Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Why would anyone WANT to hear their minister talk about his politics and who he is going to vote for? If that's what you go to church for then it really makes religions look silly and church goes seem a little stupid.
Why would anyone WANT to hear their minister talk about his politics and who he is going to vote for? If that's what you go to church for then it really makes religions look silly and church goes seem a little stupid.
Exactly! Didn't the founder of Christianity say he was not of this world?
Well I'm waiting to see just what the IRS does. My guess is NOTHING.
I think this would be a case of having enough proof, time and money to go after the problem. If it comes to a court case what would that cost?
Either way, I agree that this loophole should be closed or enforced. Too many churches are using their clout and money in politics, specifically against our Founder's wishes.
If the tax exempt status was removed, future taxes collected should offset any court costs.
Property taxes alone, if the exempt stauts is removed, should be extremely helpful for local budgets
For those churches who insist on telling their followers who to vote for and who collect money for certain politicians, yes, they should lose their tax exempt status because they are not keeping the separation of church and state. They are using their tax exempt property as a background to work against half of our government. Did we not learn anything from the early history of the Catholic Church?
You liberals ..... there is no boundary or limits to the extremism in every one of your thoughts and actions, which includes hypocrisy, reverse logic, and circular reasoning. It literally boggles my mind how you people can extract these asinine ideas from the ether ... claiming them to be real and legitimate.
Churches are under no such obligations to "keep separation", whatever that is supposed to entail. The Constitution, and the 1st Amendment is very clear in it's language which specifically speaks to prohibitions placed upon "Congress" ONLY ... i.e. "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof ...." How in the world could a sane and marginally intelligent person derive any restrictions applying to a Church in that language? It's beyond ignorance.
The plain truth of the matter is that the entire 501c3 tax-exempt status itself is a DIRECT VIOLATION of the 1st Amendment by the Government, on every conceivable level. It's very nature is a criminal fraud of extortion ... extortion to force religious institutions to wave their constitutionally protected rights in return for this tax exemption ... it's like the mafia selling "fire insurance".
Government: "Oh yes, you do have free speech, but it's going to cost you an arm and a leg in taxes to keep it. But, if you sign right here, waving your rights, we'll cut you a deal, and promise not to tax you into oblivion".
The greatest oxymoron of all time is "Liberal Logic".
More than 1,000 religious leaders across America will take part today in “Pulpit Freedom Sunday,” a plan that has pastors endorsing political candidates from the pulpit in defiance of an Internal Revenue Service rule.
Pastors are hoping their bold move will prompt the IRS to enforce the 1954 tax code, the so-called Johnson Amendment, which prohibits tax-exempt organizations, such as churches, from making political endorsements. The law states it is illegal for churches that receive tax-exempt status from the federal government to intervene in “any political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for elective public office.”
Location: By the sea, by the sea, by the beautiful sea
68,340 posts, read 54,462,599 times
Reputation: 40741
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bulldogdad
That's not what the founding fathers believed based on their writings or wrote into the Constitution.
How do you translate "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion " into "Churches should get a free ride and still be allowed to play politics" ?
Did you get a secret de-coder ring with a six-pack of Holy Water?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The Constitution, and the 1st Amendment is very clear in it's language which specifically speaks to prohibitions placed upon "Congress" ONLY ... i.e. "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof ...." How in the world could a sane and marginally intelligent person derive any restrictions applying to a Church in that language? It's beyond ignorance. 
