it's kind of pointless to protest religions for the stances they take. religions aren't democracies. they take these positions because they believe their religious doctrine requires it. maybe if you committed to a detailed theological debate you could convince them they are mistaken. well, probably not. but that at least would have a better shot than waving placards outside their temples.
but the controversy over the morman church's role in funding proposition 8 does raise the question of why religions get a special tax exemption. some of the protesters have pushed to get the church of latter day saints tax exempt status revoked because they engaged in politics during the prop. 8 campaign. that raises a host of messy questions about where the line is between advocating for a particular candidate (or referendum vote) and being vocal about a tenet of your religion. the line between the two is inherently fuzzy. it seems that every time that the prevailing party in an election was supported by a religion, there are calls by the losing side to revoke that religion's tax-exempt status.
so why do we give religions tax exempt status to begin with? let's revoke every religion's tax exemption. then religious leaders could openly say whatever they want to say, even out-and-out endorse candidates, without the threat of any financial penalty. and members of other religions or non-believers like me could stop resenting the unfair tax advantages that religious organizations get over everyone else.
