1,500 Pastors Defy IRS Ban on Preaching Politics

Religion is the divine arm of Politics. To ban preaching politics is to effectively castrate a religion.
I can understand why the Judeo-Masonic elites would want pastors to limit their sermons to that which cannot threaten them.

originally posted by: Annee

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Urgent: Should Obamacare Be Repealed?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?

I don't think I've ever seen as much a large demand nor official attempt to prosecute them. Same question to you, should Planned Parenthood lose it's tax exempt status due to it's political activism and candidate endorsements and lobbying?

originally posted by: NavyDoc

Churches, IMHO, that are politically active should not be tax exempt.

I somewhat agree, but how would define "politically active"?

If my Pastor reassures the congregation that no gay marriages will take place in our church, is that political activism?

If one of our members is running for Mayor and the pastor asks the congregation to support him or pray for him, is that political activism? Should he not be allowed to mention it at all?

Where do you draw the line?

originally posted by: windword

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

And you have not answered the question at all.

And, "by the same rules apply to everybody" includes enforcement. You can have the rules in the books, but if you don't enforce them equitably, then the same rules do not apply to everyone. Savvy?

The equitable use of our tax exempt codes and the hypocrisy of those calling for tax exempt status being removed from one group but turning a blind eye to violations of others is very part and parcel for this discussion. If you just want an echo chamber, I think you are in the wrong place.

originally posted by: Bone75

originally posted by: NavyDoc

Churches, IMHO, that are politically active should not be tax exempt.

I somewhat agree, but how would define "politically active"?

If my Pastor reassures the congregation that no gay marriages will take place in our church, is that political activism?

If one of our members is running for Mayor and the pastor asks the congregation to support him or pray for him, is that political activism? Should he not be allowed to mention it at all?

Where do you draw the line?

It's is agreeable a subjective area. I'd have to say that endorsing specific candidates by name would be the dividing line. One shouldn't remove it based on a philosophical stance.

a reply to: alexball

Religion is the divine arm of Politics.

Really? I suppose that you think that our politicians should possess divinity degrees and wrap themselves in divine providence for every bill they introduce and vote they cast?

To ban preaching politics is to effectively castrate a religion.

I thought religion was about ministering to the spirit, salvation and a personal relationship with a "god".

Here's one subject I can claim some experience with having grown in up the town that Jerry Falwell of the Moral Majority called home (still home to Liberty University - training "young champions for Christ" blah blah). Old Jerry got his way here in town for many a year, acquiring property and using it to raise money but avoiding taxes. I even worked on a State Senate campaign for a candidate whose #1 issue was trying to have Falwell's tax exempt status revoked for all his open politicking from the pulpit. It was all to no avail.

Fast forward 30 years later and it seems to me that churches on both sides of the aisle are using their position for political issues. That tells me that most churches have lost their way, forgotten their true mission and been lured in to dirty waters of the political pool. My point being that the larger meaning for the country is not about a few dollars in lost taxes but a country adrift without a moral compass.

Over the years I've come to realize the importance of churches in how our society is structured and how individuals behave both morally and ethically. What is our country really is crisis about? Is it about money or rampant criminality and loss of ethics?

The very issues they are so vocal about the ones that have been used to drive wedges in our society - pro-life/pro-choice, for gay marriage/against it, welfare spending, stopping communism, etc. etc. Our country is more divided than at any time save for the period leading up to the Civil War. The fodder pushing this division is being preached every Sunday and no amount of taxes is going to stop it. We should take it for the warning that it is - that America has no sense of unity or purpose, no goals or dreams.

Much could be done by the church to end the bickering, restore hope and heal the wounds. I would much prefer they get back on message and get the ship turned around before it sinks. If taxing them to kingdom come would do it then let's start taxing them but be forewarned: WHO gets taxed and for WHAT REASONS will become a bigger political football than we've ever seen.

a reply to: NavyDoc

And, "by the same rules apply to everybody" includes enforcement.

So, where's is the enforcement inequality? You got a source? Link? Citation?

a reply to: windword

No. Religion is about survival, power and most of all - money.

Politicians acting as agents of Christianity serve as spiritual aristocrats - a noble role in a decaying degenerate West where the majority look up to the sort of profligate scum on television as models of character.

originally posted by: NavyDoc

originally posted by: Annee

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?

