Why?????

[veritas]

After three years of study, a Vatican-appointed panel of theologians has declared that limbo is a "problematic" concept that Catholics are free to reject. The 30-member International Theological Commission said there are good reasons to believe instead that unbaptized babies go to heaven, because God is merciful and "wants all human beings to be saved."

See link

http://www.religionnewsblog.com/16159/pope-to-end-doctrine-of-limbo

Personally I like some non-tax talk.

[Oxtrainer]

Why?????

Thanks to all who responded to the question. Snaggletooth is probably right that we
strayed a little far from the point. However the question Why was answered most
adequately by Erchess and really needs no apology no matter how repugnant to some
who take offence at anything Christian.

To put the same answer in terms I hope would be non offensive: When a child
is born it is completly self centered. It knows how to do wrong from birth. It does
not need to be shown how to hide the cookie behind its back and lie like crazy.
If it wants your gold coin or glasses or anything it is attracted to it would kill you to
get it if it had the ability. Unless it is trained to be different it will grow up to be worse
than any animal. This was the concenses of a study by the Minnisota Highway
Patrol some years ago.

I guess it is ingrained in us to do these things if we are not trained to do better.

Again Thanks for your responses and I hope this does not rub anyone.

[jainen]

religious doctrine

>>the question Why was answered most adequately by Erchess and really needs no apology no matter how repugnant to some who take offence at anything Christian<<

The book of Matthew records its protagonist as drawing a very clear separation of church and state, specifically in the matter of taxes.

Generally I don't argue with cops, and I don't know anything special about Minnesota babies. But my own boys and all their playmates were little angels in the beginning, so I don't agree with your idea of nature-versus-nurture.

I also don't think the original post needs to be answered in such terms. There are any number of reasons for not filing those old returns when originally due, and quite as many for picking them up now. There are plenty of possibilities just in Snaggletooth's one idea about domestic tranquility.

It's not our job to assign motivations to our clients, and we certainly don't serve them professionally by expressing their legal obligations as religious doctrine.

[Oxtrainer]

Why???

Thanks for the response Jainan, I always wondered where separation of Church and
State come from since it does not appear in the Constitution. I knew the passage
was there but never related it to separation of church and state as used today.
Your posts are always full of knowledge and I do appreciate them.

[erchess]

The phrase

separation of church and state does not appear in the Constitution but go read the First Amendment. The Federal Government may not found a religion nor adopt an official religion. The Federal Government may not prefer nor denigrate one religious position or positions (including absence of any) over another. The extent to which those and other provisions of the US Constitution restrict actions of State and Local Governments has been much debated over the years but when the Constitution including the First Ten Amendments was ratified, most of the States had their own State Churches that were supported by taxes levied on the public at large.

None of that changes the fact that most people will have most of their views on different subjects influenced by their religious or philosophical beliefs.

Nor does the relationship between government and religion in this country have any bearing that I see on what is and is not proper to discuss on this board or in public discourse generally.

[jainen]

by public demand

>>separation of Church and State... does not appear in the Constitution<<

Yes, that was one of many startling new concepts introduced by Christianity. Obviously adherents have had difficulty with it ever since.

But not in the Constitution? You'd better take another look. It was one of the most important reasons for revoking the Articles of Confederation. It filled the convention and prevented ratification of the original document, but was added thereafter with extraordinary prominence by public demand.

[TaxBird]

>>separation of Church and State... does not appear in the Constitution<<

Yes, that was one of many startling new concepts introduced by Christianity. Obviously adherents have had difficulty with it ever since.

But not in the Constitution? You'd better take another look. It was one of the most important reasons for revoking the Articles of Confederation. It filled the convention and prevented ratification of the original document, but was added thereafter with extraordinary prominence by public demand.

I think the reason most people don't think it's in the Constitution is because there is no phrase that says "Separation of Church and State" in the Constitution. Rather, there is a phrase that says something to the effect that public funds shall not be used for private ends. Church/religion is considered a private endeavor.

