Church tax

ei.sdraob

Well we are constantly reminded of how we need to be more "German" on this forum, so how about a Church Tax like Germany? Especially considering that the state took on itself to pay compensation (1billion or so?) for the sins of a certain church organisation.

The census 2011 has 255K people who ticked "no religion" option that leaves about 4.2 million people in country who are religious.
At 100 euro a year that's 420 million a year in steady income

That could be a start, raise it from there to match German rates
And maybe give an option for people to chose to donate this instead to registered charity instead.

Taxpayers, whether Roman Catholic, Protestant or members of other tax-collecting communities, pay between 8% (in Bavaria and Baden-Württemberg) and 9% (in the rest of the country) of their income tax to the church or other community to which they belong.
For example, a single person earning 50,000 euros may pay an average income-tax of 20%, thus 10,000 euros. The church tax is then 8% (or 9%) of that 10,000 euros: 800 (or 900) euros

more here

srsly78

In Germany it was +1% extra tax (in rhineland) if you declare as religious. e100 is nothing. Don't think your 9% is right.

IrishKnight

So you want people to give money to the church?

ei.sdraob

IrishKnight wrote: »

So you want people to give money to the church?

Nope to the government who decided to pay for abuses carried out by a certain church, this money could be used for abuse compensation cases or ring-fenced for welfare (helping thy neighbour)
or alternatively give the person an option to donate to registered charity since most religions claim to be all for kindness and helping others.

IrishKnight

Well the point about the German tax is that you pay it to your local church or community group, you are not paying it to the government. By doing this you are basically charging people to be a member of a religious organisation, were the charge is not going to the club, but rather the government. Silly IMO...

ei.sdraob

IrishKnight wrote: »

Well the point about the German tax is that you pay it to your local church or community group, you are not paying it to the government. By doing this you are basically charging people to be a member of a religious organisation, were the charge is not going to the club, but rather the government. Silly IMO...

No you are charging people to do good with their taxes such as
* pay religious abuse victim cases
* help charities
* help welfare

Religions generally preach being nice to others, so how about putting your money where your beliefs lie.

Right now everyone is being taxed by state in order for the state to pay for carry on of the catholic church, I find that repulsive

And anyways we need to be more German right? right?? and to bring in more tax revenue since making cuts is not on table..

amen

While a good idea better idea would be for all religious organisations to pay tax. It is my understanding that under a finance bill from the late 1960s that all religious organisations with a presence in Ireland prior to 1963 are exempt from paying tax on all/any income.

IrishKnight

ei.sdraob wrote: »

No you are charging people to do good with their taxes such as
* pay religious abuse victim cases
* help charities
* help welfare

But we are already doing that with taxes that are already in place. Imagine if you had to start paying money to the government because you are follow a football club or a members club. If you don't want the government to pay some of the bill, then make representations asking for the church to pay it all...

UDP

srsly78 wrote: »

In Germany it was +1% extra tax (in rhineland) if you declare as religious. e100 is nothing. Don't think your 9% is right.

According to this it is 8-9%.

I think in some respects it would be a good idea to have this tax in that it would force people to consider whether they are actually a member of the religious organisation that they claim to be part of. I don't think the goverment could just take the tax however but what they could do is remove the charity status of religious organisations and start taxing their profits.

ei.sdraob

IrishKnight wrote: »

But we are already doing that with taxes that are already in place. Imagine if you had to start paying money to the government because you are follow a football club or a members club. If you don't want the government to pay some of the bill, then make representations asking for the church to pay it all...

I haven't heard of any football clubs molesting people and then having the state to pay compensation, neither do football clubs preach being nice to everyone

and of course football clubs are not exempted from taxes...

edit: since when is football a religion?

IrishKnight

ei.sdraob wrote: »

I haven't heard of any football clubs molesting people and then having the state to pay compensation, neither do football clubs preach being nice to everyone

and of course football clubs are not exempted from taxes...

The point was that taxing someone to be a member of an organisation is foolish. Unlike the USA, members of an organisation can not be made to pay for the crimes of others in the organisation.

ei.sdraob

IrishKnight wrote: »

The point was that taxing someone to be a member of an organisation is foolish. Unlike the USA, members of an organisation can not be made to pay for the crimes of others in the organisation.

Yet everyone in the country no matter what religion (or no religion) has to pay for crimes of an organisation (hmmm banks and FF are other corrupt organisations we are paying for too )

stanley 2

great idea this is also used in italy you can decide a small portion of your tax can be used to upkeep any charity be it church or hospital anything with charitable status

IrishKnight

ei.sdraob wrote: »

Yet everyone in the country no matter what relogion (or no religion) has to pay for crimes of an organisation (hmmm banks and FF spring to mind too )

And yet everyone in the country no matter where they are living has to pay for roads which they never use.

ei.sdraob

IrishKnight wrote: »

And yet everyone in the country no matter where they are living has to pay for roads which they never use.

Driving on roads being compared to molesting people? only on boards...

one is infrastructure another is a crime

IrishKnight

ei.sdraob wrote: »

Driving on roads being compared to molesting people? only on boards...

Asking people to pay for following a religion? only on boards...

ei.sdraob

IrishKnight wrote: »

Asking people to pay for following a religion? only on boards...

If your religion preaches doing good to others (as most of them do) then what is the problem? Put your wallet where your beliefs lie or stop claiming to believe something you really do not.

What is the problem of donating to charity of your choice, especially now that charities are loosing funding from the state

ei.sdraob

Aside the proposed property tax will bring in 160 million a year
The catholic church on the other hand will cost the state over 1 billion...

IrishKnight

ei.sdraob wrote: »

If your religion preaches doing good to others (as most of them do) then what is the problem? Put your wallet where your beliefs lie or stop claiming to believe something you really do not.

What is the problem of donating to charity of your choice, especially now that charities are loosing funding from the state

And those who attend mass often do give money at the collection.

ei.sdraob

IrishKnight wrote: »

And those who attend mass often do give money at the collection.

Then whats the problem?

Would a registered charity spend money on marble and gold?

mossyc123

ei.sdraob wrote: »

If your religion preaches doing good to others (as most of them do) then what is the problem? Put your wallet where your beliefs lie or stop claiming to believe something you really do not.

What is the problem of donating to charity ofyour choice, especially now that charities are loosing funding from the state

Money is raised after mass up and down the country, week in, week out for good causes.

Just last week my Parish took in approx €5,000 for the East African famine.

No PR, no convoluted sponsorship nonsense, just raw cash going from the people to the famine relief.

You can't force people to donate, idiotic proposal.

ei.sdraob

mossyc123 wrote: »

Money is raised after mass up and down the country, week in, week out for good causes.

Just last week my Parish took in approx €5,000 for the East African famine.

No PR, no convoluted sponsorship nonsense, just raw cash going from the people to the famine relief.

You can't force people to donate, idiotic proposal.

Yet you can force everyone in the country no matter what religion (or no religion) to pay an equivalent of 10 years of property taxes for mistakes of one church?

mossyc123

ei.sdraob wrote: »

Then whats the problem?

Would a registered charity spend money on marble and gold?

They spend it on a €200,000 severence package.

They spend it on endless TV ads.

They spend it on Marketing/PR BS.

They spend it on chuggers.

They give half of it to Airline companies so people can go on fundraising trips to Kilimanjaro/Everest/Machu Pichu or a cycle to the Alps.

"Sponsor me to fly around the world... it's for Charity... you can't say no!"

I'd give it to the Church or Trocaire ahead of any of that nonsense.

mossyc123

ei.sdraob wrote: »

Yet you can force everyone in the country no matter what religion (or no religion) to pay an equivalent of 10 years of property taxes for mistakes of the entire state child care apparatus?

FYP.

Cookie_Monster

It's the churches themselves that should be taxed, not the people who choose to attend them.

They should be required to publish accounts and pay tax just like any other company as that is all they are, a business providing a service for people.

ei.sdraob

Cookie_Monster wrote: »

It's the churches themselves that should be taxed, not the people who choose to attend them.

They should be required to publish accounts and pay tax just like any other company as that is all they are, a business providing a service for people.

Fair enough that's another alternative.

If any business (or football club since that analogy was made) went around molesting people, the members of the organisation would be imprisoned and the organisation fined.

Dirk Gently

just tax the church profits like every other business. 90% untill they pay the compo bill and standard company rates there after.

