General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsPastors pledge to defy IRS, preach politics from pulpit ahead of election
Forgive me for posting Fux, but they seem to be the only ones up with this story except for The Christian Post. I think it's important.
More than 1,000 pastors are planning to challenge the IRS next month by deliberately preaching politics ahead of the presidential election despite a federal ban on endorsements from the pulpit.
The defiant move, they hope, will prompt the IRS to enforce a 1954 tax code amendment that prohibits tax-exempt organizations, such as churches, from making political endorsements. Alliance Defending Freedom, which is holding the October summit, said it wants the IRS to press the matter so it can be decided in court. The group believes the law violates the First Amendment by muzzling preachers.
The purpose is to make sure that the pastor -- and not the IRS -- decides what is said from the pulpit, Erik Stanley, senior legal counsel for the group, told FoxNews.com. It is a head-on constitutional challenge.
Stanley said pastors attending the Oct. 7 Pulpit Freedom Sunday will preach sermons that will talk about the candidates running for office and then make a specific recommendation. The sermons will be recorded and sent to the IRS.
Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/us/2012/09/19/pastors-pledge-to-defy-irs-preach-politics-from-pulpit-ahead-election/#ixzz271QfDe90
NV Whino
(20,886 posts)Last edited Thu Sep 20, 2012, 05:05 PM - Edit history (1)
Go ahead and test it, preacher boys.
spanone
(135,635 posts)M_M
(163 posts)I'm not into fairy tales.
SickOfTheOnePct
(7,290 posts)So don't participate. But you don't find it unreasonable to want something "shut down" just because you don't like it?
BTW, indiscriminately shutting down churches is not an option...pesky First Amendement and all...
laundry_queen
(8,646 posts)Some of those churches are rolling in dough. Think of all the revenue for social programs
SickOfTheOnePct
(7,290 posts)Sure, tax them. Otherwise, no, I'm not in favor of taxing churches.
auburngrad82
(5,029 posts)Because if you can record it and hand it over to the IRS, that seems like the only way it can be proved.
cali
(114,904 posts)the video to the IRS.
auburngrad82
(5,029 posts)Let's hope the IRS pulls their tax exempt status, then.
smirkymonkey
(63,221 posts)Could this be part of the solution to closing the budget gap? At the very least we could use the tax dollars from political churches toward providing social programs for the poor.
PowerToThePeople
(9,610 posts)No one is taking away their "freedom of speech", but they will lose the tax exempt status they are able to have by being a NON-PARTISAN religious organization.
AndyTiedye
(23,500 posts)Opus Dei has a working majority on the Court.
michael811
(67 posts)The first amendment guarantees freedom of religion it doesn't guarantee churches the right to tax exempt status. If anything this will remove the tax exempt status for all churches which is fine by me
surrealAmerican
(11,340 posts)They have no constitutional right to a tax break. They can say whatever they like, but they will have to pay taxes just like anybody else.
rsweets
(307 posts)If you want to play the game...
pay the entry fee
Blue Meany
(1,947 posts)cali
(114,904 posts)cthulu2016
(10,960 posts)Of course it is a free speech issue.
If your tax status is determined by what you say that is about speech, not merely a tax issue.
One can argue a compelling state interest in restricting that speech that outweighs what is, on its face, a speech restriction, but one cannot simply say it isn't about speech.
nebenaube
(3,496 posts)Because they voluntarily surrendered their right to be political activists in exchange for tax-free status. I say pull their status and hit them for the maximum penalty.
cthulu2016
(10,960 posts)I have no objection to churches being taxed, but it cannot be based on what they say in sermons.
There was a case last year about a special State tax break for donations to non-profits that serve the inner city. In establishing the tax break, the legislature specifically excluded Planned Parenthood for advocating abortion.
The court observed that exclusion from a otherwise available/eligible tax benefit based on Panned Parenthoods abortion advocacy is constitutionally indistinguishable from levying a fine on Planned Parenthood for advocating abortion, and obviously the state cannot fine anyone for advocating abortion.
I agreed with that decision, as did most everyone else here.
So we have the question of whether any penalty can be applied to a church for the content of the church's teachingsspecifically, whether the church has a position on who to vote for. I would say that's an easy no. If free exercise of religion does not encompass the words spoken in sermons then what on Earth does it encompass?
As an atheist this all troubles me, of course, but the combination of free exercise and no establishment is a unique constitutional pincer. Violations of one are violations of the other... the government can neither reward nor punish. The government cannot punish free speech but it can reward it. When a library buys Tom Sawyer versus Catch-22 there is no issue of unconstitutional establishment of Tom Sawyer. I can publish a book advising sneezing on everyone during cold season, but the government is free to issue guidelines that we should not do so without an improper establishment of hygiene.
