As the country still debates the unhinged ravings of Barack Obama’s Minister Jeremiah Wright, as discussed shown here, another minister has used his pulpit to attack Obama as a “freak,” “trash,” and “emissary of the devil.” Rev. James David Manning runs a church in Harlem and appears to specialize in showing how racism is a redeeming part of faith, repeatedly criticizing Obama’s connections to white women. The video below raises serious question over the tax exempt status of this church — as well as the sanity of this hate-filled and overtly racist black minister.
Just as Wright’s church now faces serious tax questions, here,
Manning seems to invite an IRS investigation. His unhinged diatribe against Obama looks like it meets every definition of political activity by the IRS:
Under the Internal Revenue Code, all section 501(c)(3) organizations are absolutely prohibited from directly or indirectly participating in, or intervening in, any political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for elective public office. Contributions to political campaign funds or public statements of position (verbal or written) made on behalf of the organization in favor of or in opposition to any candidate for public office clearly violate the prohibition against political campaign activity. Violation of this prohibition may result in denial or revocation of tax-exempt status and the imposition of certain excise tax.
I would take a condemnation of a candidate as the “emissary of the devil” as “opposition to [a] candidate” under any reasonable interpretation.
For the video, click here
Why not give the same attention to Hagee, but especially Parsley, who called for a real Holocaust against Islam?
prescription day tramadol tramadol no prescription
Hey, thanks D.W.! I have heard David Kuo speak out against this as well.
Best Wishes,
Jill
Center for Faith-Bssed & Community Initiatives. The various branches of the Executive have these mandated offices in them, such as in DOL, DOI, etc. Their purpose is pro-active (and arguably political) in seeking out religious organizations that can “aid and assist” the mission of the respective Department. Departmental budgets are involved so the government under Bush has funnelled public monies to religious groups that only imperfectly comply with the window-dressing prohibition against using those monies for explicitly religious practices.
“Wall of separation? Hah! I’ve got your wall of separation…!”
D.W. What is CFBCI? Thanks for the sympathy for my friend. That really was an awful thing for him to go through.
Jill
Jill,
I agree with you: when churches become political clubs, they definitely should lose their tax exempt status. In fact since many such organizations receive public monies from the CFBCI’s scattered throughout the Departments, I would argue that their tax-exempt status should be at an end anyway.
The story you relate about the congregant and his Kerry sticker is very sad, and pretty emblematic of the ostracism such congregations impose on political dissent.
I think there should be no tax exempt status for any religious organization. This eliminates restriction of speech by these same organizations. The IRS is not a neutral in these dust-ups. During the 04 campaign many christian fundametalist churches not only preached that a vote for bush was a vote for god, they (co)overtly helped in bush’s organization. I have a fundamentalist friend who did not agree with his pastor or most of his fellow congregants about voting for bush. He was told he would go to hell and even had people screaming at him in the parking lot for having a kerry sticker on his car. As he does believe in a literal hell, this was quite a difficult time for him. Certainly the IRS could have pulled the exemption of his church and many others during that time as they could for the churches mentioned by JT.
Most believers feel stongly that their faith is a part of their politics. It would make sense to recognize that reality by withdrawing any priveledged position of religious organizations. I’d be interested in other’s opinions.
Thanks,
Jill
Somebody’s been drinking the baptismal water again! All kidding aside. Garry Wills wrote an interesting book on just the subject you have all been speaking to. It’s called: Under God: Religion and American Politics.
I used to like preachers when they called down the wrath of heaven on their enemies, but now they call down the IRS. Doesn’t seem the same does it?
kermudgeon:
You are just factually wrong since Jefferson never believed in a Christian God who has a personal relationship with the faithful. His contempt for religion is manifest as evidenced inter alia by his authorship of his own Bible which cut away most of the nonsense of the King James version. If the historical truth appears to you to be “Christian bashing” and hence a threat to your faith, that is more revealing of your faith than of the truth.
Kerm,
When Christians oppress others or try to impose their beliefs by the raw application of power, they well deserve any bashing that comes their way.
Its a matter of the historical record that Jefferson was a deist; but his religious beliefs have nothing to do with what he felt about the dangers of church/state entanglement. One can be an ardent believer and still believe in the principle of separation.
The left has been preaching for decades that Thomas Jefferson was a Deist. It doesn’t matter what you preach, his (Jefferson’s) writings, sentiments, and the recollections of friends of his that put their memories to pen all indicate he was a God fearing man who believed that Jesus Christ died for his sins. Your insistence that he did not believe that does not make you right; it makes you look like a Christian basher.
kermudgeon:
Believe me, I know the background and text of the letter to the Danbury Baptists. Jefferson was no friend of religion and completely believed in the separation of government and religion as did his contemporary, James Madison. Why else would Jefferson have written to von Humbolt: “History, I believe, furnishes no example of a priest-ridden people maintaining a free civil government. This marks the lowest grade of ignorance of which their civil as well as religious leaders will always avail themselves for their own purposes.” So spare me some half-cocked, right- wing reinterpretation of historical fact like he was “just using the language of the day.” Like most right-wing ideology, it only appeals to the unlettered.
uh mespo, Jefferson was just using language of the day to try to explain our 1st Amendment written “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.” See his letter below:
Mr. President
To messers Nehemiah Dodge, Ephraim Robbins, & Stephen S. Nelson a committee of the Danbury Baptist association in the state of Connecticut.
Gentlemen
The affectionate sentiments of esteem & approbation which you are so good as to express towards me, on behalf of the Danbury Baptist association, give me the highest satisfaction. my duties dictate a faithful & zealous pursuit of the interests of my constituents, and in proportion as they are persuaded of my fidelity to those duties, the discharge of them becomes more & more pleasing.
Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between man & his god, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legitimate powers of government reach actions only, and not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof, thus building a wall of separation between church and state. [Congress thus inhibited from acts respecting religion, and the Executive authorised only to execute their acts, I have refrained from presenting even occasional performances of devotion presented indeed legally where an Executive is the legal head of a national church, but subject here, as religious exercises only to the voluntary regulations and discipline of each respective sect.] Adhering to this expression of the supreme will of the nation in behalf of the rights of conscience, I shall see with sincere satisfaction the progress of those sentiments which tend to restore to man all his natural rights, convinced he has no natural right in opposition to his social duties.
I reciprocate your kind prayers for the protection and blessing of the common Father and creator of man, and tender you for yourselves and your religious association, assurances of my high respect & esteem.
(signed) Thomas Jefferson
Jan.1.1802.
I used to think religion was a good thing. Now I think it just attracts the crazies and the profiteers (and the occasional pervert), who are sometimes one in the same. Jefferson gets wiser every day with his wall of separation between a free people and, more and more, the crazies who inhabit the pulpits.
Rush already featured this yesterday. It went from 300,000 views to the over 800,000 views it is at now.