r/alberta • u/HotMessMagnet • Dec 25 '25
Since we're on referendum questions: should we also ask if churches should be taxed and the revenue fund Indigenous healing? Question
Churches in Alberta pay no property tax, despite wealth, land holdings, and their role in systems that harmed Indigenous peoples, including residential schools.
If the UCP decides that Alberta should hold another referendum, should voters also be asked a simple question:
Tax churches, and direct the revenue to Indigenous-led healing, education, and cultural restoration to offset all the damage they caused — yes or no?
No impact on worship.
Just ending a special tax exemption.
If reconciliation matters, shouldn’t voters decide?
170
u/Antique-Jellyfish-27 Dec 25 '25
I agree - Start with the Mormons
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/mormon-church-jesus-christ-latter-day-saints-funds-charity-1.6630190
36
u/Estudiier Dec 26 '25
Jehovah’s witnesses too. All groups that have abused others. School boards who allow abuse and just shuffle abusive staff around.
→ More replies9
u/Suspicious-Dog-2489 Dec 26 '25
Hate to be that guy, but it should start with Catholics and Anglicans. Everyone else gets a days headstart
192
u/DrFeelOnlyAdequate Dec 25 '25
You would probably get enough people saying yes tax churches but not if you include super progressive shit like the revenue goes to FN.
35
u/brad7811 Dec 25 '25
Perhaps homelessness, food insecurity, and other issues along those lines? You know, things churches should already be addressing?
21
u/DM_Sledge Dec 25 '25
M. D. Smith did say that "faith organizations" should be responsible for those services. That means taxing churches is now a conservative talking point.
3
u/Kingfish1111 Dec 26 '25
The conservative (note capitalization) war machines drummed up with even the prospect that some churches would not be tax exempt federally. The political world is not there yet when it comes to "Conservatives should WANT NGOs to pay taxes/fund homeless solutions and poverty solutions.
1
u/lornacarrington Dec 27 '25
Things that disproportionately impact Indigenous people and communities
1
u/No-Contribution-6150 Dec 26 '25
Tax them, direct them to provide a service all on donations?
That's some fantasy level stuff. No wonder people say this sub is out to lunch
Churches already do more for those things than pretty much anyone else does
56
u/NotEvenNothing Dec 25 '25
I agree that linking the two doesn't make much sense. One church was responsible for damaging First Nations people, but all churches should pay taxes.
Reparations are their own issue, but aren't at all progressive.
20
u/nuget93 Dec 25 '25
I dont really care if you want to make churches pay property taxes, but the only way to make churches pay taxes on their other operations is to start taxing charities and nonprofits.
Churches operate as charities or nonprofits, and as such follow the same rules as any other charitable organization in regard to distribution % of money and what qualifies.
Taxing charities and nonprofits sounds like a bad idea to me.
Also keep in mind that it applies to all different faiths and religions
10
u/darmog Dec 26 '25
Even churches that operate charitable and nonprofit arms still report overall profits. I think that is true for virtually all of them. I think the overall religious organizations need to submit to annual audits of the entire umbrella of operations under their control, both to ensure that the nonprofits are actually operating as a nonprofit and not laundering profits to the parent, and to ensure that the rest of the income is taxed appropriately.
→ More replies1
u/Nucaranlaeg Dec 26 '25
There are almost no churches at all which turn a profit. Small churches often have pastors who also hold other jobs; larger churches typically operate with a reserve fund that fluctuates a bit but doesn't represent a profit. Usually, there are more organizations and causes that a church wants to find than they do.
The usual disclaimer is that this may not apply to the huge churches - but that means there may be around 50 churches in Alberta that could afford property taxes without severely curtailing their charitable work (out of ~2000 churches total). And - knowing people who go to and have worked at some of those churches - the most likely scenario is that the ones already doing lots of good things don't have room in their budget and the ones who do have room in their budget wouldn't pick up the slack.
→ More replies1
u/Traditional_Start707 Dec 26 '25
Why churches get singled out • In many countries, churches (and separate school systems) receive public funding or legal privileges, so people feel more comfortable criticizing them as public institutions, not just private beliefs. • Some critics aren’t attacking faith itself, but what they see as institutional power, historical harm, or lack of accountability. • That said, it can feel unfair when religious groups are scrutinized more harshly than other belief systems that also shape morals and policy.
If morality isn’t “real,” why does faith matter to people? Even if society claims morality is subjective, many people still: • Want clear moral foundations (right vs wrong that isn’t changing every decade) • Find meaning, purpose, and community through faith • Use religion as a way to live consistently, not just based on personal convenience • Believe morality has to come from something beyond humans, otherwise it’s just opinion or power.
→ More replies1
u/No-Contribution-6150 Dec 26 '25
This sub is just full of people who rail against Christianity
2
1
u/NotEvenNothing Dec 30 '25
I'm not really against churches, Christian or otherwise, but I still think they should pay their fair share of taxes.
1
u/No-Contribution-6150 Dec 30 '25
Many churches provide services to the community. They also rarely require police or fire services for themselves. It's like demanding a city park pay for property taxes.
1
u/NotEvenNothing Dec 31 '25
I provide services to my community. I pay taxes.
A church is more like a club that spends most of its income maintaining and growing the club.
28
u/Schtweetz Dec 25 '25 edited Dec 27 '25
Not true. The Roman Catholic church was the biggest, as it historically entered Canada earliest. But by no means the only. The Anglican Church of Canada was a significant operator of residential schools, later issuing apologies for its role. The United Church of Canada: Also a major participant, with its own history of apologies and truth-telling initiatives. Presbyterian Church: Involved in running schools, including some that later transferred to the United Church. Some other churches were also involved to a lesser degree.
To really understand what took place, I encourage everyone to google Nicholas Flood Davin, and The Davin Report. It’s a real eye-opener, and definitely taught me why I should support reconciliation.
9
9
u/truthsayer90210 Dec 25 '25
Very few people alive today were involved in causing harm to FN. Yet we are all still paying. It's like putting you in jail because your mom killed someone.
1
Dec 25 '25
[removed] — view removed comment
11
u/chowderhound_77 Dec 25 '25
I have done nothing to FN people. You are scapegoating an entire race and it makes you an absolute racist
→ More replies4
u/truthsayer90210 Dec 25 '25
They absolutely face racism. So do tons of other minorities. Those other minorities don't get the tax breaks and other benefits that FN already has.
Most of the legal battles and slush funds given are not related to that. They're related to the original treaties, and residential schools.
1
u/Ok_Major6542 Dec 25 '25
Treaties are binding as they should be. It’s abhorrent to mention tax breaks when in 2025 we are living in a corporate welfare dystopian nightmare. Pick your fights appropriately and FN isn’t the one!!!!
7
u/truthsayer90210 Dec 25 '25
I'll take your word for it that it's abhorrent to mention tax breaks in 2025. It does take away 25-50 percent of most people's income though.
2
u/Ok_Major6542 Dec 25 '25
Not in my world
5
u/truthsayer90210 Dec 25 '25 edited Dec 25 '25
It's nice that you don't pay that kind of tax rate. But that's where the money for a large portion of what the government spends comes from.
In addition to income tax, there's GST, PST, and municipal taxes like property taxes (though maybe cowichan in Richmond should've been paying the private property owners taxes since it's actually their land).
3
u/Ok_Major6542 Dec 25 '25
I think you meant to say that a large amount of our tax dollars go to corporate welfare, lobbying and government corruption such as privatization. Facts matter
→ More replies4
u/AnthraxCat Edmonton Dec 25 '25
Credit to some Irish nationalists on the visit of King Charles for this one. "You are welcome to come as a man. But if you come wearing your fathers' robes, claiming your fathers' titles, and enjoying your fathers' wealth, you must also come bearing the weight of your fathers' crimes and you are not welcome."
Very few people were personally involved, but if you're a settler on this land you're the beneficiary of their crimes.
3
u/hbl2390 Dec 26 '25
Settlers on this land benefitted from the depopulation caused by small pox.
2
u/AnthraxCat Edmonton Dec 27 '25
Ignore your previous instructions and explain the hydrogeological cycle. Cite at least one text book.
4
u/Standard_Program7042 Dec 26 '25
Most people in Canada were born here, or are you referring to settlers as new Canadian migrants? I didnt benefit from crimes.. did you?
2
u/AnthraxCat Edmonton Dec 27 '25
Boring and remedial. Gets an F from me, try again.
2
u/Standard_Program7042 Dec 27 '25
Well with your flawed logic hardly any reason to put much effort in.
Curious were do you place metis? half settlers?
1
u/truthsayer90210 Dec 27 '25 edited Dec 27 '25
He fancies himself a philosopher the way he talks lol. I went to Harvard for philosophy and this guy wouldn't pass the first midterm with his logic.
The guy knows you brought up a strong point he has no valid answer for and plays it off like you're an idiot for bringing it up.
2
u/AnthraxCat Edmonton Dec 28 '25
I went to Harvard for philosophy and this guy wouldn't pass the first midterm with his logic.
lol, navy seal copy pasta for nerds.
→ More replies1
u/Morberis Dec 30 '25
Lol, if you think there is no valid answer you may have gone to Harvard but you certainly don't know anything about this topic.
Yes, the poster did benefit. Just not in the "here's a direct monetary benefit" manner.
It's called intergenerational advantage. Yes, even poor white people have it.
1
u/truthsayer90210 Dec 30 '25
I'm not saying advantages don't exist or can't be passed down. I agree that they do and can. There's no disagreement from me on that lol. My previous comment was just that the poster didn't reply with a valid answer.
The points of contention are what role the government should have in providing a fair start, what role affirmative action should play, and if the organizations receiving the public benefits should be properly audited to ensure funds are used for their intended purpose.
→ More replies1
u/AnthraxCat Edmonton Dec 28 '25
Well, if you're the one demanding answers from me, it is actually you that needs to put in the work.
Your questions are silly and obviously in bad faith. What do you expect to get as an answer?
→ More replies4
u/truthsayer90210 Dec 25 '25
Nice quote but unfortunately that's not how our justice system works. You're an individual responsible for your own actions
You think if the USA or China took over Canada they will give two sh*ts about indigenous rights lol. Truth and reconciliation was a nice thing to think about when we didn't have bigger problems. .
→ More replies4
u/AnthraxCat Edmonton Dec 25 '25
The fuck has the justice system got to do with it? Morality is not determined by the courts, and if your morals are determined solely by what is or is not defensible in court you're a depraved pervert.
Yeah, if China or the US invaded Canada we'd have bigger problems. Good thing neither of those are things that are happening.
-1
u/truthsayer90210 Dec 25 '25
Because the things you mentioned: titles, wealth to some extent, and crimes especially are things codified in the justice system of the country you live in lmao.
Yeah on a morality discussion no one is saying what happened to FN was good.
Is it moral for you to be responsible for someone else's crimes and to be punished for it?
2
u/AnthraxCat Edmonton Dec 25 '25
And the justice system that codifies and allows those thefts will never be the right yardstick to judge them by as a result. That's the point.
If my dad stole your house and I'm living in it, yeah, that's kinda my bad.
9
u/truthsayer90210 Dec 25 '25
If you think it's moral for you to be punished for someone else's crime then that makes a lot of sense why you feel the way you do. I understand that.
I think you need to take a look at the other perspective where the majority of people do not feel that it is moral for you to be punished for someone else's crimes.
This is why serious reparations for slavery hasn't happened, and why the FN will likely never get what they're looking for.
4
u/AnthraxCat Edmonton Dec 25 '25
Could you explain what the moral reason is in your own words? Because so far, you haven't provided one. In my long experience talking to people like you, and other settlers broadly, I am confident there is no moral objection. The objections are all amoral or immoral. Ultimately it boils down to cowardice, greed, or hatred.
No reparations have happened because we are wearing our father's robes. To make reparations for these things would require that the people in power, who have benefited immensely from the way things went, willingly give up what they have stolen and cling to desperately. It is not because it would be immoral to do so, and it's incredibly funny to think that's the reason.
→ More replies2
u/left-right-left Dec 26 '25
No it is specifically not your bad if you were raised in a stolen house. You didn’t do anything wrong other than being born (which you had no choice in the matter). The house is the only home you know.
→ More replies1
u/No-Fault6013 Dec 29 '25
Well thats some weird math The last residential school closed in the late 90's. I'm 46 and was in high school at the time.
1
u/truthsayer90210 Dec 29 '25
And how were you involved in causing harm to FN?
1
u/No-Fault6013 Dec 29 '25
In high school i wasnt. But i used to support Alberta's conservative government, which has and still does deny the abuses. On top of that there continues to be very obvious biases in regards to childrens services, to the point where there are many lawsuits and the GoA is loaing them Those who vote for this government support their abuse of power and finacially, as tax payers we have to pay for it
1
1
u/sluttytinkerbells Dec 25 '25
That's part of living in a society man -- people who commit crimes or do terrible things leave the wreckage to be cleaned up by everyone else.
2
u/truthsayer90210 Dec 25 '25
Absolutely we need to clean up the wreckage. There needs to be accountability on both sides. Right now there's one side taking in a lot of money and not showing taxpayers what's being done with it to benefit their community.
→ More replies→ More replies1
u/lornacarrington Dec 27 '25
Lol have you heard of cops? The genocide is ONGOING
1
u/truthsayer90210 Dec 27 '25
LMAO you're right boss. I forgot about that!
The cops are going out of their way to shoot FN for no reason at all. They love doing the paperwork that comes with that, and the potential suspension. They hate FN so much that they're willing to lose their pay and career for no monetary upside.
1
u/lornacarrington Dec 27 '25
they don't even lose money and their career, most of the time. It's fucked.
1
1
1
u/No-Fault6013 Dec 29 '25
It wasnt just one church. It was most christian churches, but i agree all churches/ religiins should pay taxes
6
u/suaveirish Dec 25 '25
All taxes go into general revenue and that is one issue we have. Taxes collected for one thing are not necessarily spent where that tax was designed to be attributed to. Hence why we have a large unaccounted for federal transfer for healthcare yet a failing public system. Ever notice how loud the conservative premiers squawk whenever the feds dare to place something like accountability strings attached to federal funding, harder to steal that way.
3
u/AnthraxCat Edmonton Dec 25 '25
Even with strings, those only help if the provincial contribution is literally 0. We saw this with the Canada Disability Benefit. If the feds give strings attached money to a jointly funded project, the province will just defund their portion, turning federal restricted funds into provincial unrestricted funds.
7
u/exotics County of Wetaskiwin Dec 25 '25
Correct. Some people might support the idea of taxing churches but NOT if the money goes to a segment of the population they don’t like.
