Perhaps to be replaced by secular organizations, instead of organizations that believe that in a few years time myself and most of my friends are going to be tortured for eternity in a very real place called hell and who are ok with that.
It's an end to favourable special treatment, not an increased burden of restrictions.
Seems like google decides what nonprofits are good and deserves a discount and who are "evil" (or whatever) and does not. How would their soup-kitchen look like?
Saying that someone is not charitable because they give out food AND preach is a huge value judgement.
That's a strawman. It's not saying they're not a charitable organisation, it's saying they're not an organisation whose sole purpose is charity.
Maybe..
"it's saying they're not an organisation whose sole purpose is charity."
And that's the value judgement. Right there. You just defined what a "charity" is, and is not. Some might call preaching a charity (I might) etc..
Besides, preaching is advertising. It's designed to increase the numbers of the parent organisation of the charity. Other things that are charity aren't designed to do this. Giving clothes to someone isn't designed to increase the numbers of the parent org.
Most people consider "strings attached" charity to be not pure charity. Not to say it's uncharitable, but that it's not 100%.