Having said that I do like the idea of an opt in system, if for nothing else just to see the true number of catholics in the country. On paper I'm a catholic and I have no option to opt out according to the church. It would be nice to be seen as non-religious as default in the eyes of the state and then have religious people declare themselves if they wish. It would be an interesting statistic if nothing else but I still wouldn't tax the poor fools, just hit the churches at source and tax them like any other business.

srsly78

UDP wrote: »

According to this it is 8-9%.

The website is wrong. Must be including something else along with the Kirchsteuer.

alan85

amen wrote: »

While a good idea better idea would be for all religious organisations to pay tax. It is my understanding that under a finance bill from the late 1960s that all religious organisations with a presence in Ireland prior to 1963 are exempt from paying tax on all/any income.

Very good point and one the Humanist Assosiation of Ireland have been making for a while. ***kers have it sussed every which way...

Actually, talking about the church I called up our local one today to ask the ***kers to turn down their bells at 7.45 in the morning...

matthew8

I'm tired of all these silly tax ideas. Whether someone goes to church or not is their private business and the government shouldn't intervene. People should only pay income tax and then be safe in the knowledge the government isn't coming to get them. We can run this country on 30 billion euro. When tax revenue increases we shouldn't increase expenditure so that we can pay back the money lost through budget deficits. No need for tax increases.

Also I believe it damages the idea of a secular state (meaning a state with no religious laws or bias) that we single out religious people from non-religious people and force them to pay tax for being in this religion.

Manach

I'd say that all paying a tithe of one's income to a charity of your choice, a Church or otherwise is a good idea. They can either spend it wisely or burn it in one large furnace. Your money, your choice. That is something even the Atheist ataollahs can grasp. As well, if they want to go the road of simple cost/benefit, I reckon the RCC will come out ahead.

jased10s

pay a tax to a religon that fecks kids in the bum hole and abuses them , dont think so.

never been baptised or anything and my soul is still clean.

Just legalize weed and save on guard / judges / prision costs.

Tis a lot less harmfull than drink.

But hey this is paddy / catholic land so sensible decisions dont count.

Now drink more everyone.....

RichardAnd

jased10s wrote: »

pay a tax to a religon that fecks kids in the bum hole and abuses them , dont think so.
.

Monday morning and already, boards.ie has managed to throw up another remarkably asinine comment.

You might like to ascribe to the comforting belief that the abuses against children were the act of one organisation but I for one, don't buy into this. How many children were being abused up and down the country by relatives and neighbours who were not ordained members of the Catholic Church?

And after you've thought about that, consider that the treatment of children within institutions was not exactly unknown to Joe Public. In fact, a common treath towards children in my father's day was that if they did not behave, they'd be sent to the Artane Boys' School.

You see, the abuses going on in the Catholic Church were being perpetrated by Irish people. Blaming the Church for this is, in my opinion at least, simply a comfortable way for the modern Irish person to shy away from the fact that such abuses were not a crime agsint Irish society but rather, a symptom of somthing else.

There is a impalpable thing at the core of the mentality of the Irish that is as foul as carrion and as rancid as soured milk. Perhaps it's the drink, perhaps it's the stagnant geene pool or perhaps it's the inability to accept responcibility but whatever the case, dismissing child abuse as being the crime of the Church and of the Church alone is quite the same as blaming the recession upon Bertie Ahern and a few of his banker mate; Utterly facile and wholly dangerous.

UDP

RichardAnd wrote: »

You might like to ascribe to the comforting belief that the abuses against children were the act of one organisation but I for one, don't buy into this. How many children were being abused up and down the country by relatives and neighbours who were not ordained members of the Catholic Church?

..and what does that prove? It doesn't make the RCC any less innocent.

RichardAnd wrote: »

And after you've thought about that, consider that the treatment of children within institutions was not exactly unknown to Joe Public. In fact, a common treath towards children in my father's day was that if they did not behave, they'd be sent to the Artane Boys' School.

I don't believe the general public knew the extent of the abuses that went on and I very much doubt any believed any sexual abuse was going on.

RichardAnd wrote: »

You see, the abuses going on in the Catholic Church were being perpetrated by Irish people. Blaming the Church for this is, in my opinion at least, simply a comfortable way for the modern Irish person to shy away from the fact that such abuses were not a crime agsint Irish society but rather, a symptom of somthing else.

