It is time to revisit the separation of church and state.

[Stonepounder]

The first amendment of the Constitution says: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof..." and I'm all for that.

But, we give churches tax exempt status as 501(c)(3) organizations. Yet every election cycle we see more and more churches explicitly violating the terms of their tax-exempt status. To maintain a 501(c)(3), organizations, including churches, must abide by strict guidelines that prohibit election activity.

https://www.rawstory.com/2016/07/angry-dc-priest-insists-tim-kaine-be-denied-communion-for-supporting-womens-rights/

While Tim Kaine’s pastor describes Kaine as “very compassionate, approachable, available, and friendly,” a Washington DC-based priest, a member of the Dominican Order, has told Tim Kaine that he is not a true Catholic and not entitled to receive communion. The issue? Tim Kaine has stated his personal opposition to abortion, but refuses to enact laws as a public official that would interfere with a woman’s right to choose.

The anti-abortion site LifeNews reported that Father Thomas Petri took to Twitter to condemn Kaine. “Senator @timkaine. Do us both a favor. Don’t show up in my communion line.” The priest also told Kaine that his beliefs that women should be priest and that “abortion is fine” makes him either “poorly catechized or a dissenter.”

We have seen many other 'Evangelical' churches telling congregants who to vote for, from the pulpit. Yet, the FEC and IRS never seem to take note. Seems to me that its about time to make churches play by the rules. It's OK if they don't want to play by the rules of a 501(c)(3) organization, but then they should lose their tax-exempt status and pay taxes just like the rest of us who enjoy freedom of speech.

[Brickbat]

1. Fr. Petri has apologized, apparently.

But yeah, he never should have tweeted in the first place.

[FBaggins]

2. That's problematical

Is it a "free exercise of religion" if you can't even preach what you consider moral/ immoral behavior from the pulpit?

[cleanhippie]

6. When a church accepts public subsidies, they lose some autonomy because that's the constitutional

Price they must pay.

Just remove the tax -exempt status from all churches, then they can say whatever they want to.

[SickOfTheOnePct]

9. They don't lose the right to preach the tenets of their religion

All they lose is the right to explicitly tell parishioners/church members, who, by name or party, they should or should not vote for.

[cleanhippie]

15. Yes, that's what I'm saying.

[Bernardo de La Paz]

14. Ostentacious Osteen Tax Exemption

[OnlinePoker]

17. Don't forget the $65 million jets

You may have heard the story a few months ago about an Atlanta-based minister who claimed he needed a $65 million private jet so he could “safely and swiftly share the Good News of the Gospel worldwide.” But almost as quickly as Pastor Creflo Dollar asked his 200,000 followers to each donate $300.00 towards the purchase of a luxurious jet, the campaign vanished and was removed from his website.

But now, the board of World Changers Church International — which also operates as Creflo Dollar Ministries, has announced it is ready to purchase the plane.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/steve-siebold/the-biggest-scam-of-all-p_b_7521170.html

[smirkymonkey]

30. Sickening.

What a grifter.

[cherokeeprogressive]

22. "shall make no law"

Where can I find the abdication of autonomy clause in the Constitution?

[cleanhippie]

26. I think you understand my point.

No need to be obtuse.

[cherokeeprogressive]

35. No. I dont. Please point out where subsidy and autonomy are constitutionality intertwined.

[Panich52]

41. Blame tax code (& religious dependence on not paying them)

A church's autonomy in political issues is subject to their exemption status. As long as they want to avoid paying taxes, they stay out of political endorsement. Singling out Kaine was a political announcement. He might have gotten away with it if Kaine was included in a list of parishioners who are deemed unworthy of communion.

[SickOfTheOnePct]

10. They can

preach what they consider moral/immoral behavior from the pulpit all they want to without risking losing their tax-exempt status, so long as they don't explicitly tell church members who, by name or party, they should not vote for.

The priest who tweeted against Kaine violated nothing with regards to tax exemption.

[cleanhippie]

16. You're very adept at missing points.

[Igel]

23. The legal points aren't all that fine.

But that's not what's being argued here.

You can argue from the pulpit to not vote for somebody violating your church's tenets. No problem. But to say, "Don't vote for Ashok bin Alon y Shih" is over the line and gets a reprimand the first time it's reported and verified. It seldom happens a second time.

You can also organize voter registration drives and even tell people to go straight to the polls after services in which you discuss what you think the proper values in elected leaders are. Black churches do this frequently during early voting and some Islamic Centers are taking a clue.

What's being argued is, "I don't like the effect they might have on the elections, or them all by themselves, so we should consider not taxing them a subsidy." Like not taxing you is a subsidy--remember, marginal tax rates aren't just lower for the 1% than they were in the '50s, they're also lower for the bottom 20% and everything in between--and therefore gives the government a right to monitor your actions and even interfere if you step out of line. And we get pissed off if the state says SNAP can't use their money to buy lobster.

[eppur_se_muova]

3. "... or a dissenter." He says that like it's supposed to be a bad thing. nt

[canetoad]

4. Classic separation of church and state

"Render therefore unto Caesar the things that are Caesar's; and unto God the things that are God's."

