"Pulpit Freedom Sunday": Ministers to defy IRS ruling

[Progressive Realist]

LOS ANGELES — In a matter of days, some 1,400 American pastors are planning to break the law.

And they’re likely to get away with it.


As part of “Pulpit Freedom Sunday,” on Oct. 7, religious leaders across the country will endorse political candidates — an act that flies in the face of Internal Revenue Service rules about what tax-exempt organizations, such as churches, can and cannot do.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/on-faith/pastors-to-challenge-irs-over-political-endorsements-and-theyre-likely-to-get-away-with-it/2012/10/04/b6fc0350-0e57-11e2-ba6c-07bd866eb71a_story.html


Ugh. Keep in mind that this is being driven by the "Alliance Defending Freedom", which is a group whose mission statement has to do with

transforming the legal system and advocating for religious liberty, the sanctity of life, and marriage and family.

http://www.alliancedefendingfreedom.org/about

Yuck.

[Comrade Shmoo]

Separation of church and state: love it or leave it.

[Minnesota Mike]

Don't get me started on religion and tax exempt status.

[Fmr. Emperor PiT]

     Churches typically have a political agenda anyway. They're just being more explicit about it here.

[Torie]

Churches should be free to say what they want like everyone else, and pay taxes like everyone else (most relevant being property taxes), and like everyone else who is not a 501(c)(3) charity, gifts to them should not be tax deductible. It is just so simple really. I want to help churches by freeing them of their golden handcuff shackles. Let Freedom Ring!

[Link]

Churches should be free to say what they want like everyone else, and pay taxes like everyone else (most relevant being property taxes), and like everyone else who is not a 501(c)(3) charity, gifts to them should not be tax deductible. It is just so simple really. I want to help churches by freeing them of their golden handcuff shackles. Let Freedom Ring!

Torie I don't know if I agree but I like your thought process on this one.  People can't have it both ways.  And you are right.  If you want to go into the political free speech game you have to pay your taxes like everyone else.  My only problem is entities like the Catholic Church would get hit hard if they lost their 501(c)(3) privileges.  I don't always agree with the Catholic Church but I would hate to see that happen.

[Inks.LWC Supports Chuck Hagel]

So this is why my mother brought up the subject today.  I smoked her in a nice little 2 hour debate after she got home from work.  Lot's of fun.

Point is, churches shouldn't endorse as long as they're a 501(c)(3).  Ideally, I go with Torie, but that's not going to happen soon.

I'd revoke each and every one of those church's 501(c)(3) status (assuming that'd be legal after they violated the law), or take whatever legal remedy is available.

[shua]

I've never understood the connection between political activity and tax exempt status. An individual or a corporation doesn't pay a different tax rate depending on whether they endorse a candidate.  If they are a non-profit, they shouldn't pay taxes. If they are for-profit, they should.

[後援会]

I've never understood the connection between political activity and tax exempt status. An individual or a corporation doesn't pay a different tax rate depending on whether they endorse a candidate.  If they are a non-profit, they shouldn't pay taxes. If they are for-profit, they should.

This.

Also, I'm an atheist and even I think organized religion needs a stronger voice in American politics, not weaker. At the very least - they would act in good faith, which is something one cannot say about many other special interests dominating much of America's governance. They would also restore some semblance of parity in some of America's social issues.

[Ѕenator Αverroës]

At the very least - they would act in good faith, which is something one cannot say about many other special interests.

???

[Rooney]

Will a minister in Dayton, Tennessee, pull this stunt? I want to see a redux of the Scopes Trial starring Geoffrey Figer and the Christian Legal Society with the role of defendant/prosecution reversed. That would be sweeter than Nutella.

[Former Moderate]

Well, I guess these churches don't want their tax exemption. That's cool, I guess.

[opebo]

I'm an atheist and even I think organized religion needs a stronger voice in American politics, not weaker. At the very least - they would act in good faith...

Oh man, you are a strange one.  But about the underlined - you apparently have never come into contact with the christian religious in the US, have you?

[Grumps]

Well, I guess these churches don't want their tax exemption. That's cool, I guess.

I think they'll end up keeping them but damn man, of all entities not to f[inks] with, the IRS is always numero uno.

[memphis]

Well, I guess these churches don't want their tax exemption. That's cool, I guess.

I think they'll end up keeping them but damn man, of all entities not to f[inks] with, the IRS is always numero uno.

They'll keep them and get to play the victim card. The IRS doesn't have the balls to go after the churches.

[DC Al Fine]

I've never understood the connection between political activity and tax exempt status. An individual or a corporation doesn't pay a different tax rate depending on whether they endorse a candidate.  If they are a non-profit, they shouldn't pay taxes. If they are for-profit, they should.

Question for the Americans: Do groups like the NRA or NARAL have to pay income tax because they endorse candidates?

[memphis]

I've never understood the connection between political activity and tax exempt status. An individual or a corporation doesn't pay a different tax rate depending on whether they endorse a candidate.  If they are a non-profit, they shouldn't pay taxes. If they are for-profit, they should.

Question for the Americans: Do groups like the NRA or NARAL have to pay income tax because they endorse candidates?

It's more about property tax than income tax.

[DC Al Fine]

I've never understood the connection between political activity and tax exempt status. An individual or a corporation doesn't pay a different tax rate depending on whether they endorse a candidate.  If they are a non-profit, they shouldn't pay taxes. If they are for-profit, they should.

Question for the Americans: Do groups like the NRA or NARAL have to pay income tax because they endorse candidates?

It's more about property tax than income tax.

So the NRA would pay property tax on their headquarters correct?