Dozens of conservative pastors are defying the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) ban on ministers using their pulpits to endorse political candidates. Organized by the Alliance Defense Fund, the ministers are effectively daring the IRS to take away their tax-exempt status. The effort is an obvious set-up for litigation, though they may put conservatives like Chief Justice Roberts and Justice Alito in a tough position. ADF advocates insist that the ADF’s “Pulpit Initiative” is to intended to show that the “proper role” of pastors is to try to direct the voting of the faithful.
ADF attorney Erik Stanley says that “For so long, there has been this cloud of intimidation over the church. . . . It is the job of the pastors of America to debate the proper role of church in society. It’s not for the government to mandate the role of church in society.”
This is clearly the view of other nations like Saudi Arabia, Iran, and Pakistan where clergy dominate politics and mete out their own sectarian forms of government. Now, the religious right wants to be exempted from taxes while using those tax exempt dollars to expand a church-based political movement.
The ADF was founded in 1994 by Christian conservatives including James C. Dobson of Focus on the Family and William R. Bright, founder of Campus Crusade for Christ. It is viewed as an alternative to the ACLU in pushing a conservative agenda.
It would be an interesting test for Roberts and Alito, who tend to be extremely pro-government except in religion cases and a couple of other areas. Alito particularly assembled a record of virtually blind support for governmental claims in criminal, environmental, and other areas. Now, he would be asked to extend the same extreme deference to the IRS.
For the full story, click here.
Jill — You say these things as if they are self evident truths. That this is objective reality. Try not to forget that these are people, with sincerely held beliefs, who think that the country is headed in the wrong direction, who vote and are sometimes outspoken. You can lump them all together, call it religion, and make generalizations based on a few bad actors, but the influence of religion in society and government is not going away any time soon. Casting them as the enemy in shrill terms doesn’t make your side, whatever it is, sound more reasonable. Honestly, I come here often, but I still can’t make you people out.
Gino,
Who is shouting down all the freaks? The screaming I’m hearing is coming from the christian taliban. That is a large, vocal group dedicated to taking away the rights of everyone they don’t like or don’t agree with. The christian right is not an abused minority. It’s an abusive minority.
Hugh and mespo,
Do you have any theories on above? I think, in part, it has to do with unaddressed issues of class in our society. We don’t have a social safety net. The power imbalance between rich and poor is more like a banana republic than what a wealthy democracy could be. People feel powerless and enraged, that’s what I hear in many, many conversations.
What does the christian taliban offer its followers? Not greater social equality, not a job with a living wage, not health care, not good schools, not any of the things people desperately need and aren’t able to readily secure in this society. But they do offer the promise of a taste of power. It will be their “values”, their church, their god who will rule over this nation. Thus the powerless are given power, and it is not fake power, it’s real. They really will be able to teach creationism, choose to end the mother’s life, go to war for jesus, force the gays from jobs etc. These are not inconsiderable powers.
The christian taliban works to further empower the rich, who will never subject themselves to the laws of their footsoldiers. It will never address the most pressing problems of our time, but it does offer that taste of power to the powerless. I think that’s why it works.
Mespo- “That these robots, high stepping from the pulpit into the political Main Street, are tolerated by a secular democracy is one of the great curiosities of this Country.”
Because in a tolerant democracy everyone would shout down these superstitious freaks? Kind of puts new definitions on tolerance and democracy, doesn’t it?
Mespo- “That these robots, high stepping from the pulpit into the political Main Street, are tolerated by a secular democracy is one of the great curiosities of this Country.”
Amen, brother! Well said. I have often puzzled over their acceptance myself.
And by the way, I would loathe any concentration of political or economic power in a single source. Nowhere are Acton’s words any more prophentic than in the amphitheaters of these monoliths to power and greed. That these robots, high stepping from the pulpit into the political Main Street, are tolerated by a secular democracy is one of the great curiosities of this Country.
mnoble:
“The business of a church is for the members of that church to decide.”
**************
That’s the logic endorsed by such religious men as Jim Jones, David Koresh, and the infamous UFO religion, the Heaven’s Gate death cult. Sorry but nobody get a pass from the law and, more importantly, from the public opinion of the citizens in a democracy.