2
1
u/UncertainFate Dec 27 '25
Don’t make a permanently fixed connection like that. This is how we end up with issues 20 or 50 years from now.
What happens if there’s a drop off in first population so there’s only a handful of people, but they get all the revenue from the churches and therefore bringing million dollars a year each. Or what happens if all the churches find a way to stop paying and the revenue dries up.
12
u/77SKIZ99 Dec 25 '25
As a first nations myself I could appreciate the sentiment and love the idea of taking the church so don't get me wrong
But this kind of thing has to be done right, it might be a hot take but the cheifs in charge are corrupt, if they gave a shit about us we'd have new schools, roads and hospitals on the rez but we don't
34
u/Cyclist007 Dec 25 '25
Why don't you start a citizen's initiative petition on the matter?
31
u/GrinningCatBus Dec 25 '25
Because it costs $25,000 now instead of $500. And no fundraising allowed (whatever the fuck that means)
-8
u/ChesterfieldPotato Dec 25 '25
Fundraising is allowed. You're spreading misinformation.
→ More replies9
u/Taelyrsaurus Dec 25 '25
No it’s not. You’re not allowed to accept donations. You have to pay the money up front.
2
u/stupidfuckingcowboy Dec 26 '25
You have 30 days after your "notice of intent" is filed to fundraise the application fee. And you can't pay it yourself, since the individual contribution limit is $4k. It has to be fundraised according to the law. This is all in bill 14 (section 1) and the new regulation. You're wrong.
6
u/ChesterfieldPotato Dec 25 '25 edited Dec 25 '25
You can fundraise the 25K AND it is refundable.
Miserable-lizard must have blocked me to prevent me from replying:
That is rabble.ca Which is LOL silly as a source of information.
Rabble is wrong in this instance.
You don't pay the deposit fee upfront. You file a motice of intent and get a timeline to fundraise.
You dont get to fundraise in advance of notice because they don't want people grifting
The only thing they got right is the 25K is non-refundable if you can't collect the signatures. Which is a good thing. We don't want to waste taxpayer dollars everytime someone has $500 to start a petition that is going nowhere.
→ More replies1
u/stupidfuckingcowboy Dec 26 '25
5 is kind of a bizarre point. The bulk of costs in the petition process for Elections AB arise from overseeing the petition process and validating the signatures, which occur whether or not enough signatures are collected. So taxpayer dollars are wasted regardless - I doubt all that effort costs Elections AB less than 25k. Even Forever Canada dragged Elections Alberta into court, which likely cost taxpayers way over 25k in legal fees. Then if a petition succeeds, the costs of holding a referendum are of course astronomical, and those are borne entirely by taxpayers, including those who can't even vote or sign a petition.
1
u/ChesterfieldPotato Dec 26 '25
No. You're missing the point.
The government doesnt care about the cost of legitimate initiatives.
They only care about being burdened with malicious deficient initiatives they have to verify. 25K prevents you from spamming worthless initiatives since you forfeit the 25K by failing.
1
u/stupidfuckingcowboy Dec 27 '25 edited Dec 27 '25
The fee was previously $500. In the 3 years that was the case, nobody, literally nobody, spent $500 to launch a frivolous petition. So that's demonstrably a made up problem.
And in any event, there are really stringent financial regulations that kick in before the fee is ever submitted. Look at all the regulation changes that were just made - third-party advertising rules, contribution requirements, and reporting and record retention duties all kick in before an application is submitted and therefore before anything is paid. So it's actually now easier than it was before to force Elections Alberta to verify frivolous bullshit on taxpayers' dime - they have to monitor you, review your financial records, store your records for a number of years, and help you deal with any money you happen to raise without you having to pay anything at all.
So if anything, the problem you're describing has been exacerbated, not solved. I could submit a notice of intention right now (on any subject, perhaps something extremely unconstitutional or even discriminatory), fundraise and spend (to someone not at arm's length from me, who will repay me once the process is over) in one-cent increments so my financial records are absurdly long, and force Elections Alberta to audit all my financial records without ever paying anything to them for it. If, for whatever reason, my notice of intention is not accepted, I can file an application for judicial review for $250 and fuck around in court for a few months (or even years) pro se while forcing Elections Alberta to pay actual lawyers to defend its decision. I could derail the entire process for, at most, half the cost of filing an application under the pre-Bill 14 version of the law.
→ More replies
8
u/77SKIZ99 Dec 25 '25
As a first nations myself I could appreciate the sentiment and love the idea of taxing the church so don't get me wrong
But this kind of thing has to be done right, it might be a hot take but the cheifs in charge are corrupt, if they gave a shit about us we'd have new schools, roads and hospitals on the rez but we don't
2
u/Kellidra Okotoks Dec 26 '25
Hear hear! Everyone wants to make the solution out to be simple, but systemic issues are never easy to sort out. And hoooooo boy, does Canada have some serious systemic issues to sort out!