Yes, while the abuses were perpetrated by Irish people they were facilitated centrally by the vatican and encouraged to be covered up from the top to the point that if someone exposed them they would be excommunicated.

RichardAnd wrote: »

There is a impalpable thing at the core of the mentality of the Irish that is as foul as carrion and as rancid as soured milk. Perhaps it's the drink, perhaps it's the stagnant geene pool or perhaps it's the inability to accept responcibility but whatever the case, dismissing child abuse as being the crime of the Church and of the Church alone is quite the same as blaming the recession upon Bertie Ahern and a few of his banker mate; Utterly facile and wholly dangerous.

I think what people are angry at is that the church were trusted like they were. I think this was a failure of the Irish Government and the Irish People BUT the vatican went out of their way to cover up what was going on and to frighten people into ensuring secrecy of the criminal acts. Nobody thinks the Irish Government or Irish People bore no responsibility but not only have the RCC not learned from their mistakes but the cloynes report shows that still there are a large number of clergy that just dont get it.

ei.sdraob

matthew8 wrote: »

I'm tired of all these silly tax ideas. Whether someone goes to church or not is their private business and the government shouldn't intervene.

It is ok I am tired of them too

* Tired of being told to be more like Germans, whatever that means
* Tired of being told that cuts and reform are not possible
* Sick of the state socialising failures of various organisations onto everyone (whether its the catholic church or the banks or unions)
* Tired of being told to pay various "levies" which are nothing more than taxes under a different name

If you haven't guessed from my OP there is quite alot of sarcasm in my post.

matthew8 wrote: »

People should only pay income tax and then be safe in the knowledge the government isn't coming to get them. We can run this country on 30 billion euro. When tax revenue increases we shouldn't increase expenditure so that we can pay back the money lost through budget deficits. No need for tax increases.

Agree, but hey wake me up when the promised reform and needed cuts materialise

This tax would start a debate in the country, like I said earlier the property tax alone will bring in 10x less in one year than is being spend by state on compensation for religious related abuse. People switch off when numbers go into billions yet 100 euro a year house tax has caused (and rightly so) an uproar. 1.2 billion is the number the Catholic Church owns the state, the damage done to its people on the other hand is incalculable.

matthew8 wrote: »

Also I believe it damages the idea of a secular state (meaning a state with no religious laws or bias) .

Have you seen our constitution or aware of the likes of Blasphemy law? Hell its 2011 and only the first Census to even bother to ask whether you don't belong to a religion.

matthew8 wrote: »

we single out religious people from non-religious people and force them to pay tax for being in this religion.

How about singling them out to pay for the mistakes of the organisation they chose (and still chose) to follow, If a Bank ****s up its only fair that shareholders get burned, If a company dumps toxic chemicals into a river and hurts people they will be made pay and criminal cases brought forward.

Another aspect I brought up is that religions preach giving, sharing and caring (like Barney says) what is wrong with collecting this money to charities, now that the state is cutting their funding?

And why would it hurt Secularity? Do you claim the likes of Germany, Italy, Switzerland, Iceland are any less secular than us? In Iceland for example if you dont belong to a religion you can chose to donate the money to University of Iceland and this is a country that got into as deep a poo as us.

keithclancy

srsly78 wrote: »

The website is wrong. Must be including something else along with the Kirchsteuer.

Its right and wrong, its 8-9% of that Tax you pay (8% in Nordrhein Westfalen for example and 9% in Bavaria.

ei.sdraob

RichardAnd wrote: »

There is a impalpable thing at the core of the mentality of the Irish that is as foul as carrion and as rancid as soured milk. Perhaps it's the drink, perhaps it's the stagnant geene pool or perhaps it's the inability to accept responcibility but whatever the case, dismissing child abuse as being the crime of the Church and of the Church alone is quite the same as blaming the recession upon Bertie Ahern and a few of his banker mate; Utterly facile and wholly dangerous.

Oh the Church is not the only one to blame, but on this forum if you start pointing out various failures of the State you would be branded as a dirty Libertarian "god forbid" (ha)

RichardAnd

UDP wrote: »

I don't believe the general public knew the extent of the abuses that went on and I very much doubt any believed any sexual abuse was going on.