And public schools can teach in contradiction to religion. We teach that the Earth is more than 4,000 years old, which contradicts some religious views. But the geological age of the earth is not a religious tenet. There is no establishment of science because science is not a religion.
So the religious distinction does matter. Sometimes I wish that "conscience" would be substituted for religion, but if it were then public schools couldn't teach that hurting people is bad, since doing so would be an establishment of a philosophy that hurting people is bad.
Religion is, however it pains me, a special constitutional case and the threshold for disparate treatment of religions is so incredibly high that the state interest in disparate tax status is nowhere near sufficiently compelling.
IMO.
nebenaube
(3,496 posts)They agreed to the standard when they took the exception.
Dawson Leery
(19,348 posts)It appears to be just that.
rug
(82,333 posts)warrior1
(12,325 posts)to every last one of them.
WCGreen
(45,558 posts)to the church on their Schedule A...
dembotoz
(16,739 posts)on call
on premise
24/7
jwirr
(39,215 posts)be taxed for its entire income at the highest rate possible.
cbayer
(146,218 posts)tax exempt status.
cleanhippie
(19,705 posts)Without the tax-free money taken in, AND the government grants, most of these churches would never survive.
justiceischeap
(14,040 posts)On the other hand, if they do this and the IRS goes after them, that's an "Obama is attacking religion" campaign ad right there.
Bandit
(21,475 posts)However I would bet early next year there will be an investigation and possible sanctions and possibly even a revocation of their tax exempt status..
justiceischeap
(14,040 posts)They don't want to take a chance at losing their tax exempt status.
former9thward
(31,802 posts)Both sides use churches to promote their candidates and politics. Congress would never allow the IRS to have a serious investigation.
Generic Other
(28,979 posts)Pay your taxes for God's sake!
hifiguy
(33,688 posts)ETA: "Tax the churches. Tax the businesses owned by the churches." - Frank Zappa
cthulu2016
(10,960 posts)Favoring apolitical religions poses an establishment problem, in my mind.
If I started a religion it would certainly involve counseling people to not vote for Romney. In my sense of things that is basic moral instruction.
So the government then says I am not entitled to the same status as other religions because I think it is important to preach that people should be ethical and good in the voting booth. That seems a pretty clear shaping of the tenets of my religion.
And that isn't a case of a religion getting into some exotic faux-religious area like selling time-shares... it is quintessential moral instruction.
It makes no sense, to me, to say, "You can tell people that abortion is the murder of a million people a year but it would be over the line to tell them to not vote for candidates who favor the murder of a million people a year."
The separation of church and state is a limitation on government, not religion. Religions are, or should be, free to say whatever the heck they want.
And if there is any government reward for a religion not holding certain moral views (i.e. "don't vote for Romney" then it is establishment of religious doctrine and those benefits are, to my way of thinking, unconstitutional in all cases.
(Both carrots and sticks are establishment.)
rsweets
(307 posts)once you start naming names ... you gotta pay taxes.
i don't remember "life,liberty and no taxes for churches"
anywhere in the bill of rights.
correct me if i'm wrong.
cthulu2016
(10,960 posts)in sermons is not fine.
earthside
(6,960 posts)This will only bring more scrutiny upon any church that participates ... and that may mean expensive legal wrangling with the IRS.
Is this what church members want their offerings to be spent on?
But if one of their goals is to promote Rmoney and the Repuglicans, well, that will backfire, too.
Most Americans find the intrusion of church into politics to be distasteful.
So, I hope they go ahead and do this.
AsahinaKimi
(20,776 posts)lose their tax exemption status and suddenly have to pay back taxes of what they have owed for so many years. The howling that would come from them would be nearly delicious. Go ahead,... thumb your nose at the IRS..and get smacked with having to pay back taxes.
bhikkhu
(10,708 posts)Most of them don't, of course, but the one's that do should be open and honest about it, and pay taxes like the rest of us.
cr8tvlde
(1,185 posts)Average people have no clue what these grifters take in ... and spend. Would love to take the lid off and expose what the Pharisees/Theocrats have been up to for the couple of millenia.
If you think the Democratic Convention was great...and it was...Fired Up and Ready To Go...multiply that many times and you'll understand the Right Wing Pharisees...I refuse to call them Fundamentalists. Why? Because They Are Not. People who live their lives by the Sermon on the Mount are Fundamentalists.
