Posted on 11/21/2001 9:30:11 AM PST by toenail
Here is today's Sixty Second Activist ACTION ITEM:
ISSUE: There are limits to what your preacher can say from the pulpit -- limits placed there by the government. Now, a bill introduced in Congress seeks to change the law.
If a church mixes politics and the pulpit, it risks losing its tax-exempt status. But the "Houses of Worship Political Speech Protection Act" (H.R. 2357) would provide an exemption from the IIRS code, reports Focus on the Family's "Citizen Link" (www.family.org).
Rep. Walter Jones (R-NC), who introduced the bill, explained how the problem of churches speaking out on political issues arose.
"Lyndon Johnson in 1954 put an amendment on a revenue bill that stifled the ministers, priests and rabbis from being able to speak of moral and political issues," Jones said. "That's not what America's about. America's about freedom. And we've got to have freedom in the churches."
He said Johnson's amendment has had a chilling effect that has kept many churches from speaking out, even on subjects where their speech is actually protected. He also contended the restrictions have not been impartially enforced.
"I think all churches should be treated the same," Jones said. "They should have freedom to talk about these issues."
The bill, which has already gathered more than 90 cosponsors, would also put an end to the long-running debate over churches distributing voter guides.
ACTION ITEM: All churches should be treated the same. They should have freedom to talk about any issues affecting any aspect of society -- including politics. Anything else is simply un-American.
Rep. Jones' bill, which has already gathered more than 90 cosponsors, would also put an end to the long-running debate over churches distributing voter guides.
Please sign the petition to Congress to support H.R. 2357, the "Houses of Worship Political Speech Protection Act":
NOTE: Please be sure to forward this to everyone you know that wants to see free speech rights apply to ALL Americans, in EVERY situation. Thank you!
What they don't have the freedom to do, if they are a 501(c)(3) church, is to endorse candidates, work for campaigns, etc. That's what happens when the govt essentially co-opts you by giving you tax goodies.
The solution is for individual churches to scrap their 501(c)(3) status.
Do all ministers get this freedom of speech or is it just the ones you agree with?
"Freedom of Religion" not "Freedom from Religion".
We have both. It is part of what makes this (supposedly) a free country.
The issue has nothing to do with religion it has to do with tax status. There's other tax designations churches can choose if they want to endorse candidates.
Until a church gives up it's 501(c)(3) status, though, it's going to be treated the same as any other non-profit organization with the same tax status.
Churches don't get free passes from laws that apply to everyone just because they're churches
Look at it from the opposite side too. If churches could make political endorsements and contributions while maintaining special tax status, then what is to keep political parties and PACs from calling themselves churches and getting the same benefits?
If a church engages in political activity, then it's doing something that organizations who have been granted tax-exempt [501(c)(3)] organizations [whether churches or any other nonprofit] aren't allowed to do, and it can have its tax-exempt status revoked by the IRS.
It should be applied equitably across the board.
But this never seems to get applied to denominations of a liberal bent, or those consisting predominantly of certain ethnic groups.
I believe the laws you mention may not be legal. Please review the First Amendment to our Constitution. I noticed when I looked it up that the freedom of religion comes before the freedom of speech. Also individual free speech comes before freedom of the press.
"Amendment I 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."
What makes you think they're listed in order of importance?
How can one unalienable right be 'more unalienable' than another?
Chruches don't have First Amendment rights? Only individuals? News to me. If churches don't, it sounds like the govt can come in and tell them what to not say and how to pray.
Obviously, First Amendment rights apply to churches but this particular issue is not a First Amendment issue. It's a case of profiteers trying to use your tax dollars to endorse their preferred candidates and cloaking it as a freedom of religion or freedom of speech issue.
If you suspect a church in your area is violating these laws then report them to the IRS or FEC.
And tell me, where in that Bill of Rights is the "right to tax-exempt status?"
With the sheckles come the shackles
Actually, I think churches shouldn't pay taxes so they can't lay claim to government subsidies/tax benefits.
But if they want 'faith based' funding, the deal is off and they get to see the taxman.
So, no police protection, fire-fighting, mail delivery or sewer services?
I'd throw those in as a freebee. But not anything else.
With at least two of them (sewer and fire-fighting), failure to provide services would harm others. In economic terms, they're considered 'free-riders'.
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.