Obama-sama,
You are right to say it’s a death cult and Palin is the real deal. As you point out, bush is a poseur. I completely agree with your analysis except for one thing, we cannot break faith with our Constitution, no exceptions. Doing so has gotten us to the point we’re at now.
I’m scared. You, burbilly and others are telling the truth about the christian right. But we have to hold firm to fundamental principles even when we’re terrified (that would be me, now!).
Keep speaking out and showing these people for who they are. Oppose them at every turn. Expose them in every way possible, but hold true to principle. I will say that one reason I believe Obama is not doing very well as a candidate is he appears to have no real principles. He cannot speak forcefully to address the problems of this nation because they are not known to him at a deep level. It is easy for Palin to outmanoeuver him as, even though her principles are evil. they are still her principles.
There is only one way to counteract principles that are evil. That is through the articulation and passion for priciples that are good.
I have inside knowledge of how Pentacostal churches operate. For those of you curious as to how, let’s just say Thanksgiving is awkward. By way of explanation, the Constitution is the most important legal document. Freedom of religion is essential. However, that being said, there are some religious traditions so at odds with reality that I think it’s a disqualifier from being allowed to hold office. Simply, would you want the President to be an adherent to a belief that requires human sacrifice? No. You get someone just as crazy as that in Palin. You should fear this woman worse than Herr Bush. He’s just a fascist who pretended to be a religious loon so he could start illegal wars for profit. She’s the real deal – a full on religious nut case. I will say this without reservation – it is a faith so twisted that being a member should AUTOMATICALLY preclude one from being able to run for office. Why such an extreme view? It’s a death cult, plain and simple. They desire the end of the world so they can meet Jesus in person. They actively teach that anything you can do to bring about said end of the world IS A GOOD THING. That, by any reasonable definition, is insanity. Both from a logical and theological standpoint. Trust me, I know all the arguments – thinking about it makes me taste cranberries and turkey stuffing. It also brings to mind an image of my uncle’s head about to explode.
Palin as Bush?
No, no . . . it’s much worse than that.
The evangelical movement in this country is in reality an extremely well funded and hard driving christian political party. A preacher telling the congregation how to vote is only the tip of the iceberg. The lie is that their candidates masquerade as republicans AND also as democrats.
I have deep concerns that our country is nearing a theocratic tipping point.
———————————————————————
Amen burbilly! The lust for power is on full display thanks to Palin.
The fact that it’s so open now is one of my few hopes of stopping it.
Historically there do seem to be “tipping points”. I hope people of conscience; either left, right or center see this for what it is and reject it utterly. This is a complete subversion of our Constitution and it WILL ruin this nation.
“What does an organization’s political activity have to do with whether or not it is not-for-profit in nature?” – Gino
Let’s face it, many of the world’s great religions, including christian, like to be governmental themselves, as in The government. This tax rule is suppposed to protect us against organised politically active, that’s an understatement, politically driving, influential and quite manipulative groups from taking an unfair financial advantage influencing elections over other political parties who operate under a different tax status. For all their faults, at least republicans and democrats declare themselves a political party and pay taxes accordingly. Perhaps Hugh can tell us more about that status. The evangelical movement in this country is in reality an extremely well funded and hard driving christian political party. A preacher telling the congregation how to vote is only the tip of the iceberg. The lie is that their candidates masquerade as republicans AND also as democrats.
I have deep concerns that our country is nearing a theocratic tipping point.
Gino
1, September 8, 2008 at 8:55 pm
The law doesn’t have anything to do with whether an organization is properly non-profit or not,
Tell that to the IRS.
The law doesn’t have anything to do with whether an organization is properly non-profit or not, but we need the law and it’s a good law because it protects the integrity of the election process by separating non-profits from PACs and other tax exempt political organizations. And I guess we need to smack around those uppity Jesus freaks a little bit, too. Seems like weak tea to me, but I guess it doesn’t take much if you’re inclined to support those kinds of laws in the first place. Go crazy.
seamus
1, September 8, 2008 at 4:38 pm
Disney Land isn’t tax exempt. Why the Hell are churches?