There are roughly a quarter of a billion ... 240,000 ... Christian Churches in the US and let's say just one quarter, 60,000, fall into the nutwing/Pharisee category. They get the somewhat equivalent hype of our Democratic Convention 52 weeks of the year. Unleash this mostly Red State and Very Red State crew on the common folk...get those pensioners to send in half their 47% Social Security checks to not only Ensure Their Heavenly Mansion, but first Silence The Ungodly Liberals, lord, literally, have mercy.
Separation of Church and State will have officially turned into a Theocracy.
cbdo2007
(9,213 posts)Romney is pro-choice and only changed to get elected. He'll never push through any anti-abortion laws, nor would he put in a sc justice that is not pro-choice. Joke is on them!!
bevb
(10 posts)Church goers will be pissed and eventually the IRS ruling will change in their favor. There are a lot of religious Christians in this country and their numbers give them power.
DonRedwood
(4,359 posts)They are supposed to be tax free because churches used to HELP people, give charity, take care...but now they own businesses and city blocks of housing. I say tax them like any business if they are going to join politics.
Matariki
(18,775 posts)almost worth going to fundie churches with a recording device...
stopbush
(24,378 posts)a tax exemption to begin with.
Let's face it, there are no votes in heaven, and people who are Christians are supposed to bow down in servitude before their lord and master, Jeebus.
You'd think Christianity would be on the sedition watch list.
cali
(114,904 posts)religion is protected by the Constitution. And Christianity has a myriad of variations- from very liberal to very conservative.
Seditious, my ass.
sarcasmo
(23,968 posts)Egnever
(21,506 posts)This will or should bite them in the ass in a big way.
mick063
(2,424 posts)And if the DEA stops me, I will scream about them oppressing my constitutional rights.
If these pastors pull this off with court backing, they open up all kinds of possibility.
HooptieWagon
(17,064 posts)And another from local govt for property taxes. And I hope legal fees cost them a bundle.
GreenStormCloud
(12,072 posts)This will be a political hot potato that the IRS will not want any part of. They will ignore it an hope it goes away.
SickOfTheOnePct
(7,290 posts)If the pastors choose to advocate for or against a candidate or a party, they should lose their tax exempt status for that tax year, as the law allows.
GreenStormCloud
(12,072 posts)The amount of taxes they would collect from those 1,000 churches would be small and the political cost would be high.
Most Christian pastors avoid political endorsements anyway, because their congregations will have both Republicans and Democrats and Other among them. They tend to view the Cause of Christ to be above politics as Jesus rejected political solutions in His life.
renie408
(9,854 posts)Tippy
(4,610 posts)This would turn on the Right....you know they did this on a much smaller scale durring the 2000 election...they handed out printed materials those in attendence could take home and pass out to friends and neighbors...they will use the abortion issue as drawing card...Has anyone ever got the IRS to go after the churches? Hell we couldn't even get them to take down their political signs in our town....
Mimosa
(9,131 posts)I've attended Catholic then Episcopalian churches in ATL in the 70s and 80s, heard no politics from pulpits. Sometimes I attended a couple of tent revival 'churches', again no politics. Catholic and Episcopalian ministers spoke about the esoteric life of our spirits.
After I moved to New Orleans in the late 1980s I sometimes attended 'Full Gospel' and Victory Assembly of God evangelical churches and more frequently attended the mainstream small 'Spiritualist' churches. The former were very large, mainly black congregations which did a lot of outreach in the community. Anybody who has spent time in churches with primarily black congregations know nearing elections candidates and elected politicians are as thick as flies swarming potato salad and sweet potato pies at a picnic.
A lot of organising and GOTV activities have always happened in black churches. It wasn't unusual for somebody like Congressman Bill Jefferson or Mayoral wannabe Marc Morial to say a few words from the pulpit the Sunday preceding an election. (I could describe and name many candidates -especially city council reps who campaigned from pulpits). The influential pastors frequently endorsed candidates from their pulpits. I was never comfortable with it, especially since so many of the politicos turned out to be crooks.
Since the 19th century churches had always served as 'community centers' for black people in America. Vernon Johns, predecessor to MLKjr, preached resistance to segregation from his Dexter Ave Baptist Church pulpit in Montgomery AL. MLKjr, brought in to Dexter Ave Baptist to be a calming influence organised boycotts and other social justice activities from his pulpit.
MessiahRp
(5,405 posts)We need a comprehensive list of these churches and we need to turn them into the IRS and demand action NOW.