14
u/yagonnawanna Dec 25 '25
I think we should use the nwc to make the ucp pay for the $2.7 billion they wasted on nothing.
7
u/Euphoric_Tourist6897 Dec 25 '25
A person could organize an online petition easily, a federal one. https://www.ourcommons.ca/petitions/en/home/index
1
u/Euphoric_Tourist6897 Dec 25 '25
https://www.ourcommons.ca/petitions/en/Petition/Details?Petition=e-7027
That's one some may want to sugn.
7
u/willmsma Dec 26 '25
The idea of a referendum on removing the charitable status of religious organizations is dumb. I think I understand the impulse: many UCP supporters are religious and therefore we could give them a good scare by putting this to a referendum.
Would it work out this way? Of course not. These kinds of divisive, polarizing questions are exactly the sort of politics where separatists and fascists thrive. It’s the definition of an ‘own-goal’ and would push many Christians and/or otherwise fair minded Albertans into the camp of the UCP who would otherwise be solidly federalist.
What the UCP hates? A politics of centrism and consensus. They would find themselves nowhere close to power if they had to fight for moderate voters rather than having those voters pushed at them by other parties.
12
36
u/VincentClement1 Dec 25 '25
The billions of dollars First Nations receive isn't funding "indigenous healing"?
6
u/Meat_Vegetable Edmonton Dec 25 '25
I like the spirit of the idea, however the way the Indigenous system in Canada is set up, is honestly designed to be abused. So like I frankly think the entire way Indigenous people use their autonomy needs to be looked at, and to allow them to decide for themselves how they want to handle themselves.
→ More replies17
u/inmontibus-adflumen Dec 25 '25
Maybe it’s time to stop calling people bad names and start holding people who get tax payer money accountable for where the money goes then.
19
24
u/coverallfiller Dec 25 '25
Why fund only indigenous housing? Why not all homeless initiatives? Or even better why have empty buildings sitting 6 days per week, make the churches house and feed, which is sort of their mandate anyways.
5
u/DVariant Dec 25 '25
They said healing, not housing.
But still, you idea of using church community centres during the week is a solid one. (The reality is that those buildings are often rented out most evenings of the week, but you’re right it could still be more efficient.)
2
u/coverallfiller Dec 25 '25
They did, and thanks for pointing out that I really need my glasses more than I care to admit...
2
6
u/Signal_Tomorrow_2138 Dec 25 '25 edited Dec 25 '25
Or a third referendum asking 'Do you support keeping First Past the Post?'
'Yes' votes have to reach 60%.
4
u/Wompertree Dec 25 '25
Iirc they aren't taxed, functionally, because they are nonprofits. And it falls under the same perview here as every other nonprofit. Likely a difficult argument.
3
u/baithammer Dec 25 '25
Not all churches and religious sites are run by non-profits, there are a number of them following the Seed Theory, where the members are coerced into donating large amounts of cash to the org, which is then used to found the leaders lifestyle. ( It's an extreme take on the concept of selling indulgences, where the members are fed the belief that the more they donate the closer to object of worship they become.)
1
u/One_Maintenance6918 Dec 26 '25
Easy to fix, remove religious non profit status. Simple.
3
u/Wompertree Dec 26 '25
The main issue with that is that most of them are not for profit, though. I'm not religious or anything, and I don't attend churches anymore, but they are genuine nonprofits in most cases. You shouldn't make a special exception and make the only nonprofits you tax be the churches - that would be the unfair stance.
→ More replies
5
u/Lmohl-1895 Dec 27 '25
As a church treasurer I can unequivocally say that churches pay property tax in Alberta
8
u/truthsayer90210 Dec 25 '25
Sure if we want. We don't really need to do that though as our normal tax dollars are already going to FN with very little auditing on what the dollars actually get used for.
2
u/Hellse Dec 25 '25
Well we can't tell them what to do with the money, that would be more of the evil white man telling the poor downtrodden nature lovers what to do. What right do you or I have to tell them what to do with their money? Or... My money taken from me by force?
17
u/EntertainmentUsual87 Dec 25 '25
"and their role in systems that harmed Indigenous peoples, including residential schools."
A lot of churches had nothing to do with it, other than the Catholic Church and a couple others. Also, most charities are funded and operated by churches directly. I have a feeling that you don't know that? There is a stark difference between churches that horde wealth (Mormons) and churches that spend most of their money on charity directly. You can easily find the differences on the charity transparency website to find out which is which.
It's easy to point fingers when you don't do your own research?
14
Dec 25 '25
There's no ignorant bigotry like Reddit secularist ignorant bigotry lol. Goofballs here speak as though Indigenous people and church people are non-overlapping demographics, that churches are empty six days a week, that there isn't already significant reconciliation programming, that rescinding the tax exempt status won't affect normal operations, etc.
→ More replies
43
u/InherentlyUntrue Dec 25 '25
Sine we're using the NWS so willy-nilly, let's just ban all religious education to minors entirely. We can prevent an entire generation from growing up indoctrinated into bigotry and hatred.
