{"id":31862,"date":"2021-05-10T19:01:37","date_gmt":"2021-05-10T23:01:37","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.cccc.org\/news_blogs\/?p=31862"},"modified":"2021-05-11T10:59:55","modified_gmt":"2021-05-11T14:59:55","slug":"centre-for-inquiry-canada-and-cost-of-religion","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/cccc.org\/news_blogs\/john\/2021\/05\/10\/centre-for-inquiry-canada-and-cost-of-religion\/","title":{"rendered":"Centre for Inquiry Canada and the Cost of Religion"},"content":{"rendered":"
This entry is part 3 of 4 in the series Sector Narrative<\/a><\/div><\/div><\/div>\n

The Centre for Inquiry Canada<\/strong> (CFIC<\/strong>) published two articles authored by Sandra Dunham<\/strong> and Leslie Rosenblood<\/strong> about the cost of religion<\/strong> and recommend eliminating advancing religion<\/strong> as a charitable purpose<\/strong>. You can download them here:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"\"<\/a>
Download CFIC Exploring Advancement of Religion as a charitable purpose<\/em><\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n\n\n
\"\"<\/a>
Download CFIC Religious Charities Issuing Tax Receipts<\/em><\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

There are three main points in these articles that need a response:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

  1. CFIC asserts that \u201c[I]t is no longer appropriate to confer charitable status\u2026on organizations whose sole purpose is evangelism, the aim of \u2018advancing religion\u2019 is not an intrinsic good, and Canadians should not continue subsidizing organized religion.\u201d1<\/a><\/sup><\/li>
  2. CFIC\u2019s attempt to analyze the cost of the charitable tax credit<\/strong> for donations to religious charities<\/strong> is incomplete and therefore very misleading.<\/li>
  3. The rationale for CFIC\u2019s position is based on a faulty premise: \u201cCFIC believes that Canada\u2019s social safety net is better provided by organizations that do not require program participants to adhere to the tenets of a religion in order to participate.\u201d2<\/a><\/sup><\/li><\/ol>\n\n\n\n

    CFIC: Advancing religion is not an intrinsic good<\/h1>\n\n\n\n

    CFIC\u2019s assertion that advancing religion is not an intrinsic good is indeed just that: a mere assertion. It is an opinion not grounded in evidence and research. It comes nowhere close to answering the volumes of peer-reviewed research showing the opposite. Just one Canadian example of this research is the 2020 book, The Status of Religion and the Public Benefit in Charity Law<\/a><\/em>. It contains chapters on the public benefit of advancing religion by authors from several countries, replete with evidence of the numerous benefits of advancing religion.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    CFIC: The charitable tax credit for advancing religion is an unfair cost to Canadians<\/h1>\n\n\n\n

    CFIC\u2019s approach to valuing the charitable tax credit for donations to religious charities is deeply flawed because it considers only the tax credit’s cost. Its focus is exclusively on the cost of religion to Canadians, and that’s fine if someone is merely curious about tax expenditures. However, it is woefully inadequate for any discussion about the tax credit itself. Public policy decisions must include a full analysis of the costs and<\/em> the benefits. CFIC\u2019s approach is akin to valuing stocks and bonds based only on the purchase price without regard to expected return on investment or risk. We wouldn\u2019t use the Centre for Inquiry Canada\u2019s simplistic methodology for personal investment decisions. Neither should Canadians use CFIC\u2019s simplistic methodology when investing through the tax system. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

    The Centre for Inquiry Canada frames the entire issue as a cost issue, the cost of religion, without considering the value of religion at all. In fact, one of the authors of the report, Sandra Dunham, dismissed robust, academically rigorous research that examines value aspects of the tax credit as \u201coffensive\u201d and \u201cdrivel<\/a>.\u201d In the same opinion piece, Dunham castigated the media for reporting this research. Using these terms and tone is inappropriate in serious public policy discussion, greatly undermining CFIC\u2019s claim to be scientific and rational.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    Who really benefits from religion?<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

    Fortunately for all Canadians, others have done a much better job than the Centre for Inquiry Canada of examining the socioeconomic benefits of religion. Every Canadian, even the most secularist or atheistic Canadian, benefits from the places of worship that the Centre for Inquiry Canada writes off so easily. One example will show what the CFIC has overlooked.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    Every Canadian (religious or non-religious) who values\u2014or who has benefitted from or might ever benefit from\u2014organizations involved in the following initiatives, along with many other charitable causes, have places of worship to thank for transforming people into civic-minded, caring, generous neighbours who support Canada’s secular charities:<\/p>\n\n\n\n