Aspies For Freedom

There may be trouble ahead

A change in the law could mean mediums, psychics and healers face prosecution if they cannot justify their claims. Spiritualists are delivering a mass petition to Downing Street and complaining that a genuine religion is being discriminated against.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/magazine/7354089.stm

Spiritualism is actually a religion.  Whether churches or "religious" organizations can charge for courses, services or counselling is an interesting discussion.  

The problem is in how people are charged money for these services and under what circumstances.  If a psychic is paid a fee to "entertain" at a party giving reading, it is quite different from someone charges a vunerable person large sums for "removing a curse".  That should actually be fraud because how are they going to prove they actually removed a curse.

One thing:

How many churches demand people tithe them, or else donate a % of their income to charity (whether that "charity" be the church or an actual charity)?

And how many of these same churches not only promise immortality and fail to deliver (the contents of the coffins in their churchyards are proof of failure) but in some cases even promise spiritual healing and offer counselling?

Mainstream religions are just as irrational as all the new-age hippy spiritual healers.

I do wonder if this law will be enforced against members of church clergy who start to doubt their faith. Personally I think while at it the government should tax churches too - after all, how is promoting a particular religious doctrine charitable?

Best comment from the article:

I agree Simon

In a lot of cases, mere belief will lift a self-fulfilling curse.

Any charity or organisation which claims to be charitable and solicits donations is guilty of fraud if they do so under false pretences. If a church offers free services such as counselling (and this counselling must be seperate from religious preaching) then that would be an actual charitable action. However I know that at least in the UK a church can be tax-exempt merely by claiming their purpose as "promoting religious belief". That is not a charitable action.

Churches should be taxed like any other organisation, the donations they solicit are often used to maintain the grounds or pay for their staff and a lot of churches do nothing other than advertise. That is not charity - if you believe that it is "saving souls" or whatever else then that's up to you, but that belief does make it an objective fact that the government should enshrine in law.

I think it's okay for people to practice as psychics as long as they don't guarantee 100% accuracy. Because even if being able to see into the future, or communicate with dead people, or whatnot, is possible and these are such individuals who are capable of it (which I believe some are genuine), there would still be no way to be 100% accurate, unless they were just incredibly good at it (which I've never heard even an anecdote that would compel me to think this has happened).

After all, someone who goes to the psychic is going on the basis that they believe it is possible - otherwise, if you don't believe it's possible, why would you throw your money away? So yeah, a disclaimer perhaps is in order, but not to shut it down altogether.

Anyone can see that there's tons of fraud with psychics. At the very least, putting a disclaimer up is a good idea, just as you can't sell any other product not proven to work with claims that it definately works you shouldn't be able to sell spiritual or religious services without evidence.

Some churches demand 10% of people's income to become a voting member.  I think that is wrong.  

Most churches will publish annual financial reports, as do most charities, that show how the money is being used.  Members are allowed to vote on how the church finances are used, they can elect other members to a board that manages the churches affairs and trustees are appointed to oversee legal affairs.  This is not the case in all churches because sometimes there is a hierarchy of clergy who control everything and make all the decisions.  

Any revenue generated by a church that is not a donation (money that is not received for goods or services) is taxable in my country.  If a church charges for a wedding, it is taxable.  Only the land that the actual church sanctuary is standing on is not taxable.  Other buildings and parking lot are taxable.  Some ministers charge people who are not members of the church for performing funerals, wedding and baptisms but some "suggest" a donation be made.  I don't know if ministers have to pay tax on their "donations received" for services.  Usually the congregation will provide free housing for them because often ministers do not get paid much.   They are guidelines that churches and charities have to follow in order to kept their tax status and their ability to issue tax receipts for donations.  Not filing a yearly report to the government or breaking certain rules results in them losing that designation.  

I also don't believe that churches should charge people to take bible study courses unless they are accredited as educational institutions.   If they say they are charging people for literature used in the course, I don't think that is fair to people who are poor.  

Some spiritualist actually belong to organized churches.  Swedenborgs, Spiritualist Church of Canada (Christian spiritualist) and others.  I know a church in Canada that does charge for readings but the money is given to the church and people are only allowed a certain number of readings per year.  They also charge a fee for applying for membership.  

If people want to run a "Psychic" business and charge from a set list of fees for certain services, issue receipts and pay taxes -- no problem.  It does not mean that people can demand quality from them.  Personally, I would not use them anyway.  The law proposal might actually be a way to regulate this underground economy, make psychic businesses register and pay tax.  They could also generate revenue from fining people who operate without a license.  Usually when the government sticks its nose into religion (or most matters), it is looking for money or ways to reduce legal/judicial costs.  

What about people who charge to investigate haunting and do "clearings"?

Pascal's wager
I'm not going into the problems with it, wikipedia it

I'd hate to see readings banned completely, because some really are legit in that they are not willfully defrauding people. However, in my view they still need a disclaimer which states "This has not been proven". Saying "this is just for entertainment" may be true in some cases, but when it's taken seriously by both parties that's actually another lie. If people sell a service that's not proven to work and do so by telling people it's not proven then personally i've got no issue at all.

Agreed

All charities are required by law to file such reports, but even commercial companies are required to file annual returns too - http://www.companieshouse.gov.uk offers online access to the last accounts for any company registered in the UK, the charities commission stores more specific records here: http://www.charity-commission.gov.uk

In the UK, a charity must have objects which are of benefit to a large number of people besides the founders - http://www.charity-commission.gov.uk/pub...mary.asp#2
Now, personally I can't see how "c) the advancement of religion;" is actually charitable in the normal sense of the term, it's only charitable to those who already are part of that religion - "saving souls" is very charitable if you believe that is what you are doing.

Bible study courses as run by churches are just another form of advertising, and so I agree with you here - especially if that church is still claiming to be charitable. As for educational insitutions, i'm not aware of any that are actually combo churches. There are religious boarding schools or schools which offer courses on theology, but these are not churches in the normal sense of the word (a place or organisation devoted to religious practice as a sole purpose).

"but the money is given to the church" - so what? I'd kinda expect money that the church charges to go to the church.

Are spiritualists generally known as avoiding tax? I'd have thought they're no more known for tax evasion than other "cash in hand" jobs.
As for licensing, i'd hope that doesn't happen for one simple reason: it confers legitimacy upon people who are all essentially claiming the same thing. What seperates fraud from honesty in this industry is literally just intent - those who do not believe themselves are obvious fraudsters, the rest are being honest in so much as they are not willfully lieing to their clients. Personally i'd make the latter just give a disclaimer stating "this hasn't been proven scientifically" the same as i'd force "alternative medicine" quacks to.

Unless something is actually seriously harmful to public health, there's no reason why people should not be allowed to spend their own money on it having been told the facts.

If the government really wanted to license psychics, how would they test them?

Most of the what is said at Spiritualist church readings during the services is very very vague.  I once asked a church medium what was the point of the readings but she told me that is gives people hope.

Apologies for typo in thread title. Even self-confessed pedant's mkae mistakes sometimes.