[meow2u3]

12. Time to remind Fr. Petri

that Jesus Himself is the author of separation of church and state and that God didn't die and leave him in charge.

I'm sick of RW clerics who impose their personal views on everybody!

[Panich52]

42. I'm even more disgusted by the theocrats in elected office

[meow2u3]

44. Theocratic preachers and priests helped to install theocratic politicians

As evidenced by the partisan "voter guides" which effectively threaten parishoners with eternal damnation unless they vote for theocratic repukes.

[cleanhippie]

5. I'm all for removing the tax-free privilege that all religions get. Never gonna happen though.

You'd be hard-pressed to find any liberal believer that would endorse that idea, as they know it would mean the near-end of their church too. Most churches only exist because of the tax-exemptions they receive. They cannot survive financially without it.

[spanone]

7. churches do this because they know there is no enforcement.

they can politicize without consequence.

and they do.

[former9thward]

8. The FEC has nothing to do with this.

They do not enforce that law, the IRS does. The reason the IRS generally ignores violations is that it depends on Congress for its budget. Both parties have church allies who help them during election cycles so neither party wants to see strict enforcement of this issue. For example, as anyone in Chicago knows, President Obama got his start doing the south side churches circuit. Churches invite Democratic party candidates to speak and the ministers promote their candidacies.

[dawg]

11. Removing 501(c)3 status would not force the churches to pay taxes.

They could still be not-for-profit organizations, just like the super-pacs.

The only difference would be that the contributions they receive would no longer be tax deductible to the donors. (Which they shouldn't be anyway, *if* the church is engaged in political activity.)

[That Guy 888]

13. According to CNN Tim Kaine is somewhat nuanced on abortion, but supports Clinton's position.

Tim Kaine under scrutiny for abortion comment

Hillary Clinton's running mate, Tim Kaine, sparked confusion Friday after saying he supports the anti-abortion Hyde Amendment and the Clinton campaign's call to repeal the measure.

"I have been for the Hyde Amendment. And I have not changed my position on that," Kaine said Friday on CNN's "New Day."

Kaine's anti-abortion stance has been a sticking point for many liberal Democrats concerned that he might work against Clinton on the issue. But Karen Finney, a senior Clinton campaign spokeswoman who is also working with Kaine, said he would keep his personal views but also support a repeal of the Hyde Amendment, which bans federal funds for abortion.

"As Tim Kaine has said, while he supports the Hyde Amendment, he has also made it clear that he is fully committed to Hillary Clinton's policy agenda, which he understands includes repeal of Hyde," said Finney, who has previously worked as Clinton's senior spokeswoman.

http://www.cnn.com/2016/07/29/politics/tim-kaine-hyde-amendment-abortion/

Not good enough for Father Petri I guess.

[lindysalsagal]

18. Like I care what dead popes and archbishops think about my uterus.

They can get their own uterus.

[awoke_in_2003]

19. 36 years overdue. nt

[Old Union Guy]

20. Think hard now. Do you *really* want religion under government control? n/t

[Stonepounder]

21. Of course not. Any more than I want government under religious control. n/t

[TipTok]

25. I truly don't care if they want to preach magic and leprechauns...

Last edited Sun Jul 31, 2016, 01:47 AM - Edit history (1)

... and judgmental supernatural men in the sky.

I see no reason they should be paid extra out of my pocket, as a taxpayer, for the privilege.

[SickOfTheOnePct]

28. They aren't getting paid out of your pocket, as a taxpayer n/t

[TipTok]

31. Sure they are...

http://news.atheists.org/2016/07/22/atheists-sue-kansas-city-over-65000-handout-to-baptist-convention/

Today American Atheists and two Kansas City residents filed a complaint in federal court asking for a temporary and permanent injunction to prevent the City of Kansas City from giving $65,000 to Modest Miles Ministries, Inc. for the National Baptist Convention to be held in September.

Since April, American Atheists and the local plaintiffs, Joshua Stewart and Eric Abney, have been working to force the city to address the illegality of the funding under Missouri’s constitution, which prohibits public aid for religious purposes. Karen Donnelly of Copilevitz & Canter is serving as local counsel.

“The National Baptist Convention is inherently religious—and it is clear under Missouri law and the First Amendment that Missouri taxpayers should not be paying for it,” said Amanda Knief, American Atheists National Legal Director.

“This is a shocking violation of the state and federal constitutions. Direct funding of a religious ministry in the form of a cash handout is exactly the sort of action our founders and the framers of the Missouri constitution sought to prevent,” Knief added.

Even if they aren't getting a direct check to their account, we are missing out on their tax dollars for infrastructure, education etc...

What makes them so special that they can own a $10,000,000 piece of property but pay no taxes on it? Even undeveloped property as they wait for market value to gain in some cases.

The actual tax payers have to either pick up their slack or go without.

[SickOfTheOnePct]

32. I stand corrected on the issue of direct payments

such as in the article above.

