This is a very interesting development!

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB121029464937179517.html?mod=special_page_campaig n2008_leftbox

I read this and combine it with "get involved poltically", or take the fight to the political arena kinds of statements and have to seriously wonder if this is God's work, or an ugly mix of sheeple driven by people with serious control issues!

Given SCOTUS has a majority of Republican nominees seated now, this move has some potential. Something I'll be watching for sure.

Gonna also give a little to the ACLU. It's likely they are going to need it.

...on the other hand, think of the revenues!

Maybe we should just eliminate all tax exempt statuses! Make them show the same kinds of records other non-religious charatable organizations have to show and be done with it!

They can help pay for the war then.

Black churches are the first campaign stops of every democrat candidate for President. Churches like Rev. Wright's black liberation theology church are admittedly political beehives of activity.

The democrats are hypocrites when it comes to going after the tax exempt status of white evangelical Christian churches. Hypocrites! Shut down those black churches for their political activity too! Where's the congressional investigation of the black churches?

Hypocrites. Dems are hypocrites through and through. If you want to know what's wrong with the democrats, just listen to what they accuse everyone else of doing, because that's exactly what the democrats are doing! They're doing what they accuse the other side of!. Look in the mirror, democrats, you hypocrites.

So Wobboh, are you saying that Democrats are hypocrites?

I don't know about that. Maybe hypocrites are Democrats!

Guess he will have to clear it up for us.

Meanwhile, we all know what happens when too many people vote Republican.

This is a crystal clear black and white issue: Tax exempt status comes with conditions, and if you want campaign from the pulpit, give up the tax exempt status.

The true hypocrites are the conservative churches who want to have their cake and eat it too.

Both parties have their respective fingers in the cookie jar when it comes to churches and political organizing and outreach. The archdiocese to which I belong takes positions on matters of social and public policy. I may not always agree, but I don’t find it intrusive. I’m a big enough boy to make up my own mind.

Politicians have been pandering to religious groups since the dawn of the republic. This shouldn’t come as a surprise to anyone. But when churches become fundraising tools for either party, it puts the churches mission into question. I wouldn’t want my parish priest collecting money from me for the purpose of donating it to a political candidate. That would be contrary to the relationship I have with my priest and my church. I feel the best approach is keeping the two worlds separate.

If churches are violating the law, then they should be given the opportunity to right the mistake. But it should apply across the board, be it an inner city African American church or suburban evangelical Christian mega-church. But from what I’ve read lately, the only church targeted of late is a liberal Episcopal church in California.

One thing that should be kept in mind. George W. Bush and his Faith Based Initiative crosses the line of good and honest government. Moneys doled out by the executive branch of government could easily be done because of the political relationship with the incumbent administration. And I don’t want my tax dollars going to churches for the purpose of evangelizing to those receiving aid from any church. I think it stinks to high heaven.

Why is there not any first ammendment rights behind the pulpit or why is political speech restricted/nixed in my religious expression as a leader in a church???

I know there is some law against it...guess it goes under the law that restricts tobacco advertising over airwaves...just wonder why it hasn't hit the Supreme Court...lots of other crazier things have...

I think there are first amendment rights behind the pulpit --given you pay taxes like anyone else; otherwise, the speech is limited in return for the tax break.

All you had to do was read the quick article to understand why:

"In 1954, Congress made it illegal for nonprofits, including churches, to endorse or publicly oppose political candidates or to intervene in candidates' elections, although they are free to take sides on issues."

"Tax exemption is a benefit, and it comes with conditions. So if any pastor out there feels he is gagged or can't speak on partisan politics...forgo the tax exemption and say what you want."

Easy as 1, 2, 3! Give up the free money and say whatever it is you want! But if you want the free cheese courtesy of this taxpayer, then play by the rules!!

I don't think the First Amendment reads; 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 long as you pay taxes

Now, that being said, When I'm at church listening to our Pastor's message, I don't really want to hear any political stuff.

There is enough already way too much of that CRAP on TV that we are going to have to put up with until November.

I'm sure I'll wear out the mute button on my remote between now and then! Too bad there isn't a "blank the video" button too.

I'm thinking purely from an individual standpoint...not an organization such as the church...say a pastor wants to endorse/give his views of a certain candidate but qualifies it saying that it's his personal opinion and does not represent the church or other leadership or congregation but only his opinion. Question...is his personal first amendment rights being abridged here?

If he's up on the pulpit in front of the congregation, yes.

I would think that any good pastor of any good church would understand that it would be a poor decision to put at risk the congregation's tax exempt status by preaching politics from the pulpit.

>>as long as you pay taxes...

Great one SkyBill...I am wondering why a bunch of starving lawyers havn't tried to take this one to the Supremes...guess there's not many starving lawyers in America...?

Really, they are able to organize and assemble on inexpensive land and with inexpensive means and methods, BECAUSE they have the tax break.

That's ideally to help them get the word out in a non-partisan way. This is seen as a public good.

If they decide to go partisan, then the line between church and state gets blurred, and that's not really a public good anymore --at least it's not a known one.

So then, they end up being like everybody else then! Anyone can build organizations, given they pay toward the upkeep and development of the COMMONS their organization will inhabit.

As it stands right now, many of these organizations do a lot of public good in their works, and their words. That's easily worth forgiving their obligation to the COMMONS we all live and work in.

If they end up being more political mouth piece than anything else, tax 'em as they are no longer holding up their end of the deal struck early on.

Personally, I'd like to see limits on the tax exempt status of some churches. I think it's an abuse of the tax code to be exempting Walmart sized churches.

I completely agree.

I do admit that pastors/religious leaders have so much more important things to say than endorsing a political candidate but when a time could come up...zip....just something within me goes...boy..theres something not right here.

I don't go to worship to hear political viewpoints. Thankfully over the years the pastors that have lead our congregation have kept those cards close to their chests.

My dad never preached politics from the pulpit. He did preach be involved in the process and get to know the issues then vote your conscience.

I strongly agree with this.

We have the vote for exactly that reason. If the faith resonates strongly, advocacy to others on the merits of it should lead to the votes that do the same.

There is no need to directly link the two, IMHO.

In fact, doing so is harmful. From that position then, potential new comers see something that is highly likely to not be genuine.

>>I don't go to worship to hear political viewpoints.

Most people don't.

>>pastors that have lead our congregation have kept those cards close to their chests.
>>My dad never preached politics from the pulpit

they know they'll get their church sued if they did with current law discussed. What do they really think?

Unions, Editorial Boards, others can endorse candidates...not a big deal to most pastors...just maybe some of them might want to say who he/she would vote for in their forum...again...personal.