestly feel that universities are the "churches" of liberalism and athieism, then I think we'd both just waste our time. All I will point out is that schools are no more a breeding ground for certain ideologies any more than churches are a breeding ground for child molestation and the murder of doctors. Universities have a healthy mix of College Republicans, College Democrats, Libertarians, Green, etc. As for the ideology of the professors themselves, I doubt the math department is a hotbed of anti-Jesus rhetoric.

[Douglas Knight]

The Engineer,
that paper is ridiculously complicated. I outright reject it. However, it cites a number of papers that show simple correlations; this seems more promising.

ChristV82,
about half of the econ papers I see linked on the web are NBER working papers. I haven't been paying attention, but I really don't think they're the conservative half. On the contrary, I think the main factor deciding if a paper ends up on NBER is whether the author lives near Boston, or once did.

[SFG]

I think it's more important if he went to college orgot his ph.d. near the Charles River.

[The Engineer]

>>The Engineer,
that paper is ridiculously complicated.

Agreed. It is in the "Freakonomics" vein. I too outright reject anything that can't be done with knowledge found in "Statistical Analysis with Excel for Dummies".

But in my defense, I was just showing one paper that shows correlation between religion and good outcomes. In fact, that paper was simply the first hit on google "religion correlation outcomes". There was a lot more there.

[Lisa]

As well the comment from engineer aroused sentiment that remined me of Anne Coulter.Perhaps I should look up Jonah Goldberg. Conservatives are definitely not limited from academics in fact hopefull soon I will be attending Au Sable Institute whcih is an extension of Calvin College where religion is highly integrated into the institution.In other perhaps more public institutions religious preferences are not included within the secular curriculum but I am involved in a highly active campus ministry and they are considered "progreesive" for their actions of goodwill and charity. I don't see much reflection of atheism in the education system. I do empathize with those however that feel there is not enough questions of morality being addressed throughout all levels of education. By no means do I see higher education as a church of atheism, otherwise I could not see any sense in being there.That is where the issue of initail statement stands. That there should be no preferential treatemnt regardless of a 90% majority of christian populace. For education does not negate my personal faith and faith should not dictate secular affairs either.