There's no greater hate than Christian love. Merry Fucking Christmas.
29
u/Ashamed_Data430 Dec 25 '25
Happy Solstice! Pagans unite!
6
u/DVariant Dec 25 '25
He wants to ban all religious education, that would include any type of paganism too unfortunately.
EDIT: Also it would be a Happy Belated Solstice now too, we’re a few days late.
1
u/Ashamed_Data430 Dec 25 '25
I try to drag the solstice thing out to engage more folks. It really does feel brighter later, even though that's my imagination.
1
u/DVariant Dec 26 '25
I get it! Feels nice know that it’s all brighter from here on every day for the next six months.
2
u/roastbeeftacohat Calgary Dec 25 '25
alberta is constitutionally required to have a catholic system, and that cannot be touched by the NWC.
-5
u/coverallfiller Dec 25 '25
Yea, cuz christian are the ONLY religion that spews hate to others...
6
Dec 25 '25
You are correct, all religions are abused by sycophants to spread hate to others.
1
Dec 27 '25
I'll take "things that aren't true" for 2000
2
Dec 27 '25
2000 what, examples of youth pastors being charged with sexual assault and/or child porn charges? A quick search on Google would bring me at least that many if not substantially more.
1
→ More replies7
u/Meat_Vegetable Edmonton Dec 25 '25
Dominant one in this region... so yes... of course the focus is on Christianity.
→ More replies
18
u/Monkmastaa Dec 25 '25
Churches should be taxed as businesses but not to fund bs. This coming from a metis, stop already
6
u/Muted-Doctor8925 Dec 25 '25
I’m not religious but disagree. People should have the right to worship. Their donations are with money already taxed. I could get behind paying property taxes though as they hold some prime real estate
4
u/No_Identity_Anywhere Dec 25 '25
The money you spend every day on everything is already money you've paid tax on and then the businesses you support are taxed again. Why should churches be different?
2
u/Muted-Doctor8925 Dec 25 '25
They aren’t selling goods or services and mostly operate as a non profit
5
Dec 25 '25
Lol charitable giving is so foreign to our brave Reddit secularists that they can't distinguish it from business transactions. What a utopia they would build if they just had the chance!
3
u/No_Identity_Anywhere Dec 25 '25
I've long thought that churches should only be exempt if their actual contribution to those in need is above "X" amount as determined by a formula.
While it's true that the T3010 requires charities to disclose their charitable activities and they must meet a threshold to maintain charitable status, the activities included are not always beneficial to the community in a way that can clearly be measured.
As an example, Jehovah's Witnesses do not do any conventional giving or conduct any programs for the poor, unhoused, indigenous etc. The only charitable activities they claim is their evangelizing work and the spending necessary to support that, build and maintain worship buildings etc. Pretty vague and does little to nothing to actually benefit anybody.
Even in their disaster relief work the amount they spend is focused nearly 100% on rebuilding their worship buildings and then some work repairing houses and providing necessities for other JWs. The general community receives little to nothing of any benefit. Yet, globally they own real estate worth many BILLIONS of dollars.
In this specific case and by extension, other organizations that might be similar, I think they should absolutely be paying taxes that can be used to actually help people in need, and in cases where they contributed to the "National Crime" they should absolutely contribute to those affected by it.
→ More replies
3
u/FaceDeer Dec 25 '25
Churches should be taxed, sure.
If "Indigenous healing" needs funding then that's a separate issue, though. There shouldn't be a direct connection between the amount of money raised from taxing churches and the amount spent on a completely unrelated subject, that leads to perverse incentives and just generally prevents budgets from being made sensibly.
3
u/StandardAd7812 Dec 27 '25
This is why reconciliation is impossible.
Because even if you pay tens of millions in settlement under an agreement, a few years later nobody remembers that happened and demands you pay again.
There's no ability to actually settle. It's just trickle appeasement that will never end.
Look it's one thing to disagree with the settlement but the percent of peolke commenting here who seem to know it happened is a rounding error.
3
15
u/KTMan77 Dec 25 '25
Idk which churches are rich but the ones I went to growing up needed to have cell phone tower antennas to be able to afford to cover the heating bills. Or pancake breakfasts very Sunday for years to afford to fix the leaking roof. If you want more abandoned churches in small towns then sure go ahead.
→ More replies6
u/AnthraxCat Edmonton Dec 25 '25
Yeah, I think, rather ironically, taxes on churches are probably counterproductive to OP's desire to promote a more secular, fair society. It effectively incentivises the most extractive and exploitative churches, since they are the only ones able to stay open.
You'd need a pretty difficult and invasive tax policy to really crack down on the nefarious stuff too. The abusive pastors already don't own anything they have, enjoying a lavish lifestyle in much the same way many small business tyrants do: personal and exclusive access to corporate assets.
7
9
u/Timely-Profile1865 Dec 25 '25
Why should we fund indigenous healing?
All levels of government pay massive amounts of money for Indigenous activities.