I don't think I've ever seen as much a large demand nor official attempt to prosecute them. Same question to you, should Planned Parenthood lose it's tax exempt status due to it's political activism and candidate endorsements and lobbying?

I don't actually see the comparison.

Religion should be about religion, about God. I do not support churches being political from the pulpit.

However, that doesn't mean parishioners can't form special interest groups. I believe many charities that affiliate with specific beliefs are actually separate from the church itself.

I don't see the problem - what have they got to lose?...oh yeah, tax free status...i wonder who wouldn't be up in arms...seems a very basic issue...no doubt there will be tax payer funded dinners to discuss it archbishop to politician (or whatever) to protect that massive foot in the door...

Å99

originally posted by: windword
a reply to: NavyDoc

And, "by the same rules apply to everybody" includes enforcement.

So, where's is the enforcement inequality? You got a source? Link? Citation?

You can't source a non-event--that's a logical fallacy.


There have been plenty of complaints--

The Million Mom March crossed this ethical line at least twice. It told its prospective donors that firearm misuse kills 12 (or 13) children a day, and it told the IRS on its Form 990 tax return for 2000 that it was "organizing a march in support of public health and safety." This is also what it told many of its supporters. The truth is that this march was a thinly disguised campaign rally for Al Gore, along with a photo opportunity for Hillary Clinton, Tipper Gore, Carl Levin (D-MI), Barbara Mikulski (D-MD), Nita Lowey (D-NY), Carolyn McCarthy (D-NY), and other political figures. Ms. Clinton's involvement in this scandal needs to be a major issue if she runs for president in 2016.

Planned Parenthood is also one of President Barack Obama’s top political allies, and spent more than $1.7 million in the last election cycle to help elect Obama and support his fellow abortion rights Democrats, the Center for Responsive Politics reported.

The power of Planned Parenthood to quickly raise funds from the private sector was shown recently when the Susan G. Komen foundation tried to cut off $650,000 it gave the organization in grants because of the congressional and other state investigations.

The backlash from Planned Parenthood with a campaign to criticize the breast cancer group was swift, and resulted in the resignation of Karen Handel, Komen’s vice president of policy. As the uproar subsided, Planned Parenthood raised in a matter of days nearly $700,000 from non-government supporters to backfill the loss, and the Komen foundation restored Planned Parenthood’s grants for mammograms at limited clinics and referrals from other clinics.

--but no actions and even the outrage in this thread have only been limited to a single type of tax exempt organization.

If a megachurch gave $1.7 million to elect Bush, I'm certain you'd be calling for the revocation of it's tax exempt status. Do you thus hold, by the same principle, that planned parenthood's tax exempt status should also be revoked?

In addition, you don't think that there is no unequal treatment? Were you asleep during the whole IRS tax exempt scandal along with all of the mysterious missing emails?

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: NavyDoc

originally posted by: Annee

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?

I don't think I've ever seen as much a large demand nor official attempt to prosecute them. Same question to you, should Planned Parenthood lose it's tax exempt status due to it's political activism and candidate endorsements and lobbying?

I don't actually see the comparison.

Religion should be about religion, about God. I do not support churches being political from the pulpit.

However, that doesn't mean parishioners can't form special interest groups. I believe many charities that affiliate with specific beliefs are actually separate from the church itself.

Does not matter if it's a church or not. If you have tax exempt status under that provision of the bill, you are not permitted to endorse politically.

Planned Parenthood is also a 501(c)(3). Not only is it tax exempt but it also gets taxpayer dollars yet it endorses candidates, lobbys, and gives money to campaigns and spends money for candidates. Under the exact same rules as this church, should not planned parenthood also lose it's tax exempt status.

originally posted by: Asktheanimals
Much could be done by the church to end the bickering, restore hope and heal the wounds. I would much prefer they get back on message and get the ship turned around before it sinks. If taxing them to kingdom come would do it then let's start taxing them but be forewarned: WHO gets taxed and for WHAT REASONS will become a bigger political football than we've ever seen.

No truer words said. The part in bold is incredibly important. Short sighted people delight in using the tax code to squash political opponents, but that Pandora's box is the thing that eventually will bite them in the rear-end.

Tax them all, IMHO, and let them deduct what they actually use for charity from their taxable income--and political endorsements are not "charity."

originally posted by: windword
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.