If there's one thing we do well here in Ireland, it's pretending something isn't happening when it is. My dad told me that upon the street he grew up, there was a family within which the father regularly beat the crap out of his wife and daughters. Did anyone do anything? No they didn't, it was just ignored.

This kind of crap was common in this country. It's an off-shoot of the "ara shure it'll be grand!" attitude that's gotten up into such an economic mess. Perhaps it's wasn't known that children were being raped within the care of the Church but it very much seems to be that many had some inkling that it was not the manner of place one would like to end up.

I'm not saying the Church are some sort of sanguine gathering of wonderous souls but daemonising them and not considering the wider picture is just playing the blame game on a different field.

UDP

RichardAnd wrote: »

If there's one thing we do well here in Ireland, it's pretending something isn't happening when it is. My dad told me that upon the street he grew up, there was a family within which the father regularly beat the crap out of his wife and daughters. Did anyone do anything? No they didn't, it was just ignored.

If the HSE or some organisation covered up the abuse of that family while spouting family values etc then it might be on par but the church went out of its way to hide the abuse from the public and the goverment. The failing was the Irish government believing and trusting the rcc and giving them power to get away with it. Ireland was a niaive country (still is to a certain extent).

RichardAnd wrote: »

This kind of crap was common in this country. It's an off-shoot of the "ara shure it'll be grand!" attitude that's gotten up into such an economic mess. Perhaps it's wasn't known that children were being raped within the care of the Church but it very much seems to be that many had some inkling that it was not the manner of place one would like to end up.

Thats not necessarily true since the threat would have been perceived that you were being sent away from your family moreso than you would be raped, physically and mentally abused.

RichardAnd wrote: »

I'm not saying the Church are some sort of sanguine gathering of wonderous souls but daemonising them and not considering the wider picture is just playing the blame game on a different field.

Yes abuse happens everywhere but the church is somewhat unique in that firstly it was given immense trust because of the self-righteous crap they spouted (big mistake by niaive idiots), then it systematically raped and abused children while at the same time covering it up (the rcc are guilty of this from the head to toe with those guilty people still in positions of great power inside the organisation e.g the pope) and finally the mindset of the organisation still has not changed - they still dont get it that the protection of children ALWAYS comes first.

So its not even that massive trust that was broken and heinous crimes been committed and covered up but that they still have not changed their mindset after all that has happened. Thats why people are so infuriated with the rcc.

keithclancy

If anything, if a Curch Tax was introduced it would push people to opt out.

I opted out of the German kirchensteuer last year.

RichardAnd

UDP wrote: »

Yes abuse happens everywhere but the church is somewhat unique in that firstly it was given immense trust because of the self-righteous crap they spouted (big mistake by niaive idiots), then it systematically raped and abused children while at the same time covering it up (the rcc are guilty of this from the head to toe with those guilty people still in positions of great power inside the organisation e.g the pope) and finally the mindset of the organisation still has not changed - they still dont get it that the protection of children ALWAYS comes first.

You see, the bolded section is something I've never really believed. You're implying that child abuse was the mission of the Church and as someone with family members who are ordained priests, I find that quite disagreeable.

What happened in this country was that people abused their positions to abuse their charges and then this was covered up and ignored. Now this happened within the church and it happened outside it. Thus, my point is that the RCC was not the cause of the abuse but rather abuse and cover ups happened because the same class of people who would commit such crimes were within the RCC as well as outside it.

Hence, I wager that the problem is the society that could produce such people and entertain their crimes...

UDP

RichardAnd wrote: »

You see, the bolded section is something I've never really believed. You're implying that child abuse was the mission of the Church and as someone with family members who are ordained priests, I find that quite disagreeable.

Well most of the abuse was covered up in the same manner with orders from the head of the rcc on how to cover them up. So yes, I would say it was systematic and seemed to be the mission of the church to protect itself at all costs.

BTW I have relatives that were ordained too. I think many did not know what type of organisation they were getting into and many more were just so young joining the organisation. For example one of my parents 1st cousins joined when he was 15/16 and has been a missionary priest in asia for most of his life. This does not change what the rcc has done.

RichardAnd wrote: »

What happened in this country was that people abused their positions to abuse their charges and then this was covered up and ignored. Now this happened within the church and it happened outside it. Thus, my point is that the RCC was not the cause of the abuse but rather abuse and cover ups happened because the same class of people who would commit such crimes were within the RCC as well as outside it.

