1,500 Pastors Defy IRS Ban on Preaching Politics

For liberals/progressives/democrats?

Does this ban on political speech by pastors that you seem to be salivating for include:

Rev. Jesse Jackson?

Rev. Al Sharpton?

Minister Louis Farrakan?

Rev. Jerimiah Wright?

If you want to ban political speech by ministers who receive any tax exempt status for any of their activities you would have to include these pastors as well.

My husband and I tried to go to Jesse Jackson's church in Chicago in the late 1970's, he CHARGED a high admission fee to any non-member.

It was clearly stated to us, it was a ticket for admission. Which at the time we were too poor to pay and so we could not go to his church.

That was clearly illegal for a church to do for a church service, but I never heard anyone say his church should have their tax exempt status revoked for blatantly breaking the law. You all know he is not shy about talking about politics and urging people to vote a certain way, why didn't you complain about him years ago on this very issue?

originally posted by: NavyDoc

I would agree to that as long as every other tax exempt put politically active groups, such as unions, planned parenthood, environmental groups, also lose their tax exempt status. The same rules for all is the only fair and just answer to the question.

Funny how all the "Equality" preachers in this thread are totally ignoring your perfectly valid point.

I started to join a union once. Til this day I still get emails from them asking me to support Democratic candidates. In fact, the ONLY emails I get from them are about political issues and they're damn near demanding that I go vote for their cause of the month.

a reply to: grandmakdw

So we agree? Churches, ALL CHURCHES, who use their pulpits for the pursuit of political agendas should lose their Tax Exempt Status!

originally posted by: Bone75

originally posted by: NavyDoc

I would agree to that as long as every other tax exempt put politically active groups, such as unions, planned parenthood, environmental groups, also lose their tax exempt status. The same rules for all is the only fair and just answer to the question.

Funny how all the "Equality" preachers in this thread are totally ignoring your perfectly valid point.

Excellent point!

Fair is fair and fairness dictates that any tax exempt group be forbidden from talking about politics, contributing to a political campaign or endorsing a candidate. If that is what the liberals/progressives/Democrats are demanding for conservative pastors.

You are so right:

Planned Parenthood should be banned from all political activities and speech because of their tax exempt status, they did not receive their status based on being a political group so that should preclude them from acting in a political manner.

The same by fairness and extension should be applied to
environmental groups
and ALL groups whose main reason to obtain tax exempt status is not stated in their application as political.

a reply to: Bone75

Funny how all the "Equality" preachers in this thread are totally ignoring your perfectly valid point.

Valid as it may be, this thread isn't about unions. It's about "1,500 Pastors Defy(ing) the IRS Ban on Preaching Politics" If you and ND want to discuss unions abusing their power, go for it! Make a thread!

originally posted by: windword
a reply to: grandmakdw

So we agree? Churches, ALL CHURCHES, who use their pulpits for the pursuit of political agendas should lose their Tax Exempt Status!

I don't agree at all,

I am simply stating that if one applies it to one tax exempt organization whose main purpose is not stated as political in their tax exempt status application

then it must apply to all.

You see, what I see in many is a hunger to persecute conservative values and thinking while promoting liberal/progressive values. I am simply pointing out the hypocrisy of many who don't see that what applies to conservatives must also apply to liberals. Including Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton, Jeremiah Wright, and Lewis Farrakahn.

Liberals just won't agree with that because they think that they are right and everyone else is stupid, ignorant, and wrong and needs to be guided into the light of progressive thinking, by any and all means possible.

I am saying that liberals and progressives must be aware that what they impose on others through intimidation, lawsuits, etc. will come back to bite them when what they want applies equally to everyone. Which is one of their stated goals, but I don't believe them.

This is just my opinion and my feelings, you may think the conservatives want to impose their values on others. I would just like to see everyone chill, live and let live. Your values are yours and no better or worse than mine, unless your values dictate harm to others in any form. Neither Liberals or Conservatives have the corner on being right, and both need to stop imposing their values on the other. I just see Liberals as using the government to get their way and trying to force a one value set fits all on all of the USA.

a reply to: grandmakdw

Liberals just won't agree with that because they think that they are right and everyone else is stupid, ignorant, and wrong and needs to be guided into the light of progressive thinking, by any and all means possible.

How ironic! Apparently these conservative pastors, who have taken part in this overt protest against their legal constraints, also think that everyone else is too stupid, ignorant and wrong, and needs to be guided into the light of conservative thinking through lecturing their congregations and through their attempts to legislate their religious biases and limitations onto a secular population.

originally posted by: Bone75

originally posted by: NavyDoc

I would agree to that as long as every other tax exempt put politically active groups, such as unions, planned parenthood, environmental groups, also lose their tax exempt status. The same rules for all is the only fair and just answer to the question.

Funny how all the "Equality" preachers in this thread are totally ignoring your perfectly valid point.

I started to join a union once. Til this day I still get emails from them asking me to support Democratic candidates. In fact, the ONLY emails I get from them are about political issues and they're damn near demanding that I go vote for their cause of the month.

And that's the entire point. The way this game is played is to silence political thought you don't like, but protect that which you do like and support your supporters while squashing your opposition.

Churches, IMHO, that are politically active should not be tax exempt. However, that should also be applied to EVERY tax exempt organization that is politically active, not just churches and not just politically conservative churches. The same rules should apply to everyone.

a reply to: NavyDoc

However, that should also be applied to EVERY tax exempt organization that is politically active, not just churches and not just politically conservative churches. The same rules should apply to everyone.

As I understand it, they do.

The Prohibition on Political Campaign Intervention

Under the Internal Revenue Code, all section 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. The prohibition applies to all campaigns including campaigns at the federal, state and local level. Violation of this prohibition may result in denial or revocation of tax-exempt status and the imposition of certain excise taxes. Those section 501(c)(3) organizations that are private foundations are subject to additional restrictions that are not described in this fact sheet.

www.irs.gov...[/ex ]

originally posted by: windword
a reply to: grandmakdw

Liberals just won't agree with that because they think that they are right and everyone else is stupid, ignorant, and wrong and needs to be guided into the light of progressive thinking, by any and all means possible.

attempts to legislate their religious biases and limitations onto a secular population.

But that's not what they are doing here. They are saying is that the city should not force a certain set of values or actions on private individuals. There is nothing in their lawsuit that says that says that businesses must not hire gays and that private institutions must not make all restrooms unisex, just that the city cannot force the opposite on the people. The city ordinance is forcing leftist biases and limitations and mandates on the population. It seems coercion is okay to many just as long as it is their form of coercion.

originally posted by: windword
a reply to: grandmakdw

Liberals just won't agree with that because they think that they are right and everyone else is stupid, ignorant, and wrong and needs to be guided into the light of progressive thinking, by any and all means possible.

How ironic! Apparently these conservative pastors, who have taken part in this overt protest against their legal constraints, also think that everyone else is too stupid, ignorant and wrong, and needs to be guided into the light of conservative thinking through lecturing their congregations and through their attempts to legislate their religious biases and limitations onto a secular population.

But it is liberals who regulate what children eat in school

It is liberals who tried very hard to regulate how much soda a person can drink at a time

It is liberals who passed what is basically post-birth abortion, with laws supporting abortion up until the moment of birth, long past the ability to be born alive and live. (I personally have no issue with pre survival abortion, but a great deal of problem with 8 & 9th month abortion)

It is liberals who have made certain forms of thought a crime (hate crime), when who is to know ones thoughts

It is liberals who turned a blind eye to Black Panthers hitting billy clubs into their hands at voting polls trying to force people to vote Democrat

It is liberals who have said it is unkind to send sick people back to their homes rather than let them in the country, causing Enterovirus brought by children from south america which causes children to be paralyzed and die. By allowing people from Ebola hot zones to enter the US while the epidemic rages, all in the name of liberal and progressive fairness and justice.

And now it is liberals who want to control what pastors can and can not say in their sermons.

After the liberals fought so hard for pornographers rights of free speech, ironic.

originally posted by: windword
a reply to: NavyDoc

However, that should also be applied to EVERY tax exempt organization that is politically active, not just churches and not just politically conservative churches. The same rules should apply to everyone.

As I understand it, they do.

The Prohibition on Political Campaign Intervention

Under the Internal Revenue Code, all section 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. The prohibition applies to all campaigns including campaigns at the federal, state and local level. Violation of this prohibition may result in denial or revocation of tax-exempt status and the imposition of certain excise taxes. Those section 501(c)(3) organizations that are private foundations are subject to additional restrictions that are not described in this fact sheet.

www.irs.gov...[/ex ]

And that is enforced? Did I miss something and Planned Parenthood lose it's tax exempt status? Brady Campaign (formerly Handgun Control Inc.)?