Some churches will most certainly try.. Technically, all they would have to do is practice what they preach with charitable action outside of 'cronies,' in direct proportion to their financial intake. Meaning, most probably wont qualify.

Churches wouldn't be the only organization to try to incorrectly claim exemption under such a system though, so they would all be treated equally under what they actually contribute outside of their own organizations/groups/etc. That means it would likely impact organizations that you may support fervently. Focusing on churches alone is erroneous, in my opinion.

Large corporations are a pretty good example. While not specifically tax exempt, the objective reality of the situation yields strikingly similar results to a 501c3.

originally posted by: NavyDoc
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.

Nah, I am looking at more broad solutions. Multiple birds with one stone, or something like that. I don't have any confidence our current system will simply fix itself.

When the CEO of a charitable tax exempt organization makes a million dollars per, there is something wrong there.

Agreed

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

No doubt about that!

a reply to: NavyDoc

You can't source a non-event--that's a logical fallacy.

So why are you attacking me for not addressing a non-event?

As far as I'm concerned your post is off topic.

I have no idea how these groups relate to the OP. Are you saying that Planned Parenthood and Million Moms did something illegal, and I should know about it and be outraged? As far as I understand, Planned Parenthood is allowed to raise money.

Besides, why can't you link your sources? Are you afraid people might learn that they're off topic?

originally posted by: NavyDoc

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: NavyDoc

originally posted by: Annee

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?

I don't think I've ever seen as much a large demand nor official attempt to prosecute them. Same question to you, should Planned Parenthood lose it's tax exempt status due to it's political activism and candidate endorsements and lobbying?

I don't actually see the comparison.

Religion should be about religion, about God. I do not support churches being political from the pulpit.

However, that doesn't mean parishioners can't form special interest groups. I believe many charities that affiliate with specific beliefs are actually separate from the church itself.

Does not matter if it's a church or not. If you have tax exempt status under that provision of the bill, you are not permitted to endorse politically.

I'm obviously not an expert here. I usually try to stay in opinion based discussions ----- because fact debates require research (unless you just don't care).

Are you sure Planned Parenthood is Tax Exempt?

Seems to me it is not --- but, has specific funding groups from government that are tax exempt.

Kind of like what I suggested of churches (special interest group separate from church), only in reverse. Specific "group" is tax exempt, but Planned Parenthood by itself is not.

a reply to: Annee

I'm fairly certain that Planned Parenthood has their legal "ducks in a row" so to speak.

ABOUT COMMUNITY ACTION FUND OF PLANNED PARENTHOOD OF ORANGE AND SAN BERNARDINO COUNTIES

The Community Action Fund is the political arm of Planned Parenthood of Orange and San Bernardino Counties. It's an independent, nonprofit, and nonpartisan organization dedicated to protecting and expanding individual rights to reproductive choice and access to family planning. The Community Action Fund raises funds in support of progressive candidates that value access to affordable reproductive health services and comprehensive sexual health education.

The Community Action Fund supports reproductive rights and health care services by:

Direct and grassroots lobbying of elected officials at all levels of government

Making endorsements and contributions to endorsed candidates at all levels of government

Implementing independent expenditure and field campaigns for endorsed candidates

Mobilizing and educating voters about issues important to reproductive health care

Organizing community partners and advocates in support of women’s health issues

Electing and training pro-comprehensive sexual health school board members and candidates

Defeating dangerous anti-reproductive health care initiatives in California and other states

www.ppactionca.org...

the line between religion and state was put to protect churches just as much as it was to protect non-believers. It seems that some christians seem to want to blur that line some but aren't aware of what the consequences of doing so might be in the future . We have many different church sects with many different doctrines. No christian would like for the state to come down on their pastor demanding them to change this or that doctrine to be more catholic or more baptist of whatever!
you also shouldn't be conspiring with the politicians to rig the system into a model that is more to your religious liking. You're rules might work fine if all are following them but they can get pretty messed up with those that your religion puts higher up in the power structure don't because if will strip those lower in that power structure of any power they have to avoid the abuse of those higher ups... all in God's name of course!
the chirstian is only in this world they are not of it! they are to be like ambassadors and the typical ambassador does not go into the foreign country and start demanding they restructure their laws so he feels more at home!