It did not happen outside the church to the extent that it happened in that organisation. You make it sound like it was only a dirty dozen but yet all the people within the organisation that knew about it and that covered it up to allow it to happen over and over again were guilty - it was not just the ones that actually did the abuse directly. This includes the pope.

RichardAnd wrote: »

Hence, I wager that the problem is the society that could produce such people and entertain their crimes...

The problem is and was that the church was and is more interested in protecting itself as an organisation rather than protecting children. Most other organisations have accountability and the top tiers in the hierarchy can change quickly but the problem is that the RCC still has the same guilty people in charge and are happy to go on as such thus nothing has changed and nothing will change. They still encourage cover up on one side and publicly denouncing it on the other side.

This was not just an irish problem as you suggest either - it was global with the common denominator being the rcc.

RichardAnd

UDP wrote: »

Well most of the abuse was covered up in the same manner with orders from the head of the rcc on how to cover them up. So yes, I would say it was systematic and seemed to be the mission of the church to protect itself at all costs.

BTW I have relatives that were ordained too. I think many did not know what type of organisation they were getting into and many more were just so young joining the organisation. For example one of my parents 1st cousins joined when he was 15/16 and has been a missionary priest in asia for most of his life. This does not change what the rcc has done.

It did not happen outside the church to the extent that it happened in that organisation. You make it sound like it was only a dirty dozen but yet all the people within the organisation that knew about it and that covered it up to allow it to happen over and over again were guilty - it was not just the ones that actually did the abuse directly. This includes the pope.

The problem is and was that the church was and is more interested in protecting itself as an organisation rather than protecting children. Most other organisations have accountability and the top tiers in the hierarchy can change quickly but the problem is that the RCC still has the same guilty people in charge and are happy to go on as such thus nothing has changed and nothing will change. They still encourage cover up on one side and publicly denouncing it on the other side.

This was not just an irish problem as you suggest either - it was global with the common denominator being the rcc.

Then it seems we must disagree and leave it at that. I don't expect everyone to see things the same as me of course

jased10s

RichardAnd wrote: »

Monday morning and already, boards.ie has managed to throw up another remarkably asinine comment.

You might like to ascribe to the comforting belief that the abuses against children were the act of one organisation but I for one, don't buy into this. How many children were being abused up and down the country by relatives and neighbours who were not ordained members of the Catholic Church?

And after you've thought about that, consider that the treatment of children within institutions was not exactly unknown to Joe Public. In fact, a common treath towards children in my father's day was that if they did not behave, they'd be sent to the Artane Boys' School.

You see, the abuses going on in the Catholic Church were being perpetrated by Irish people. Blaming the Church for this is, in my opinion at least, simply a comfortable way for the modern Irish person to shy away from the fact that such abuses were not a crime agsint Irish society but rather, a symptom of somthing else.

There is a impalpable thing at the core of the mentality of the Irish that is as foul as carrion and as rancid as soured milk. Perhaps it's the drink, perhaps it's the stagnant geene pool or perhaps it's the inability to accept responcibility but whatever the case, dismissing child abuse as being the crime of the Church and of the Church alone is quite the same as blaming the recession upon Bertie Ahern and a few of his banker mate; Utterly facile and wholly dangerous.

@RichardAnd

The question was about a church tax and my response was based on known truths about the church and i responded with my view on such an establishment , this is called free speech.

And while you so rightly say abuse happened in other institutions ( and yes i was brought up in care from the age of 3 - 17 so i have seen these things happen ) the topic was about the church.

time to get back on topic.

RichardAnd

jased10s wrote: »

@RichardAnd

The question was about a church tax and my response was based on known truths about the church and i responded with my view on such an establishment , this is called free speech.

And while you so rightly say abuse happened in other institutions ( and yes i was brought up in care from the age of 3 - 17 so i have seen these things happen ) the topic was about the church.

time to get back on topic.

Which is why I wrapped up the discussion with UDP in my last post.

matthew8

It is ok I am tired of them too

* Tired of being told to be more like Germans, whatever that means
* Tired of being told that cuts and reform are not possible
* Sick of the state socialising failures of various organisations onto everyone (whether its the catholic church or the banks or unions)
* Tired of being told to pay various "levies" which are nothing more than taxes under a different name

If you haven't guessed from my OP there is quite alot of sarcasm in my post.

