Pages:
Author

Topic: Is bitcoin a religion? - page 14. (Read 6768 times)

legendary
Activity: 1078
Merit: 1003
March 23, 2013, 06:50:18 PM
#4
The issue with law, it can be interpreted any which ways you want it to be.  If the Supreme Court, as a joke, wanted to make Bitcoin into a religion, they could interpret it as such and legally recognize it as one.

Of course, this may be absurd, but considering the love and worship of the dollar...
hero member
Activity: 728
Merit: 500
March 23, 2013, 06:39:52 PM
#3
Probably not legally... On other hand it seems to be kinda big for some people here...

So, I wouldn't think it would pass in any court anywhere.

Even if I feel that some people believe in it bit too much...

This is kind of what I was getting at. As far as I can tell there is a not insignificant number of people use bitcoin for purely ethical and moral reasons.

edit: edited quote because ekaros edited making it confusing, content pretty much the same
hero member
Activity: 728
Merit: 500
March 23, 2013, 06:36:57 PM
#2
Probably not legally... On other hand it seems to be kinda big for some people here...

So, I wouldn't think it would pass in any court anywhere.

Even if I feel that some people believe in it bit too much...
hero member
Activity: 728
Merit: 500
March 23, 2013, 06:34:57 PM
#1
Quote
7.25.3.6.5  (02-23-1999)
Religious Belief Defined

    The term "religious" as used in IRC 501(c)(3) is not subject to precise definition. The leading interpretation of the term was made by the Supreme Court in United States v. Seeger, 380 U.S. 163 (1965), in which the Court interpreted the phrase "religious training and belief" as used in the Universal Military Training and Service Act, 50 U.S.C. section 456 (j), in determining an individual’s eligibility for exemption from military service on religious grounds. The Court formulated the following definition: "A sincere and meaningful belief which occupies in the life of its possessor a place parallel to that filled by the God of those admittedly qualifying for the exemption comes within the statutory definition."

    The Court elaborated upon the Seeger definition in Welsh v. United States, 398 U.S. 33 (1970), stating that "f an individual deeply and sincerely holds beliefs that are purely ethical or moral in source and content but that nevertheless impose upon him a duty of conscience to refrain from participating in any war at any time, those beliefs certainly occupy in the life of that individual a place parallel to that filled by... God in the lives of traditionally religious persons." Thus, religious beliefs include many beliefs (for example, Taoism, Buddhism, and Secular Humanism) that do not posit the existence of a Supreme Being in the conventional sense.


http://www.irs.gov/irm/part7/irm_07-025-003.html
Pages:
Jump to: