Should Churches Be Eligible For SBA Bailouts?

[Ivytalk]

Joe really came through — as I knew he would. He’s always been the go-to poster on law/religion/theology issues.

[JoltinJoe]

Thanks, Joe. When I was in law school, it was known as the Establishment Clause. Regardless, that’s the point I wished to make: the SBA loans raise more of a (Non-)Establishment Clause issue than a Free Exercise Clause issue.

The name often reflects the outlook. I was taught "Establishment Clause" in law school too.

"Establishment Clause" is more a Warren Court term.

"Non-Establishment Clause" is favored more by textualists.

How you describe it subtly explains what you see as the scope of the clause. "Establishment Clause" more readily allows for a reading of the clause so as to label unconstitutional any government action which supports religion. Even government action which favors religion, in general, without preferring one religion over another, would be unconstitutional.

"Non-Establishment Clause" emphasizes that you believe the purpose of the clause is to outlaw government action to create a specific favored state religion, i.e., a state "preferred" church. This allows for government action which favors faith, so long as no specific religion is preferred.

Don't go to a Federalist Society gathering and say "Establishment Clause."

[Ivytalk]

Thanks, Joe. When I was in law school, it was known as the Establishment Clause. Regardless, that’s the point I wished to make: the SBA loans raise more of a (Non-)Establishment Clause issue than a Free Exercise Clause issue.

The name often reflects the outlook. I was taught "Establishment Clause" in law school too.

"Establishment Clause" is more a Warren Court term.

"Non-Establishment Clause" is favored more by textualists.

How you describe it subtly explains what you see as the scope of the clause. "Establishment Clause" more readily allows for a reading of the clause so as to label unconstitutional any government action which supports religion. Even government action which favors religion, in general, without preferring one religion over another, would be unconstitutional.

"Non-Establishment Clause" emphasizes that you believe the purpose of the clause is to outlaw government action to create a specific favored state religion, i.e., a state "preferred" church. This allows for government action which favors faith, so long as no specific religion is preferred.

Don't go to a Federalist Society gathering and say "Establishment Clause."

What about the “Insanity Clause”?

[Winterborn]

Thanks Joe (and Ivy/Kalm) for the explanation between the two and for getting the topic started.

I was unaware of the different ways of stating the "clause" and their background.

[CID1990]

I’m just going to point out that I don’t know shit about this and therefore don’t have an opinion


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[CAA Flagship]

What about the “Insanity Clause”?

[GannonFan]

If you can force churches to close down, then you have to also give them the money other non-profits might have access to.

I like the simplicity of this argument. You have government intervening (for a good cause) and saying that churches cannot operate at this time. If churches aren't exempt from the government shutting them down, why would they then be exempt when government tries to help them through the forced shutdown, as they are doing with any other business/industry they deemed necessary to shut down?

[Ivytalk]

What about the “Insanity Clause”?

Winner, winner, chicken dinner!

Chico= Ivytalk
Groucho= JoltinJoe

[Ibanez]

I’m just going to point out that I don’t know shit about this and therefore don’t have an opinion


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

When the heck has that stopped anybody on here?!?!?

[SDHornet]

Hard no. No taxpayer money for churches.

I'll make an exemption for Church's Chicken.

The name of one of the programs is the Paycheck Protection Program and nonprofits, veterans organizations, tribal business concerns, sole proprietorships, self-employed individuals, and independent contractors with 500 or fewer employees can apply.

If the purpose it to protect the paychecks of the workers, than why can't churches be considered? They are likely a nonprofit. They employ people. Their revenues and thus their ability to make payroll and continue employing people could be impacted by the virus. Why exclude churches and their employees from the protection?

And don't get tripped up over the semantics of a church not being a small business. This is being administered by the SBA but it is not limited to small businesses.

If there are loopholes for chuches to use the program then so be it, but generally speaking I'm against taxpayer money being used for anything religious related. And no, I don't care what religion it is, just a hard no all around.

[Chizzang]

I’m just going to point out that I don’t know shit about this and therefore don’t have an opinion

Not knowing sh!t about the legalities shouldn't exclude you from thoughts on a "desired outcome"
I don't know sh!t about this either - but I do have an opinion on the desired outcome and the greater Seattle community

It seems that "desired outcome" gets confused by some as knowledge or presumed expertise

[kalm]

I’m just going to point out that I don’t know shit about this and therefore don’t have an opinion

Not knowing sh!t about the legalities shouldn't exclude you from thoughts on a "desired outcome"
I don't know sh!t about this either - but I do have an opinion on the desired outcome and the greater Seattle community

It seems that "desired outcome" gets confused by some as knowledge or presumed expertise

And then the unintended consequences scolds come in...

[houndawg]

They linked to the SBA’s FAQ page and it says this.

If true...

why should a church not be able to secure a loan..?
as long as its not "free money" then I don't see the issue

secured by the pastors home.

[UNI88]

Not knowing sh!t about the legalities shouldn't exclude you from thoughts on a "desired outcome"
I don't know sh!t about this either - but I do have an opinion on the desired outcome and the greater Seattle community

It seems that "desired outcome" gets confused by some as knowledge or presumed expertise

And then the unintended consequences scolds come in...

And they're almost as bad as the abomination nags.

Sent from my XT1650 using Tapatalk