Should non-profits be allowed to censor?

Should non-profits be allowed to censor?

This is a discussion on Should non-profits be allowed to censor? within the The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion forums, part of the Related Topics category; So, we've all seen the non-profits like MDA who censor their promotional videos and Facebook pages. My question is: should non-profit organizations be allowed to ...

View Poll Results: Should Anti-gun non-profits be allowed to censor tax-paying citizens?

Voters
17. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes

    11 64.71%
  • No

    6 35.29%
  • Maybe/I'm not sure

    0 0%
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 18
Like Tree14Likes

Thread: Should non-profits be allowed to censor?

  1. #1
    Member Array american23's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    Iowa
    Posts
    316

    Should non-profits be allowed to censor?

    So, we've all seen the non-profits like MDA who censor their promotional videos and Facebook pages. My question is: should non-profit organizations be allowed to do that against legitimate comments (IE comments that aren't spam)? Think about it for a moment: we subsidize them. They don't pay anything in taxes, as a result we have to pick up the slack for the police, fire departments, EMT's, roads, and everything else government related that they use. I feel like this is government sanctioned/endorsed censorship. So, should anti-gun (well, all) non-profit organizations be allowed to do this? I want to hear your thoughts.


  2. #2
    Distinguished Member Array DingBat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    Rocky Mountains
    Posts
    1,968
    can admit to being pretty uninformed here. but i voted as that's what my gut said.

    though i will add; as long as the NFL enjoys non-profit status i have hard time taking it seriously.

    and i understand the stickiness here, but the Catholic Church is in-arguably the biggest corporation on the planet. Also the biggest single landowner on the planet. so why are they tax exempt? even if they paid 1% of the taxes everyone else pays....?
    american23 likes this.

  3. #3
    Member Array american23's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    Iowa
    Posts
    316
    Quote Originally Posted by Kavalander View Post
    can admit to being pretty uninformed here. but i voted as that's what my gut said.

    though i will add; as long as the NFL enjoys non-profit status i have hard time taking it seriously.

    and i understand the stickiness here, but the Catholic Church is in-arguably the biggest corporation on the planet. Also the biggest single landowner on the planet. so why are they tax exempt? even if they paid 1% of the taxes everyone else pays....?
    I agree 100%, I've thought about this for a while wasn't sure how this would go over tbh. For me, it's more of a slap in the face to gun owners. They are basically like "haha, you're paying us to take your rights away! First we'll take your money, now we try and take your guns, and if you object to it...tough, we'll take your first ammendment away too!". To me it feels like they're rubbing their non-profit status in our faces as they abuse it...

  4. #4
    VIP Member Array peckman28's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Maryland
    Posts
    2,104
    The notion that failing to steal someone's money through taxes is akin to subsidizing them is your first mistake. Secondly, if it's a private organization it's a private organization...they can do what they want. If it's genuinely non-profit then there are no profits to tax...hence the lack of taxation. You are just as free to call them out for their stupidity as they are to act foolishly. New laws telling them what they will or will not allow people to say on their web forums, what they will or will not run for ads, what they will or will not allow people to say using THEIR resources (NOT yours) are not the answer. You are literally saying that we must deprive yet more people of their freedom to make ourselves more free. If you want a real answer to this, begin advocating for an end to our income tax system and an outright repeal of the 16th Amendment, along with the massively smaller federal government that such reforms would necessitate.

  5. #5
    VIP Member
    Array Hopyard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Disappeared
    Posts
    11,898
    A non-governmental entity is quite free to censor whatever they want to, just as the owners of this board may.

    Non-profits are no different from any other corporation except for tax treatment. 501(c) organization - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    Non -profits are not prohibited from advocacy for a point of view. e.g.,"the National Rifle Association of America (NRA) is an American nonprofit organization" https://www.google.com/#q=is+the+NRA+a+non-profit It engages in advocacy.

    There is a thin fine line at which the advocacy becomes partisan politics, and the nature of the organization under our tax code must
    be changed from 501 to something else, or more typically the charitable form of a non-profit 501c3 must be changed to 501c4, which
    are supposedly "social welfare organizations" though that label has been abused heavily by some political groups in recent times to mask
    partisan behavior. [the basis for the supposed IRS scandal in which requests for 501c4 "social welfare organization" status was denied to partisan organizations].

