Posted on 07/27/2006 8:20:43 AM PDT by xzins
Five years ago, I wrote about threats made by the Internal Revenue Service against conservative churches for supposedly engaging in politicking. Today, the IRS is again attempting to chill free speech, sending notices to more than 15,000 non-profit organizations—including churches—regarding its new crackdown on political activity.
But what exactly constitutes political activity? What if a member of the clergy urges his congregation to work toward creating a pro-life culture, when an upcoming election features a pro-life candidate? What if a minister admonishes churchgoers that homosexuality is sinful, when an initiative banning gay marriage is on an upcoming ballot? Where exactly do we draw the line, and when does the IRS begin to violate the First amendment’s guarantee of free exercise of religion?
I agree with my colleague Walter Jones of North Carolina that the political views of any particular church or its members are none of the government’s business. Congressman Jones introduced legislation that addresses this very serious issue of IRS harassment of churches engaging in conservative political activity. This bill is badly needed to end the IRS practice of threatening certain politically disfavored faiths with loss of their tax-exempt status, while ignoring the very open and public political activities of other churches. While some well-known leftist preachers routinely advocate socialism from the pulpit, many conservative Christian and Jewish congregations cannot present their political beliefs without risking scrutiny from the tax collector.
The supposed motivation behind the ban on political participation by churches is the need to maintain a rigid separation between church and state. However, the First amendment simply prohibits the federal government from passing laws that establish religion or prohibit the free exercise of religion. There certainly is no mention of any "separation of church and state," yet lawmakers and judges continually assert this mythical doctrine.
The result is court rulings and laws that separate citizens from their religious beliefs in all public settings, in clear violation of the free exercise clause. Our Founders never envisioned a rigidly secular public society, where people must nonsensically disregard their deeply held beliefs in all matters of government and politics. They certainly never imagined that the federal government would actively work to chill the political activities of some churches.
Speech is speech, regardless of the setting. There is no legal distinction between religious expression and political expression; both are equally protected by the First amendment. Religious believers do not drop their political opinions at the door of their place of worship, nor do they disregard their faith at the ballot box. Religious morality will always inform the voting choices of Americans of all faiths.
The political left, however, seeks to impose the viewpoint that public life must be secular, and that government cannot reflect morality derived from faith. Many Democrats, not all, are threatened by strong religious institutions because they want an ever-growing federal government to serve as the unchallenged authority in our society. So the real motivation behind the insistence on a separation of church and state is not based on respect for the First amendment, but rather on a desire to diminish the influence of religious conservatives at the ballot box.
The Constitution's guarantee of religious freedom must not depend on the whims of IRS bureaucrats. Religious institutions cannot freely preach their beliefs if they must fear that the government will accuse them of "politics." We cannot allow churches to be silenced any more than we can allow political dissent in general to be silenced. Free societies always have strong, independent institutions that are not afraid to challenge and criticize the government.
BTTT
If you are an organization, and you use your funds to promote political activities, you are taxable under Federal Law. That is why the NRA has set up an independent Insitute for Legal Action. The Insitute for Legal Action is taxable as supports a political agenda.
If a church supports a political agenda it should forfeit its tax free status.
Such an action would hurt liberal churches far more than conservative ones and would treat them the same way any other organization is treated under law.
Bump and ping
It is also a fact of our faith that we honestly address all cultural issues. That would include politics.
Would I tell someone not to support Al Gore or John Kerry because the support abortion? You bet I would.
That's not politics, though. That speech is RELIGIOUS SPEECH.
If they selectively use it, then fine, take legal action against eh IRS. Other wise just take it on the chin because I think they should all be paying taxes anyway. Not only that, as I said they can't shut them up, only remove their tax exempt status. It depends on what is more important to them, political activism or not paying taxes.
"... the issue here is about SINCE we HAVE a tax on political entities ..."
I don't agree. I think the REAL issue is WHY HAVE SUCH A TAX SYSTEM AT ALL WHEN IT IS NO LONGER NECESSARY.
The FairTax does a much better job all the way around, has current bills in both houses of congress with 56 sponsors/cosponsors in the House and is gaining grassroots strength all the time. There are presently over 700,000 members of Americans For Fair Taxation and some of those backing the bill (American Farm Bureau Federation) have well over 5 million members and the FairTax provisions are written into its tax position views point by point.
The income tax is a goner - as well it should be.
Thats how I see it. Christians need to be aware of how evil forces can "trick" them. The Church is the place to put it all in perspective.
The only orifice of theirs which could be restricted is their pockets - and this is not a sound producing orifice. They could fart [per Aristotle, it is ultimately the same as burp] as much as they want and are able to stand the smell of.
Since free exercise of religion has no restriction, nor does political speech in peaceful assembly you may not tax it.
Sorry to hear that you have a problem with your orfices, perhaps you should be seeking medical help.
:>)
You should copyright that one!
We are in 100% agreement!
Then vote for the FairTax and all that nonsense goes away for good.
Well, except that Mormons, Rastafrians & American Indians have all lost the cases I referenced in the earlier post. Even after agruing to a federal court that such prohibitions infringe on their First Amendment rights.
No right is absolute, as far as the courts & US Supreme Court are concerned.
All it takes is two or more! :)
Yer preachin' to the choir........ :^)
If the churches would render unto Caesar, they wouldn't have to worry about it.
Hmm, wasn't aware that the United States this was Rome under Roman law.
Last I looked this was the United States with a Constititions of strictly enumerated powers and limitations on national government, as well as a Bill of Rights expressly guaranteeing certain freedoms by prohibiting Congress from making law in specific areas regarding the exercise of those freedoms.
Then your church has nothing to worry about, unlike that African Methodist congregation that gave Clinton, Gore, Jackson, Sharpton and Co. a `bully pulpit'.
We're on the `same page', believe it or not.
"Yer preachin' to the choir........ :^) "
True enough, I am to some ... but there's also a lot of non-singers out there and some who can't read a lick of music (or anything else).
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.