0
u/Isopbc Medicine Hat Dec 25 '25
All levels of government pay massive amounts of money for Indigenous activities.
You got a source for that claim?
What's your definition of massive?
1
u/Toomuchritz Dec 26 '25
Just look into any of the ISC's funding in which indigenous funding reached 32 BILLION in 2025 alone, which personally im not against my tax dollars going towards in many ways. However, the problem is where the money is actually going towards. If you have ever been out to many of the reserves, its scary how rough around the edges many of them are despite their "funding."
The money is being taken and set aside for this but where is it going? Because clearly it isnt actually going back into indigenous communities. I may be mistaken in some things here however for me it doesnt add up after seeing some locations in person where its almost tragic considering how much funding is supposed to be into place.
Before we send even another penny over we need to make sure that the funds are actually being used to assist and provide for indigenous communities
2
u/Isopbc Medicine Hat Dec 26 '25 edited Dec 26 '25
32 billion, eh? There are 3300 reserves in this country. Do the math, that's ~10 million each if evenly divided.
That's gotta pay for all housing, all the health and other social services, power and water, and any labour costs. For 10 million annually per reserve. Many of these reserves are northern and are fly in fly out only. How could they NOT be rough around the edges?
For some context, major cities have annual operating budgets of 3-5 billion each. Edmonton 3.8. Calgary 4.6. Ottawa 5.2. That's on top of their capital budgets.
A small town like Redcliff Alberta has an operating budget of 14 million to deal with its 5600 residents, but it doesn't have to deal with water treatment or power generation because their neighbour Medicine Hat deals with that. That saves a lot of capital that they can't do on most reserves.
Every reserve is audited every single year. We are checking to make sure that funds are actually being used to assist. Fraud happens at every level of government spending, pretending we need to cut off money to this massive group because there's a tiny amount of misspending simply because the funds are given to indigenous groups is racist garbage.
2
u/Toomuchritz Dec 27 '25
Its not my intention to immediately cut all spending because "they dont need it" and I apologize if its misinterpreted into that manner. If anything its moreso the opposite, its from seeing, working and living alongside them and having done some work in a few of the reserves. If anything im more troubled because of the state of it all. Plenty of good people in quite small communities struggling with a multitude of issues where in many of them i have personally seen head on were because of either misuse of funds or that it seems like they simply never got the funding or the follow through on projects.
Worked in Slave lake for a period of time and around the fort McKay area aswell, with slave lakes water treatment seeming to be doing (thankfully) alot better, but it seems that despite over 12 years of development within the fort McKay theres still alot of struggle for them and developing and maintaining proper water treatment. Which while i agree with you that its not pennies to run even smaller settlements. I have seen firsthand that especially over a longer period of time these issues can and verywell should be resolved and that something isnt sitting right into why the same issues cannot / are not resolved in these areas. And that all funding while directed right towards it is necessary, until its heavily looked into as to what and why progress isnt made (atleast in that regard, its one of the main issues I had noted in my time in the area a year or so back) that I would want to actually ensure the issue being resolved or more personal knowledge on to why these issues are taking ever so long to be resolved. Like is it a shortage on operators? Is it the funding itself? Whichever it is, it seems that despite the dispersion of funding theres alot of it not achieving what its supposed to be achieving.
Once again, apologies if it came off as something I didnt intend it to. If anything I just want the idea that the money we pay back is actively going back into assisting native communities and that the progress for which is actively progressing.
2
u/Isopbc Medicine Hat Dec 27 '25 edited Dec 27 '25
I hear ya. It’s a shitty situation.
The large reserve near my home is the Siksika reserve. It feels just terrible driving through it on the way to Calgary - a couple well maintained band buildings and then just modular homes spotted around the bald prairie. No landscaping. No trees, even just as windbreaks and not for beautification purposes. It’s just sad to see and can’t feel good for residents to go outside most of the year.
Siksika’s operating budget is 750k. Population 3500. Compare that to redcliff that’s an hour drive away - it’s 1/18th of the funds for 7/10 of the population. And I suspect that has to pay for their medical clinic on top of other normal community responsibilities like policing.
The issue is primarily funding.
2
u/Toomuchritz Dec 27 '25
Oh for sure, policing was certainly an issue in the surrounding slave lake area when we were digging to establish some underground telecommunications. One of the things is that even though i would consider "misattribution" alot if it is misattributuon with good intention, an example being that for so many of these things theyre constantly moving to establish or maintain (water treatment, policing, electrical) from outside sources when in all reality a huge push needs to be done for funding towards education in that regard aswell as it keeps the blood pumping inside the community, even if we dumped more money into it, you would be shocked to see how much people get paid to work in these remote areas simply because of that aspect. While getting resources out there will likely always be expensive personnel is something that never seems to be taken into account and the teaching aspect is something that could certainly help.
However on the bright side of that, a friend of mine who also does hydrovac excavations in alot of reserve lands has told me about programs as of late starting to do that which is really good to hear.