Would you agree that those organizations should lose their tax exempt status as well?

edit on 15-10-2014 by NavyDoc because: (no reason given)

originally posted by: NavyDoc

originally posted by: beezzer

originally posted by: windword
1,500 Pastors Defy IRS Ban on Preaching Politics

It seems there is a movement from the Religious Right to "strategically litigate", up to the Supreme Court, a "Church's" right to endorse or slam a political candidate, without loosing their Tax Exempt Status.

Called Pulpit Freedom Sunday and organized by the Arizona-based conservative group Alliance Defending Freedom, nearly 1,500 pastors across the country took part this year during an election cycle in which same-sex marriage and abortion have become major issues between Democratic and GOP rivals.

The preachers are hoping that the political sermons in the vast number of churches will eventually lead to the U.S. Supreme Court having to rule on the controversial tax law.

Read Latest Breaking News from Newsmax.com www.Newsmax.com...
Urgent: Should Obamacare Be Repealed? Vote Here Now!

Here's an example:

Preaching Politics, Pastors Defy Ban
Pastors Can Endorse Candidates if They Give Up Their Tax Exemption

LA MESA, Calif.—Pastor Jim Garlow began his preaching with a Scripture-filled discussion of Jesus’ disgust with hypocrisy—typical fare for a Sunday sermon. But the conservative pastor finished with an exhortation to his congregation of nearly 2,000 to oppose Carl DeMaio, the openly gay Republican candidate for the state’s 52nd congressional district.

--------------

The evangelical Protestant pastor’s sermon had a political agenda, and a larger legal goal: It was an intentional violation of the law forbidding churches to engage in certain political speech meant to force U.S. courts to confront the issue. Churches registered as 501(c)3 nonprofits risk losing their tax-exempt status if they appear to endorse or oppose candidates from the pulpit.

I say NO! NO! NO! Sue them and take their Tax Exempt Status away, STAT!

Pastors and Priests and their "churches" are meant to minister to the spirit and address the choices of "salvation and repentance", not to use their position from the pulpit, as some supposed holy spokesperson, to try to limit individual choices and outlaw the perceived sins that they think need repentance!

Churches need to stop trying to legislate their biases and intolerance from the pulpit, and need to stay the ## out of the election and legislation process!

What say you ATS?

I don't see the churches in your OP that would espouse progressive or leftist political ideologies.

I would hope that you would be inclusive in your OP, but if you are simply targeting churches that promote a more conservative ideology than this is nothing mkore than an attempt at silencing the opposition.

Well, that's the true answer. Leftist Pastors such as Reverend Wright and anti-gun activists like Father Michael Pfleger get a pass.

Who's giving them a pass?

originally posted by: windword
a reply to: grandmakdw

So we agree? Tax exempt organizations, ALL TAX EXEMPT ORGANIZATIONS, who use their platform for the pursuit of political agendas should lose their Tax Exempt Status!

The edit is a bit closer to what I would agree with

I think that the only way a tax exemption should be issued is when that organizations contributions to the community quantitatively makes more of a positive impact than if they were to pay taxes to the government. Given the financial mismanagement of the government, that's not too hard. I could not care less what ideology is espoused, within reason, if the organization does more for the community than the government would with the same money. Personally, I care more about the actual results rather than an opportunity to attack, silence, or even inconvenience someone(s) based solely on different beliefs.

Of course, that would take a redesign of a few items as well as the creation of some new ones, including on the social, cultural, and individual levels. I already have worked this into an algorithm, but its method and efficacy will be shown in action. Guaranteed, many churches would lose their tax exempt status under such a system, but it would also apply to all organizations regardless of ideology or political leaning.

a reply to: NavyDoc

Sounds to me like you're saying that the ends justify the means.

From the OP

But the conservative pastor finished with an exhortation to his congregation of nearly 2,000 to oppose Carl DeMaio, the openly gay Republican candidate for the state’s 52nd congressional district.

This is clearly illegal and reflects the preacher's desire to appeal to his religious authority and bias in this particular election.

originally posted by: windword
a reply to: NavyDoc

Sounds to me like you're saying that the ends justify the means.

From the OP

But the conservative pastor finished with an exhortation to his congregation of nearly 2,000 to oppose Carl DeMaio, the openly gay Republican candidate for the state’s 52nd congressional district.

This is clearly illegal and reflects the preacher's desire to appeal to his religious authority and bias in this particular election.

Directly the opposite. I'm pointing out the hypocrisy and unjust nature of using the tax code to squash one's opposition and support your own. Either all politically active charitable organizations be tax exempt or none. No picking and choosing just the ones we dislike.

I don't think that an extremist approach and it is directly the opposite of "ends justifying the means."