Same here I guess, good to hear about the sarcasm, I thought you were mad. Of course blueshirts will tell us to be more like Germans.

Agree, but hey wake me up when the promised reform and needed cuts materialise

This tax would start a debate in the country, like I said earlier the property tax alone will bring in 10x less in one year than is being spend by state on compensation for religious related abuse. People switch off when numbers go into billions yet 100 euro a year house tax has caused (and rightly so) an uproar. 1.2 billion is the number the Catholic Church owns the state, the damage done to its people on the other hand is incalculable.

Hear hear.

Have you seen our constitution or aware of the likes of Blasphemy law? Hell its 2011 and only the first Census to even bother to ask whether you don't belong to a religion.

Our constitution is not secular I agree and Dev consulted bishop McQuaid quite a few times, but I think this would not be a step in the right direction of secularisation. I'm objecting to this as a tax I wouldn't have to pay.

How about singling them out to pay for the mistakes of the organisation they chose (and still chose) to follow, If a Bank ****s up its only fair that shareholders get burned, If a company dumps toxic chemicals into a river and hurts people they will be made pay and criminal cases brought forward.

I don't think it's very fair to make them pay, especially because those still going to church are only that way because it's how they were raised.

And why would it hurt Secularity? Do you claim the likes of Germany, Italy, Switzerland, Iceland are any less secular than us? In Iceland for example if you dont belong to a religion you can chose to donate the money to University of Iceland and this is a country that got into as deep a poo as us.

For me a secular state is a state with which it is entirely irrelevant which religion you belong to and whether you do.

My big problem with this is it's a double tax.

RichardAnd

matthew8 wrote: »

Our constitution is not secular I agree and Dev consulted bishop McQuaid quite a few times, but I think this would not be a step in the right direction of secularisation. I'm objecting to this as a tax I wouldn't have to pay.

Would you be interested to know that Arch-Bishop McQuaid kept a framed picture of Dev on his desk?

matthew8

RichardAnd wrote: »

Would you be interested to know that Arch-Bishop McQuaid kept a framed picture of Dev on his desk?

Well it certainly put a smile on my face. I hated both of those characters and their stranglehold (Almost like dictators, especially as Dev controlled the media 1939-1945) on this country.

mossyc123

matthew8 wrote: »

Well it certainly put a smile on my face. I hated both of those characters and their stranglehold (Almost like dictators, especially as Dev controlled the media 1939-1945) on this country.

Calling the leader of a peaceful, democratic country a dictator in that era (1930's & 40's) is a bit of an overstatement.

Censoring films/books and tying Church and State closer together is a trifling matter compared to what some actual dictators were up to at that time (Hitler and Mussolini)

It's actually a period in history we can look back at and be somewhat proud of compared with our supposedly "advanced" European cousins slaughtering each other in the millions.

rumour

ei.sdraob wrote: »

No you are charging people to do good with their taxes such as
* pay religious abuse victim cases
* help charities
* help welfare

Religions generally preach being nice to others, so how about putting your money where your beliefs lie.

Right now everyone is being taxed by state in order for the state to pay for carry on of the catholic church, I find that repulsive

And anyways we need to be more German right? right?? and to bring in more tax revenue since making cuts is not on table..

Let me get this right...if I register as non religous I don't have to pay for:
-religious abuse victims
-charities
-welfare

Absolutely brilliant idea, these three things have been milked extensively for the last decade.
-average abuse victim compensation =€65,000. The statute of limitations completely thrown out the window.
-charities, a tax free industry, just look at red cross ireland
-welfare, i'm all for some of this but we're broke and paying the highest welfare in europe!!!

Dirk Gently

looks like the church is thinking about taxing catholic families in parishes off their own back.

Dublin's Catholic archdiocese is close to a 'state of financial collapse' according to a leaked consultation document from its Council of Priests, details of which are printed in today's Irish Catholic newspaper.

The document says many parishes are in a precarious financial position, close even to a state of financial collapse.

The document proposes the possibility of a parish based levy on Catholic families in the parish, which could raise up to €3m a year.

http://www.rte.ie/news/2011/0817/church.html


.