    From Wikipedia: Non-profits must file tax returns too: "Failure to file required returns such as Form 990 (Return of Organization Exempt From Income Tax) may result in monetary fines of up to $250,000 per year. Exempt or political organizations (excluding churches or similar religious entities) must make their returns, reports, notices, and exempt applications available for public inspection"

    As the famous line goes, and like it or not, "corporations are people too," and non-profits are corporations too.
    If the Union is once severed, the line of separation will grow wider and wider, and the controversies which are now debated and settled in the halls of legislation will then be tried in fields of battle and determined by the sword.
    Andrew Jackson

  6. #6
    Member Array american23's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    Iowa
    Posts
    316
    Quote Originally Posted by peckman28 View Post
    The notion that failing to steal someone's money through taxes is akin to subsidizing them is your first mistake. Secondly, if it's a private organization it's a private organization...they can do what they want. If it's genuinely non-profit then there are no profits to tax...hence the lack of taxation. You are just as free to call them out for their stupidity as they are to act foolishly. New laws telling them what they will or will not allow people to say on their web forums, what they will or will not run for ads, what they will or will not allow people to say using THEIR resources (NOT yours) are not the answer. You are literally saying that we must deprive yet more people of their freedom to make ourselves more free. If you want a real answer to this, begin advocating for an end to our income tax system and an outright repeal of the 16th Amendment, along with the massively smaller federal government that such reforms would necessitate.
    That's where I feel like you are wrong. Non-profits when they were first created were supposed to be for the "common good". That's supposed to be the difference between a business and a non-profit. Kavas right, if they want to act like businesses, then they should be taxed like businesses. Non-profits are government-backed organisations...meaning WE THE GOVERNMENT back them. I have no problem with them being allowed to censor people, but I have a problem with them being a government sanctioned organization and doing it. They should either

    A: Lose their Tax Exempt status if they want to censor citizens, or...
    B: Continue to be tax exempt, and not be allowed to censor the people subsidizing them

  7. #7
    Member Array american23's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    Iowa
    Posts
    316
    Quote Originally Posted by Hopyard View Post
    A non-governmental entity is quite free to censor whatever they want to, just as the owners of this board may.

    Non-profits are no different from any other corporation except for tax treatment. 501(c) organization - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    Non -profits are not prohibited from advocacy for a point of view. e.g.,"the National Rifle Association of America (NRA) is an American nonprofit organization" https://www.google.com/#q=is+the+NRA+a+non-profit It engages in advocacy.

    There is a thin fine line at which the advocacy becomes partisan politics, and the nature of the organization under our tax code must
    be changed from 501 to something else, or more typically the charitable form of a non-profit 501c3 must be changed to 501c4, which
    are supposedly "social welfare organizations" though that label has been abused heavily by some political groups in recent times to mask
    partisan behavior. [the basis for the supposed IRS scandal in which requests for 501c4 "social welfare organization" status was denied to partisan organizations].

    From Wikipedia: Non-profits must file tax returns too: "Failure to file required returns such as Form 990 (Return of Organization Exempt From Income Tax) may result in monetary fines of up to $250,000 per year. Exempt or political organizations (excluding churches or similar religious entities) must make their returns, reports, notices, and exempt applications available for public inspection"

    As the famous line goes, and like it or not, "corporations are people too," and non-profits are corporations too.
    They are not corporations. Businesses are for-profit...which means they don't exist for the common good. In addition, corporations can claim charity work as business write-offs. So I'll say it again: if they want to act like a business, and get the benefits that come with being a business, then they should lose their tax exempt status. I have no issue with them being allowed to censor gun owners, I have an issue with subsidizing them to do it.

  8. #8
    VIP Member Array OutWestSystems's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    Colorado Springs, CO
    Posts
    2,171
    Their property, their rules.

  9. #9
    VIP Member Array OutWestSystems's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    Colorado Springs, CO
    Posts
    2,171
    Quote Originally Posted by american23 View Post
    They are not corporations. Businesses are for-profit...which means they don't exist for the common good. In addition, corporations can claim charity work as business write-offs. So I'll say it again: if they want to act like a business, and get the benefits that come with being a business, then they should lose their tax exempt status. I have no issue with them being allowed to censor gun owners, I have an issue with subsidizing them to do it.
    So you think the NRA should loose its tax exempt status also? They do the same kind of censorship.

  10. #10
    Member Array american23's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    Iowa
    Posts
    316
    Quote Originally Posted by OutWestSystems View Post
    So you think the NRA should loose its tax exempt status also? They do the same kind of censorship.
    Can you name an example of the NRA censoring someone? Yes, I would be ok with them losing non-profit status if they censor people. The rules/laws should apply to everyone equally.