However, I stand firm on the notion that not paying taxes is the same as being given money by taxpayers. Such an opinion presupposes that all money earned, by a church or an individual, is the government's first, and I don't agree with that at all.

I deduct my mortgage interest, thus lowering my tax bill. Does that mean that the government is paying me? No, of course not.

[TipTok]

36. Government has a direct interest in the general welfare and in promoting a healthy housing market...

Religion serves no purpose or benefit to the population...

Do it on your own dime.

[SickOfTheOnePct]

37. In your opinion

"Religion serves no purpose or benefit to the population..."

But whether it serves a purpose or not is irrelevant to the point I was making, which is that not paying taxes or reducing taxes by using deductions, is the same thing as being paid by the government. I notice that you didn't address that point in your response.

[TipTok]

38. The difference is...

... that there are economic reasons , all debatable (pros, cons etc..), for those normal deductions.

That whole math thing.

The fact you chose to interpret my post to mean that the govt owns all money and gives you some back is on you. I don't think that either.

Contributing members of society pay taxes and while the govt isn't owed ALL of your money, they are owed some of it to keep the gears turning, roads built, children educated and military funded.

Religion is enough of a drain on society that they certainly don't deserve the added incentive to increase that drain at the expense of the rest of us. It's a subsidy to encourage a worthless activity driven by politics and social pressures and not for any actual benefit.

If they aren't going to contribute, the same as the rest of us, there should be an overriding and excellent reason why and there just isn't.

Again, do what you want on your own time and your own dime.

[Panich52]

43. Too many ignore infrastructure aspect of tax exemption

And add police & fire depts.


Hope the permission TN got to support creationist Ark Park doesn't influence KC suit.

[Warren DeMontague]

24. as much as I do think they get too much of a tax break, I think things are fine the way they are.

The 1st Amendment is working great.

[Calista241]

33. I agree. n/t

[Panich52]

45. It would work much better if theocrats would stop getting elected.

Anti-lgbtq, anti-abortion, laws, "teach the controversy" & other creationist education laws are all religious-based — Judeo-Christian based, no matter how RW tries to frame them.

Add judges, appointed by these theocrats, who base opinions on the Bible, and the efficacy of First Amendment can be questioned.

[raccoon]

27. Amen to that!

Main reason I quit going to church was that I heard so much right-wing bullshit there.

[smirkymonkey]

29. Hear, hear!

[1939]

34. The biggest tax subsidy for churches

is not their status as non-profit entities under the IRS codes. Most churches struggle to break even. The biggest tax subsidy that churches enjoy is their exemption from state and local real property taxes especially where historic churches occupy valuable urban land.


The basis for the various amendments in the Bill of Rights are reactions to abuses by the British administration and local colonial governments prior to the revolution. In many states, all were taxed to support the "established church" (Anglican Church in Virginia). The guys who did the majority of fighting (and dying) in the Revolution were the Appalachian folks and not the folks of the seaboard. One of the things they demanded of the new government was not having to support a state "established church" and being allowed to have their own churches and have their weddings and other sacraments recognized by the state (prior to this, you had to get married in the "established church" to have it recognized).

[Act_of_Reparation]

40. Irrelevant.

The Founders didn't write the ristrictions governing 501(c)(3) status. The First Amendment has no bearing here because 501(c)(3), or lack thereof, does not interfere with the freedom to practice one's religion.

The point is simple: the rules state, in no uncertain terms, that:

501(c)(3) organizations are absolutely prohibited from directly or indirectly participating in, or intervening in, any political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for elective public office. Contributions to political campaign funds or public statements of position (verbal or written) made on behalf of the organization in favor of or in opposition to any candidate for public office clearly violate the prohibition against political campaign activity. Violating this prohibition may result in denial or revocation of tax-exempt status and the imposition of certain excise taxes.

What subsidies benefit religious organizations the most, or what the founding fathers were thinking when they wrote the First Amendment, or who died when, where, and what for simply don't matter. These are the rules. If religious organizations don't follow them, they should suffer the consequences. End of story.

[mountain grammy]

39. Tax the churches! Federal, state and local!

[LanternWaste]

46. Taxation would benefit large churches and ministries and harm smaller ones.

As with any organization, larger is better. Big churches would have the resources to hire lawyers and accountants that would minimize their tax burden. Smaller churches (like mine) that currently operate on shoestring budgets would face a relatively greater cost in order to comply with new regulations. No doubt, the Meals on Wheels program operated out of my church would ceases to operate within a week.

Additionally, if we tax churches, then churches will do what other businesses do—they’ll simply increase expenditures in order to reduce taxable income. Income is revenue minus expenditures. The TV preacher’s million dollar income? That’s an expense. His clothes for his show? An expense. His jet to travel for business? Another expense. The cost of all those fundraising mailings? More expenses. By the end, there won’t be any income to tax.

Also, government may exempt churches from property taxes and other taxes so long as they do so for other charities. There is the argument that, as in the case of religious groups on public campuses (Rosenberger v UVA), government can’t select just religious groups to tax while leaving all other organizations like schools, women shelters, soup kitchens, and fraternal organizations tax-exempt.