Trump signs order aimed at allowing churches to engage in more political activity

[DonViejo]

Source: The Washington Post



By John Wagner May 4 at 11:58 AM

President Trump on Thursday said he would direct the Internal Revenue Service to relax enforcement of rules barring tax-exempt churches from participating in politics as part of a much-anticipated executive order on religious liberties.

The order — which Trump formally unveiled in a Rose Garden ceremony with Christian leaders — also offers unspecified “regulatory relief” for religious objectors to an Obama administration mandate, already scaled back by the courts, that required contraception services as part of health plans, the officials said.

“For too long the federal government has used the state as a weapon against people of faith,” Trump said, later telling the religious leaders gathered for the event that “you’re now in a position to say what you want to say … No one should be censoring sermons or targeting pastors.” But the sweep of the order — unveiled on a National Day of Prayer — was significantly narrower than a February draft, which had alarmed civil libertarians, gay rights and other liberal advocacy groups and prompted threats of lawsuits.

Among other things, that version included a controversial provision that could have allowed federal contractors to discriminate against LGBT employees or single mothers on the basis of faith.


Read more: https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/trump-signs-order-aimed-at-allowing-churches-to-engage-in-more-political-activity/2017/05/04/024ed7c2-30d3-11e7-9534-00e4656c22aa_story.html?utm_term=.1b559af0ee7a&wpisrc=al_alert-COMBO-politics%252Bnation&wpmk=1

[MFM008]

1. Just a pay off

Because he has no actual beliefs.

[Freethinker65]

7. He wants to secure as many votes and as much money from the flocks of believers that he can

Yes. I understand that those believers are not all part of some monolithic group easily swayed by a mortal leader. I also know there are religious organizations from the opposite political spectrum of Trump, and his ilk, that will now be free to enter the political candidate endorsement fray. Trump, and his handlers (many no doubt non-believers), have calculated the benefits far outweigh the risks despite it being unconstitutional.

[still_one]

2. does that mean the Pope can call out Paul Ryan, and the other so-called religious republicans

who want to hurt the most vulnerable in our society?

[greymattermom]

5. Yes, that's what it means

and so can the Catholic Bishops call out Paul Ryan. When churches can do this, they can all do it. I think only the fundy churches are already doing it in the open now.

[still_one]

12. hmmmmmm, then perhaps he can excommunicate the jerk

[world wide wally]

21. Jackpot!

[Vinca]

3. Sounds like something that better be challenged in court.

[LeftInTX]

31. I don't think he can do this via EO

However, Rs in Congress are saying they want to get rid of the Johnson Amendment. (LBJ - 1950s)
I think Congress can legally get rid of the Johnson Amendment.

[NastyRiffraff]

4. I see Mike Pence's claws all over this

Not that Dump isn't just as guilty, but he doesn't believe this shit any more than I do. He needs the religious right wackos, that's all.

[mpcamb]

35. Constitutional Issue!

Not something for this mental Pygmy or his cohorts to decide.
They've already tromped all over the Constitution, rendering them unfit for deciding anything more pressing than where to park.
Get the right case and hustle up to the higher courts to stick it to 'em for their skewed view of what a president can decide.

[greymattermom]

6. Why do they think God is on their side?

Read the scripture, folks.

[Achilleaze]

8. You've got Hindu fascism in India, Muslim fasism in many ME states

and now - thanks to the KGOP, we've got christo facism growing bigly in the US of A, mirroring the facism in Russia.

deplorable.

[left-of-center2012]

9. Does Trump signing 'an order' make it constitutional?

I foresee a challenge in the courts.
'course, once it hits the Supreme Court .........

[Bernardo de La Paz]

10. Duplicate post of one 25 minutes ago 2 below on Home Page LBN column

https://www.democraticunderground.com/10141766739

[DonViejo]

11. Nope. One talks about planning to do it, the other, he did it.

[They_Live]

13. Time for churches to pay TAXES

NOW.

[Freelancer]

14. So... Corporations are people now, Churches are people now...

When do people get to be people?

[They_Live]

16. Maybe it's time for the Online Church of DU PAC Inc

I'm thinking of starting my own Church of Common Sense.

Except the thing is, I like paying taxes to help society, except I don't appreciate when it's used for killing people for the benefit of corporations (who don't really pay taxes because of all their subsidies and breaks). If drumpf is removing all social safety net, health and humanities programs, and all that is left is paying for Armies INC, I'd absolutely want exemption.

Are we in Alice in Wonderland yet?

[Freelancer]

18. More like Bizarro America -nt

[YOHABLO]

15. Just when did the IRS ever crack down on churches?

They pretty much say and do whatever they want anyway. They turn their sermons into get out the vote rallies for Christian Fascism

[They_Live]

17. good point. nt

[Marcuse]

25. President Obama did this eight years ago.

The IRS did revoke the 501(c)(3) status of The Church of Pierce Creek in Binghamton, New York, in the 1990s after it published an ad in USA Today saying that it would be sinful to vote for Bill Clinton.

It was after the IRS lost a 2009 lawsuit over its procedural process in investigating the Living Word Christian Center following the church's endorsement of former Rep. Michele Bachmann, R-Minn., that the agency halted investigations, according to Politico.

http://www.deseretnews.com/article/865658366/The-long-2-and-surprising-2-history-behind-the-IRS-ban-on-churches-endorsing-political-candidates.html

[Freelancer]

19. When Catholic Churches speak out for sanctuary cities, he might be sorry. -nt

[onetexan]

20. SEPARATION OF CHURCH & STATE

The judiciary needs to come to our aid again. This monster is blurring the boundaries drawn by the first amendment and furthering nutters to discriminate against he LGBT community.

[Hortensis]

29. I love that one too, :) but this this is about taxes. Money.

Churches have always had the right to involve themselves politically, same as citizens operating individually.

We allow tax exemptions for entities providing important social services, like church-supported hospitals. Not paying the same taxes as other citizens amounts to shifting that responsibility onto others, raising OUR tax burden, but we usually consider we're getting something of value in return.

Supposedly before this we didn't allow exemptions for churches engaged in political activity, although serious corruptions of that one occurred during Republican administrations. And now this.

[JudyM]

22. Were they even being prosecuted before? We hear of many churches inciting people politically.

[Marcuse]

23. They will will freak when they realize that this applies to political Islam!

[notdarkyet]

24. Guess we will have to have some protests at churches that do so. They want to

Enter the political arena? From what I've read they already preach politics from the pulpit and are losing members because of it.

[CousinIT]

26. OK. TIME TO TAX the damn things then. n/t

[mainer]

27. Time to start our own church. The Church of Our Lady of Sanity.

As opposed to so many other churches.

[OrwellwasRight]

28. Who was censoring sermons?

You don't need an EO to correct that. You just need the First Amendment.

[Ghost of Tom Joad]

30. Does this include synagogues

and mosques?

[keithbvadu2]

32. "relax enforcement of rules" -- GOP used to be for the "rule of law"

[vkkv]

33. Dupe post..

[rockfordfile]

34. Trump is un-American