The other I would like to point out is that the Amendments are a part of the Constitution not separate from.

Just so we're clear.

[jainen]

there is a phrase

>>there is a phrase that says something to the effect that public funds shall not be used for private ends<<

Come on. The very first sentence of the Bill of Rights says, "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion."

Some people have tried to re-interpret the archaic word "establishment," but the Supreme Court won't tolerate that. Other people insist this only limits what government can do to religion, not the other way around, but that's not right either. As individuals everyone is perfectly free to base political opinions on religion or whatever they like, but that right stops when religious-based opinions would become public policy, even if a majority of people share the opinions.

[veritas]

>>there is a phrase that says something to the effect that public funds shall not be used for private ends<<

Come on. The very first sentence of the Bill of Rights says, "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion."

Some people have tried to re-interpret the archaic word "establishment," but the Supreme Court won't tolerate that. Other people insist this only limits what government can do to religion, not the other way around, but that's not right either. As individuals everyone is perfectly free to base political opinions on religion or whatever they like, but that right stops when religious-based opinions would become public policy, even if a majority of people share the opinions.

the rest of the sentence,

"Or prohibiting the free exercise therof"

Kinda of a conundrum.

[Luis Mopeo]

I've also had clients who avoided filing late returns even though they could get big refunds. Here's the answer to the original question, "Why?"

The IRS' most effective compliance technique is fear. That's why the "voluntary compliance" system works. Everyone knows if they don't pay tax due, the IRS is going to come after them.

Look at the letters clients receive when they owe $6. There are three pages of intimidating threats of fines, taking property, and even prison time. You've seen the client who gets an innocent letter from the IRS and you have to talk them down to convince them that the black car they saw that morning wasn't an IRS agent ready to take them to jail.

Look at the number of people who think they'll be fined when they overpay their taxes. That's a direct result of IRS pronouncements on the matter. That's not an accident.

The message is that you'd better be scared. Even though the tax code is so complicated that even professionals with years of experience can't keep a handle on it, if you do one thing they don't like, your entire life is in jeapordy.

Of course we know more about the law, so we're not as intimidated. Most people have a good understanding of how things work and realize they won't be instantly sent to prison if they have a problem with the IRS.

However, there are those who have a very low tolerance to that kind of fear. They're terrified. Once they get into a situation where they haven't filed, they feel like escaped convicts. All they know is they want to avoid the IRS at all costs. When the finally get up the courage to ask for help, they think a claim for refund is going to make the IRS mad and come after them.

The IRS fear campaign is meant to stir taxpayers to action, and it works. Unfortunately, it paralyzes some with fear, which is the "Why."

[Joe Btfsplk]

No conflict

the rest of the sentence,

"Or prohibiting the free exercise therof"

Kinda of a conundrum.

It seems pretty clear and consistent to me. The govt is not to establish or promote any religion, but is not to deny anyone the right to choose any religion they desire to follow.

Somehow there are those who think the government should promote religion and require you to accept some type of religion. Others think the government should outlaw religion altogether.

Somewhere in the middle is a question as to what constitutes promoting religion such as placing "in God we Trust" on coins or changing the pledge of allegiance to include "under God" which was not there when I was in grammar school. School prayers were pretty standard practice at certain events when I attended school, but are questioned by many today. These are grey areas which some contend are promoting religion and others contend are freedom of speech.

[jainen]

leave it in the middle

>>Somewhere in the middle<<

Some people say "in God we Trust" on coins endorses religion. Others say that profanes it.

Words only have whatever meaning we give them. Same thing with coins, for that matter! Best to leave it in the middle.

[bertrans]

Why???

As a youngster, I was taught by the Jesuits. Whenever the issue of unbaptised babies going wherever came up, the good Jesuit fathers invariably responded: 'We leave such matters in the hands of the merciful Lord.' This was 50 years ago.