The common understanding tends to lean towards social and charitable work done by the churches, however the real reason is based on a founding principle of this country, that is the free expression of religion. Churches rely on donations from membership for their survival, and smaller churches have a harder time collecting those funds than larger churches, simply due to more members donating. Tax exemption for these religions is designed to ease the burden on these churches so as to permit all religious viewpoints the opportunity to flourish in our society, which is an idea as American as apple pie. Religious freedom is a good thing, and this law helps that happen.
Another idea as American as apple pie is the notion of seperation of church and state. And ever since certain churches have sought to blur that line and promote their own religious beliefs onto us all by using their control over their congregations to influence government officals and even get them elected.
I don’t want the local mega church in my town picking our county officals, or town council, or even our dog catcher. Let them teach the people anything about God they like, as long as they keep it the hell out of my govt. But when they want to start deciding who wins elections by preaching partisanship from their pulpits, then its time to remove their Tax exempt status and thats what the IRS should do here.
This kind of repugnant, defiant, in-you-face Christianity simply reinforces that they hate the things that America stands for. America is great BECAUSE we have a seperation of church and state not despite it. These are tax laws that benefit the churches and the rest of our citizens as well. But that’s not good ebnough for these parasites. The incredible arrogance of these churches attempts to subjogate America to their holy book and their god is Taliban-esque. Why are we spending billions every day in Iraq and Afghanistan when these terrorists live among us trying to destroy America?
For that matter, why does the church of scientology enjoy tax-exempt status?
Because the IRS declared it a religion in the early 90’s.
I wonder if you can buy the complete X-Files on DVD without paying sales tax too.
This whole thing has to do with how much political cover one’s house of worship enjoys. Last year a hippie-liberal church in SoCal got a shot over its bow due to statements made to the flock condeming our whacky mad-capped adventures in Iraq.
(no political cover)
That uber-douchebag Pat Robertson routinely endorses candidates from his electronic pulpit into mobilehomes around the nation
(lots of political cover)
Every black church in my town (chicago) invites the candidates percieved as friendly to “the community” to address their flocks every election cycle. This is Jessie Jackson country. There are several state reps in Illinois who are the ministers at mega-churches.
(lots of cover, and no politician black or white wants to comit political suicide) (p.s. Obama had to join one of these churches to be a political playa in Illinois. So don’t be a playa hater.)
Regent University, Bob Jones (sounds like a decent truck stop )University and their supporting churches and minions? Every Republican (Including McCain, who once,in a moment of clarity,called them out for being the hateful places they are)feels that he must go to these places and lick their balls because they absa-fucking-lutely endorse candidates.
(so connected that half the attorneys in the White House have their mail-order degrees from these places.)
Disney Land isn’t tax exempt. Why the Hell are churches?
Hugh
1, September 8, 2008 at 11:20 am
Why does this rule exist? The answer is obvious upon a moment’s reflection: Non-profit organizations receive tax exemption because their work is charitable, educational or religious. That tax benefit comes with conditions. One requirement is that tax-exempt organizations refrain from involvement in partisan politics. This is a reasonable rule, since tax-exempt groups are supposed to work for the public good, not spend their time and money trying to elect or defeat candidates.
This regulation is also designed to protect the integrity of the election process. Special types of organizations already exist to help political hopefuls win public office. Those groups, such as Political Action Committees, have a different tax status and are organized under a different set of rules than 501(c)(3) groups, rules designed to ensure that the nation’s campaign-finance laws are followed. Blurring the distinction between these two types of organizations would harm both religion and politics
Hugh said it right.
Well it seemed like you needed it cleared up.
If I am misreading you then by all means elaborate.
I am merely stating that the law is simple, designed to help non profit charitable organizations flourish, thus helping improve conditions for those in need and the impoverished in our society. Regardless of what people think of churches, many provide daily support for millions of impoverished people in our society, and thus are deserving of tax relief.
This is not a bad law. It is a good one. That needs to be enforced. These organizations need to remain independent with regards to partisan politics and not be turning a profit (hence their proceeds go to furthering their efforts and the church, not lining the pockets of the paid clergy) and they in turn deserve a tax break.
But not if they violate the law.
Oh, ok. I get it now. The law says that they have to be both non-profit *and* stay out of politics. That must be why they have to be non-profit *and* stay out of politics. Glad you cleared that one up.