Hey Geezer,
With all due respect, no one's speech is being abridged here. The truth is, a government benefit is being withdrawn (tax-exempt status) for a violation of an agreement between said organization and the federal government (IRS) for the affording of above mentioned benefit. I am sure you know this already but were simply in a rush to post your thoughts.
Political speech is not being violated, just the taxpayer's subsidy of it.
Bull, a tax is not a subsidy it is a cost on the citizen.
The lack of a tax on ones productivity as measured by income is the appropriate condition of all American citizens. One should be taxed on that which one is benefited by society as measured by their consumption, not on that which the contribute to society as measured by their income.
In no case should any right expressly protected under the Constititution be abridged by the requirement of payment of any tax.
The Constitution and Bill of Rights are clear on this issue.
Taxes are expressly collected on for the payment of the nations bills not the basis of regulating or conditioned on the behaviour of the individual citizen.
Constitution for the United States of America:
- Article I Section 8: "The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts and excises,
to pay the debts and provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States;
as limited by the enumerated powers granted to Congress under the Constitution, all else is reserved to the States or the People respectively.
- The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.
Furthermore there is an express prohibition under the 1st amendment against Congress (i.e. the national government) enacting any law at all reducing freedom of speech, the press or freedom of peaceful assembly and petition of grievence. Regardless of whether one is an individual alone, or in peaceful assembly of individuals as an organization.
- Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
As it is apparent neither the Congress nor the Courts respect these provisions of the Constitution and Bill of Rights, it is incumbent upon us the People to ensure the proper recognition of the limits of power imposed up that national government through the election of those representatives that will see that which is necessary to restoring the original protections under the Constitution.
With all due respect, no one's speech is being abridged here. The truth is, a government benefit is being withdrawn (tax-exempt status) for a violation of an agreement between said organization and the federal government (IRS) for the affording of above mentioned benefit. I am sure you know this already but were simply in a rush to post your thoughts.
Political speech is not being violated, just the taxpayer's subsidy of it. The pastor is free to show the Bush assassination movie or Fahrenheit 9/11 in lieu of his sermon, if he so chooses. He just can't expect the taxpayers to subsidize it.
Do you not think that having to pay for the priviledge of speaking your mind is an abridgement of that right?