Should a state give tax incentives for something to be used as an evangelical tool

[GMDino]

(06-23-2016, 12:52 PM)PhilHos Wrote: The question is should taxpayer money go towards ANY thing that many taxpayers would not want? I personally don't think abortions should be paid for with taxpayer money, for example. I obviously wouldn't mind this ark thing being paid for by taxpayers, but given what I just said, I can understand those that think otherwise.

So, the answer, IMO, simply is should taxpayer money go towards anything that taxpayers may not like? If the answer is no, then that means that ALL those "controversial" things then, not just religious. So no tax breaks/incentives/what have you to this ark, to abortion doctors/clinics/etc, to mosques/synagogues/churchs, to birth control, etc. I'd, personally, rather be all inclusive and let the whiney babies (be they religious or otherwise) cry in their bottles. So if that means tax-funded abortions, so be it (as long as abortion is legal, that is). However, that's just me. I know that I don't always represent the majority Christian mindset (unfortunately).

Tax money does not go to abortions, first off.

Secondly I think anything that designed to help the less fortunate like a clinic should be helped.

Privately owned things like stadiums and arks should not get tax breaks.