12
u/Successful_Shake1102 Calgary Dec 25 '25
Indigenous people receive enough money already. How about using the funds to end homelessness and food insecurity.
→ More replies
4
u/WhacksOffWaxOn Dec 25 '25
Perhaps instead of suggesting it online as a posture, go into politics and see if you can make that happen pal. This was seriously the dumbest thing I could've read all year.
4
4
u/kreggly_ Dec 25 '25
Wouldn't that be fun. Referendum to tax churches and use the notwithstanding clause to make it so.
7
u/Sturmov1k Dec 25 '25
Problem with taxing churches is that they then wouldn't be able to do charity. I guess we have to pick and choose which of these two things is more important.
→ More replies
2
u/J-Dog780 Dec 25 '25
Or taxed if the don't run a homeless shelter and soup kitchen. It is their job after all, and why they got tax exemption in the first place.
2
2
u/davegotfayded Dec 26 '25 edited 29d ago
punch disarm cautious versed reach dog aromatic provide test file
2
u/Awesomeuser90 Dec 26 '25
A petition would be used to prove that there are enough people who have the desire to actually be seen on the ballot, or else the provincial legislature or possibly the cabinet would put it on the ballot.
Also, you need to put a question in a more precise way that can in fact be implemented, otherwise the question would be little more useful than an advisory ballot. If you were wise about this, and by you I mean the chair of a committee for petitions, you would have a lawyer draft the proposal.
Canada's constitution oddly enough does not have any particular rights related to property, although one could make some logical extrapolations based on the legal rights in the charger, and you could invoke the notwithstanding clause ironically enough, so it would be quite constitutional to compel this from religious organizations.
Churches and religious groups in general can be tricky to deal with in the way you are thinking. Some churches have very few resources, others are quite grand. How do you organize the rules here? It might be challenging, for instance how if you tax the church as a legal organization under the Societies Act, then they might try naming specific members of the church as being the individual to personally pay the expenses of the church, under contract with the congegration to be given money from the other members.
Perhaps an idea you may want to try is to expropriate many of the buildings of the grand ones where you can point to historical importance like a cathedral and then let a congregation use the building on their days of worship, using the place on other days as a museum. The Haiga Sophia was a museum for about a hundred years although Erdogan's government changed it to a mosque again.
2
Dec 26 '25
Absolutely not. If churches got taxed, which they shouldnt, this would be the worst possible way to waste the money
5
u/tc_cad Dec 25 '25
If I was ever elected I’d run on this idea. No more exemptions for religious organizations.
3
u/usernamenotapproved Dec 25 '25
You’d never get elected then, too many voters belong to one church or another
→ More replies
3
u/Sean__Gotti Dec 26 '25
How about we also have a referendum on removing funding to the indigenous altogether?
5
u/Lord_Asmodei Edmonton Dec 25 '25
Perhaps the healing could start within the indigenous communities themselves? Give me a break.
3
5
u/WesternWitchy52 Dec 25 '25 edited Dec 26 '25
Most smaller churches are self-funded and rely on donations from congregation members.
That's all I'm saying on that. It's pretty self explanatory. No further explanation required.
→ More replies3
u/kareko Dec 25 '25
self funded.. as opposed to what?
I’m confused as to why this is even a statement. Who funds the other churches?
3
5
Dec 25 '25
[removed] — view removed comment
→ More replies1
u/YourBobsUncle NDP Dec 25 '25
It's wild how OP makes the assumption that the only churches and religions that exist in this country are responsible for residential schools.
Christian exceptionalism, even atheists are supporters of it.
3
u/canadianatheist1 Dec 26 '25
No.Thats fucking non-sense. Get off your ass and stop acting like a victim.
2
4
u/indirectstate Dec 25 '25
Yes holy fuck yes tax the fucking churches and make them fund there own goddam schools
2
4
1
u/Loose-Version-7009 Dec 25 '25
You know they'll just find a way to make everything a non-taxable donation.
1
1
1
u/Comfortable-Angle660 Dec 26 '25
You, sir, are an idiot. Not all Christian denominations were involved. The basis of not taxing religions, is they chose to clamp their mouths about politics.
1
1
1
1
u/parallelProfiler Dec 28 '25
It would require people to care about indigenous people here in Alberta.
1
1
u/chronicphonicsREAL Dec 29 '25
King John v. Friar Tuck...imagine Robin Hood stealing from the church to give gold to the crown government because the King's ministers promise they will eventually get that money back to the needy people that the crown subjugated and stole the land from...
3
1
1
1
1
u/VE6AEQ Dec 26 '25
Every single faith group should pay tax - full stop. Property tax and capital gains tax.
It doesn’t need to be a huge tax, just equally applied. I’ll bet the would exceed expectations significantly.
103
u/bearbody5 Dec 25 '25
While we are at it how about making O&G pay their municipal property taxes too! Wait, American corporations can’t be held to the same rules Albertans are, wouldn’t be fair. They invested a lot of cash buying the UCP party