Freedom of Speech for Nation’s Clergy

The Houses of Worship Free Speech Restoration Act, also known as HR 235, would give clergy the ability to discuss politics with their congregations without fear of response from the Federal government. Prior to 1954, clergy were allowed to speak freely about political issues but today they always have the threat of a response from the IRS.

This bill may come to the forefront due to the recent case involving All Saints Episcopal Church in Los Angeles. They are being investigated by the IRS and may lose their tax-exemption status because of speech given by a guest speaker last year, which discussed the war in Iraq.

The church never came out in support of either Kerry or Bush but their website openly opposed some Republican-backed propositions that were on the election ballot in the state of California.

Often liberal churches such as this one speak out and the IRS does nothing about it but that is not the case here. Conservative churches are the ones that usually follow this law while liberal churches often refuse to do so.

Under the Restoration Bill, houses of worship such as this one would not be at risk of a response by the IRS. Currently, clergy must constantly deal with this unfair law. Words such as pro-life or pro-choice are considered “code words” that be spark an investigation by the IRS.

This bill is supported by both Democrats and Republicans as well as groups form all walks of faith.

Words such as pro-life or pro-choice are considered “code words” that be spark an investigation by the IRS.

Ostensibly, this is an issue of Freedom of Speech, or Separation of Church and State -- but (of course) the media sees the Abortion angle.

We know that Rev Jesse Jackson can always say anything, and since Al Gore can raise funds in Buddhist Temples or in Black Churches, the current situation obviously works pretty well for Leftists.

I'm guessing that Restoration would primarily benefit Conservatives.

The churches were tax exempt long before the IRS had classifications such as 501(C)3.

The churches traded nothing ~ rather, religious bodies had their rights stripped from them by Lyndon Baines Johnson and a handful of anti-church fanatics in the IRS.

The first step away from this problem may well be to have Congress finally pass some legislation on the matter. The second step is, of course, to begin removing the fanatics from IRS. I'd start with the fellows who first came up with the regulation, and if they're gone (which is most likely the case), I'd start removing everyone they'd ever promoted or hired, and then remove all the folks those guys promoted or hired.

Maybe some more details would help here clarify the story. It sounds as though the liberal church is being investigated on the basis of publicly taking a position in opposition to the war in Iraq (the webpages being considered public).

It would seem that the expression of opinion on issues of public importance has nothing to do with "electioneering" which is what the (probably un-Constitutional) campaign finance laws regulate. Since the webpage didn't specifically endorse Bush or Kerry or anyone, what is the infraction the IRS is concerned about?

It has been well established that any clergyman has the personal right to make his opinions known on anything, outside of the church environment.

I also thought that churches have been in the profession, for many centuries, of expressing opinions about moral issues as an alternative to just going along with whatever secular society dictates. Since everything has a moral component, there should be no restriction on expressing an opinion on anything in that context (of moral analysis), even if different moral systems teach different things.

I believe that the fact of defining as "political" any moral issue that happens also to be politicized, which is everything (e.g. death penalty, abortion, illegal immigration, etc) would give the government to power to restrict freedom of expression merely by claiming them as political. And when is the last time government voluntarily held back from such power?

I think that, given the secularizing forces in society, the only long-term solution for churches that will not be shut up will end up being the renunciation of any benefits from current tax-exempt status. In other words, regain total freedom of expression by "paying for the privilege", or be increasingly hesitant and fearful. (Obviously talking about several decades down the line, and only those churches doing so of their own accord.) There is absolutely no reason that you couldn't start a church, pay property taxes and sales taxes, and corporate income tax on net profit (which is most cases is zero) -- but then be absolutely fearless in engaging in public discussion.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.