Originally Posted By Elderp <a href="http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26930425/" target="_blank">http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26930425/</a> Ok, they said the magic words now the question is will the Feds take away their tax exempt status? If they do what if any repercussions will this have? My prediction is major lawsuits ahead.
Originally Posted By Mr X ***"The basic thrust was this was not a matter of endorsing, it's a First Amendment issue," Hice said.*** No, it's not. They have the right to say whatever they want. They just can't do so and still get a free ride on taxes. ***"To say the church can't deal with moral and societal issues if it enters into the political arena is just wrong, it's unconstitutional."*** Ridiculous. There's nothing in the constitution one way or another about taxation for religious organizations. What a bunch of lies!
Originally Posted By mele To me, this is the same thing as a minister praying for money for Sarah Palin's campaign. If that's not "endorsing" a candidate, what is? Seems pretty clear to me but no one else is really talking about it in that thread. (Or the witchcraft thing.) So wrong on so many accounts. I think it's definitely time to start taxing churches if they insist on doing this. There's a local (evil) pastor here who continually meddles in politics. His name is Ken Hutcherson. I have personal and political reasons for not liking him but the crap that he has done is ridiculous. He has quite the reputation and he loves to live up to it. We need to stop letting people like this get away with this crap. If they want to play in politics then they need to pay taxes.
Originally Posted By mele It's funny to me that *some* of these people are the most vocal about being more-American-than-thou yet clearly are disrespecting the "laws" of their government. How does that work?
Originally Posted By Elderp "It's funny to me that *some* of these people are the most vocal about being more-American-than-thou yet clearly are disrespecting the "laws" of their government. How does that work?" We(the US population) are a society that regularly breaks the law. In fact the only real way to repeal a law is to break it, go to court and have it declared unconstitutional. To me it is more a matter of if the law is just or not just. Problem with that is, who is really the best judge for that?
Originally Posted By Mr X The lawmakers and the judges are best equiped to decide such things, I would say. I don't see how this particular law is somehow "unjust" though...the tax breaks are in line with other charitable situations (you can't get a tax break on a political donation, for example).
Originally Posted By mele <<We(the US population) are a society that regularly breaks the law. In fact the only real way to repeal a law is to break it, go to court and have it declared unconstitutional. >> Well, maybe these hypocrits will remember that the next time they calling people unAmerican for expressing their views. These people haven't lost their freedom of speech...they simply are greedy. And yet they are supposed to be spiritual leaders? How does that work? How is this not the very thing that Jesus was against?
Originally Posted By mele I'd just, for once, like the outspoken religious in this country (a distinction worth noting) would work on pulling out the planks in their own eyes instead of worrying about the slivers in everyone else's.
Originally Posted By Elderp "The lawmakers and the judges are best equiped to decide such things, I would say." Yes, because we know that the politicians are always fair and just. "And yet they are supposed to be spiritual leaders? " So that whole Martin Luther King Jr., Ghandi, Mother Theresa,etc. thing is bad right? They regularly broke the laws, does that mean what they did was bad?
Originally Posted By mele That's not the point...it's about the tax code. It's about cash. It's about tax free status. If the people you listed wanted tax free status then they should have stayed out of politics. If they wanted to be in politics (c'mon, Mother Theresa?) then they could pay their taxes. You're trying to make the issue bigger than it is. There are all sorts of things like this in life. You can't have everything.
Originally Posted By Elderp "I don't see how this particular law is somehow "unjust" though...the tax breaks are in line with other charitable situations (you can't get a tax break on a political donation, for example)." Oh, just so you know my position on this. I am probably a heretic for saying this, but I think churches should at the very least pay property taxes. I also think that if a minister gets paid he should definately pay taxes. I am not sure about taxing donations paid to the church and not to an individual. A church is an organization, but in many instances churches are non-profit, and I am opposed to taxing non-profit organizations. However, there are many churches who are definately not non-profit and I am not against those getting taxed. Anyhow, like I said I am not sure about taxes on churches as an organization.
Originally Posted By Elderp "It's about cash. It's about tax free status." So basically your saying that I can have all the freedom I want as long as I pay the government for the right. Sounds like a protection money to me, maybe that is what is about, maybe the government is just another mafia.
Originally Posted By Elderp "That's not what I'm saying and I'm pretty sure you know that." Actually, I am not sure what your saying. Maybe you can clarify. From what I understood you were saying that pastors who broke the law from the pulpit were hypocritical because they called other people "unamerican". Then you said it was about cash. I am trying to understand how pushing a canidate from the pulpit is a cash incentive. Are you trying to say that by pushing a canidate from the pulpit is going to get the church's more money and that is why they are doing it?