  11. #11
    VIP Member
    Array Hopyard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Disappeared
    Posts
    11,898
    Quote Originally Posted by american23 View Post
    They are not corporations. Businesses are for-profit...which means they don't exist for the common good. In addition, corporations can claim charity work as business write-offs. So I'll say it again: if they want to act like a business, and get the benefits that come with being a business, then they should lose their tax exempt status. I have no issue with them being allowed to censor gun owners, I have an issue with subsidizing them to do it.
    You are mistaken. Non-profits are corporations. I was once on the Board of Directors of a non-profit which was incorporated in Maryland.

    I don't disagree with your general viewpoint that organizations which are supposed to exist for the common good and therefore receive
    special tax treatment should be expected to have additional or different burdens on them than for-profit corporations. Mostly though,
    that isn't how it works in the real world.
    If the Union is once severed, the line of separation will grow wider and wider, and the controversies which are now debated and settled in the halls of legislation will then be tried in fields of battle and determined by the sword.
    Andrew Jackson

  12. #12
    VIP Member Array suntzu's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    TX/NH
    Posts
    5,968
    Why does the poll say "Should Anti-gun non-profits be allowed to censor tax-paying citizens?"
    Why not "Should non-profits be allowed to censor tax-paying citizens?"

    Me thinks there is an agenda here instead of trying to address an issue (which I think is a non issue).......

    So, do you think that in a church bulletin a Satanic cult should be able to advertise in it? I reallly don't follow your logic at all.
    Hopyard and Sig 210 like this.
    Then I heard the voice of the Lord saying, “Whom shall I send? And who will go for us?”
    And I said, “Here am I. Send me!”

    Isaiah 6:8

  13. #13
    Member Array american23's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    Iowa
    Posts
    316
    Quote Originally Posted by suntzu View Post
    Why does the poll say "Should Anti-gun non-profits be allowed to censor tax-paying citizens?"
    Why not "Should non-profits be allowed to censor tax-paying citizens?"

    Me thinks there is an agenda here instead of trying to address an issue (which I think is a non issue).......

    So, do you think that in a church bulletin a Satanic cult should be able to advertise in it? I reallly don't follow your logic at all.
    For the health of the thread. It has to be about guns...or else I'd need to make it on a different forum. There's a difference there regarding religious organizations which exist for an entirely different reason than to help people. I don't think churches should be tax exempt because it's a violation of the separation of church and state. Different topic though, let's try to stay on topic.

  14. #14
    Senior Member
    Array Lee 1973's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    Bardstown, Kentucky
    Posts
    728
    People who donate to anti-gun or pro-gun non-profits cannot use that donation as a tax deduction. Yes, a non-profit should run it's organization as it sees fit as long as it is following all laws.
    Owner/Instructor of Make Ready Defensive Training
    Kentucky Dept of Criminal Justice Training Certified Firearms Instructor in Carrying Concealed Deadly Weapons
    NRA Certified Instructor
    NRA Certified Range Safety Officer
    NRA Recruiter
    www.MakeReadyDefense.com

  15. #15
    VIP Member Array peckman28's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Maryland
    Posts
    2,104
    Quote Originally Posted by american23 View Post
    That's where I feel like you are wrong. Non-profits when they were first created were supposed to be for the "common good". That's supposed to be the difference between a business and a non-profit. Kavas right, if they want to act like businesses, then they should be taxed like businesses. Non-profits are government-backed organisations...meaning WE THE GOVERNMENT back them. I have no problem with them being allowed to censor people, but I have a problem with them being a government sanctioned organization and doing it. They should either

    A: Lose their Tax Exempt status if they want to censor citizens, or...
    B: Continue to be tax exempt, and not be allowed to censor the people subsidizing them
    Non-profits are for whatever purpose they see fit. They're still non-profit. The government does not back or endorse them. Stop thinking like a statist and assuming that if the government doesn't touch something or tax it to whatever it can bear it "endorses" it. For that matter give me a real definition of "common good". I guarantee you you'll be unable to do it without contradicting yourself or introducing massive amounts of subjectivity to it, and that's why collectivism is so illogical and absurd when faced with critical thought.
    suntzu likes this.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Sponsored Links

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Search tags for this page

can non-profits censor on their fb page?

,

censorship nra

Click on a term to search for related topics.