Again, you dogged the point. Given your position, would you or would you not also be for Rev Wright, Planned Parenthood, and the Brady Campaign lose their tax exempt status too?

a reply to: windword

The Alliance Defending Freedom “Pulpit Freedom Sunday”2 is a strategic litigation plan. Through tactical lawsuits against the Internal Revenue Service (IRS), Alliance Defending Freedom seeks to restore the right of each pastor to speak scriptural Truth from the pulpit about moral, social, and governmental issues — as well as other topics concerning his congregation — without fear of losing his church’s tax-exempt status.

looks like big lawsuits coming.

looks like big lobbying efforts to change laws coming.

another Hobby Lobby decision in the making.

originally posted by: Serdgiam

originally posted by: windword
a reply to: grandmakdw

So we agree? Tax exempt organizations, ALL TAX EXEMPT ORGANIZATIONS, who use their platform for the pursuit of political agendas should lose their Tax Exempt Status!

The edit is a bit closer to what I would agree with

I think that the only way a tax exemption should be issued is when that organizations contributions to the community quantitatively makes more of a positive impact than if they were to pay taxes to the government. Given the financial mismanagement of the government, that's not too hard. I could not care less what ideology is espoused, within reason, if the organization does more for the community than the government would with the same money. Personally, I care more about the actual results rather than an opportunity to attack, silence, or even inconvenience someone(s) based solely on different beliefs.

Of course, that would take a redesign of a few items as well as the creation of some new ones, including on the social, cultural, and individual levels. I already have worked this into an algorithm, but its method and efficacy will be shown in action. Guaranteed, many churches would lose their tax exempt status under such a system, but it would also apply to all organizations regardless of ideology or political leaning.

I would agree with you 100% percent, except for this gnawing trepidation in the pit of my stomach. Somehow I feel that "Churches" will claim to be exempt, above and beyond any other secular non-profit organization, based on their sincere religious beliefs, which dictate that they must dictate morality onto others.

originally posted by: Serdgiam

originally posted by: windword
a reply to: grandmakdw

So we agree? Tax exempt organizations, ALL TAX EXEMPT ORGANIZATIONS, who use their platform for the pursuit of political agendas should lose their Tax Exempt Status!

The edit is a bit closer to what I would agree with

I think that the only way a tax exemption should be issued is when that organizations contributions to the community quantitatively makes more of a positive impact than if they were to pay taxes to the government. Given the financial mismanagement of the government, that's not too hard. I could not care less what ideology is espoused, within reason, if the organization does more for the community than the government would with the same money. Personally, I care more about the actual results rather than an opportunity to attack, silence, or even inconvenience someone(s) based solely on different beliefs.

Of course, that would take a redesign of a few items as well as the creation of some new ones, including on the social, cultural, and individual levels. I already have worked this into an algorithm, but its method and efficacy will be shown in action. Guaranteed, many churches would lose their tax exempt status under such a system, but it would also apply to all organizations regardless of ideology or political leaning.

Still tax them, just let them deduct what they give out in charity from their taxable income, like everybody else does. This way, we ensure than they really give into the community more than they take out. When the CEO of a charitable tax exempt organization makes a million dollars per, there is something wrong there.

Abraham H. Foxman, National Director Anti-Defamation League & Foundation
$3,802,324
Includes $3,146,670 supplemental executive retirement plan.

Brian Gallagher, President/CEO United Way Worldwide $1,026,017

James E. Williams, Jr., President/CEO Easter Seals - N.O. $837,120

Pastors running "charities" while driving Mercedes and wearing Rolexes are not "charitable."

originally posted by: NavyDoc

originally posted by: windword
a reply to: NavyDoc

Sounds to me like you're saying that the ends justify the means.

From the OP

But the conservative pastor finished with an exhortation to his congregation of nearly 2,000 to oppose Carl DeMaio, the openly gay Republican candidate for the state’s 52nd congressional district.

This is clearly illegal and reflects the preacher's desire to appeal to his religious authority and bias in this particular election.

Directly the opposite. I'm pointing out the hypocrisy and unjust nature of using the tax code to squash one's opposition and support your own. Either all politically active charitable organizations be tax exempt or none. No picking and choosing just the ones we dislike.

I don't think that an extremist approach and it is directly the opposite of "ends justifying the means."

Again, you dogged the point. Given your position, would you or would you not also be for Rev Wright, Planned Parenthood, and the Brady Campaign lose their tax exempt status too?

As has already been pointed out and cited, several times, now, the IRS rule applies to ALL 501 (3)(c) corporations.

This thread is about Pulpit Freedom Sunday