Originally Posted By mele Those things don't contradict each other. These people are wrong for breaking the law which makes them hypocrits for continually complaining about the sin of others. I'm saying that they know they aren't supposed to be preaching politics from the pulpit but continue to do so, therefor breaking tax codes. If they want to preach politics so badly, they should pay up. They want to have their cake and eat it, too, which is all about GREED. Why not pay the taxes they owe? If they're breaking the law and don't want the consequences (to pay taxes) then they shouldn't do it. More BS from the "personal responsibility" crowd. I don't know how much more plainly I can put it. If they want to enter politics they need to give up their tax free status. If they want to change the law, then work to change it, but do it lawfully. The hypocrisy is so thick you could cut it with a knife! You're trying to make it sound like these people are on these huge quests and aren't being hypocritical. I disagree. And in many cases, yes, churches also get involved in politics for other greedy reasons so let's not pretend that doesn't happen. Again, it's simple. You're free to say what you want in your church but if you start breaking tax codes, you have to pay. I think politics in church is vastly more damaging to this country than gay marriage will ever be...but somehow, it's suddenly okay for churches to preach against it and still complain about activist judges. More hypocrisy, as far as the eye can see.
Originally Posted By Mr X I think you have it backwards, Elder. The basic deal is everyone HAS to pay taxes. Then, if you've got a special sort of charitable organization, you can request relief. It's not like everyone starts from zero and then the IRS selectively decides which people they're going to "shake down". So, if you want to get the tax breaks given to only a select few, charitable organizations..you have to play by the rules. I would say that it IS all about cash in the sense that these pastors are pushing the boundaries in an attempt to get the political speech thing thrown out...thus having their cake and eating it too. For some churches, pushing politics from the pulpit could bring in more revenue..sure. It's a slippery slope to marry politics and religion, as you know..and if there were influential churches endorsing particular candidates, you wouldn't find other folks supporting said candidate joining up with said power churches and so on...for networking, fundraising, and all that good stuff. It's not a pretty picture..naming your candidate is just the beginning. And by the way, I'm fully aware that such things are already ongoing. I just don't see any reason why we should make it any easier.
Originally Posted By SingleParkPassholder Some key points from the article: "ecause the pastors were speaking in their official capacity as clergy, the sermons are clear violations of IRS rules, said Robert Tuttle, a professor of law and religion at George Washington University. But even if the IRS rises to the bait and a legal fight ensues, Tuttle said there's "virtually no chance" courts will strike down the prohibition. "The government is allowed, as long as it has a reasonable basis for doing it, to treat political and nonpolitical speech differently, and that's essentially what it's done here," Tuttle said." "It is good public policy that in exchange for the valuable privilege of a tax exemption, you cannot turn your church or charity into a political action committee," said Barry Lynn, executive director of Americans United for Church and State, which intends to report the participating churches to the IRS, along with any other churches acting independently." One of the key concepts of our government is that if you don't want to pay taxes, then you don't participate in it or attempt to influence it in anyway. It's not written anywhere exactly like that, but it's like no taxation without representation in reverse. If you want to be a member of the club, then here are your dues. Otherwise, enjoy the fact you're left alone and the government doesn't come with its hand out. Extortion? Not really. Everyone involved is still allowed to vote how they want and campaign for their candidate. The pastors involved can even do so as log as they're not using the auspices of the church. Once they do that, game over. Certain factions of the evangelical right need to realize they can't have their cake and eat it, too.
Originally Posted By SingleParkPassholder And in post 17, I'm not talking about individuals not paying taxes, but entities such as churches.
Originally Posted By Elderp "I think politics in church is vastly more damaging to this country than gay marriage will ever be...but somehow, it's suddenly okay for churches to preach against it and still complain about activist judges." Actually, you can talk all day long in church about gay marriage or any issue for that matter over the pulpit and it isn't against the tax code. This sermon was different in that they specifically said "vote republican." The tax code along with case law on this is clear that churches can talk about issues all they want as long as they don't endorse a particular canidate or party. I personally don't find the hypocrisy about talking about issues in any setting. Good or bad issues need to be aired and churches due to their community setting seem like good place to do that. Where the question comes to my mind is this issue of parties and canidates. In this particular instance I can't say I agree with these pastors. I see no biblical support that would lead me to vote republican. In fact this administration has done some things in my mind that I feel the judgement of God will be upon them. Though there have been other times when I have agreed with pastors. Case in point is Martin Luther King Jr., he regularly sided with unions, parties, and canidates. He told his congregants to vote for particular canidates in order to promote his message of civil rights. Something that I personally believe in, I wont say the man was perfect, but by in large I will say that what he did was right. I will also go on to say that many in churches are for lack of a better word "sheep," in other words they do whatever their churches tell them without question, but that in my mind is no different than the "sheep" found in many other organizations. Question: Should all organizations (not just churches) lose their tax exempt status if they engage in political speech?
Originally Posted By mele <<Actually, you can talk all day long in church about gay marriage or any issue for that matter over the pulpit and it isn't against the tax code.>> I realize this. I have been talking about the tax code but have also stated many reasons why I find these churches to be hypocritical. It's not illegal to be hypocritical so it's really just my opinion. It doesn't invalidate my argument. It doesn't matter if what Martin Luther King did was right or wrong. It's just about that when he stood up before a congregation and told them how to vote, the church should have lost it's tax exempt status. No need to make a judgement call about what was said in the sermon. It's not about that. Yes, I think all groups should pay taxes if they engage in political speech.
