Thousand pastors using "Pulpit Freedom Sunday" to cross the line between church and state

[TaraJo]

http://www.opposingviews.com/i/religion/...it-freedom

Can we start taxing them now?

[Faith No More]

Yes, we can and we ought to. Their point for doing this, however, is to directly challenge the IRS, and I fear they will back down.

[Tino]

Personally I hope they do it as I believe it will blow up in their faces. Americans are equally split politically, and have become accustomed to not hearing political views with which they disagree. If a church-goer has to sit through a sermon that is intrinsically political, I think the reaction will be very bad from more than half of parishoners.

Also, the articles suggests that the reason they are doing it is to force the IRS to take the issue to court. But the tax law (501C3, summarized below) that prohibits churches from campaigning is the same law that applies to the vast majority of non-profit organizations. That's going to be a tough sell - suddenly allowing all non-profits to become political. I believe the majority of them would oppose the change, as they know that becoming political, or even being perceived as being potentially political, would hurt donations.

"In exchange for the receipt of tax-exempt status, I.R.C. § 501©(3) absolutely prohibits churches and other tax-exempt organizations from campaigning for or against a candidate for public office. If a church participates or interferes, directly or indirectly, in any political campaign for or against any candidate for public office by publishing and distributing certain written material or making oral statements regarding the candidate, then a church can lose its tax-exempt status for violating the campaigning ban. I.R.C. § 1.501©(3)-1©(3)(iii). Quite simply courts have interpreted 501©(3) to ban any degree of participation or intervention in a campaign for public office. Ass’n of the Bar of N.Y. v. Comm'r of Internal Revenue, 858 F.2d 876, 879 (2d Cir. 1988)."

[Minimalist]

Please realize that constitutional rights are not an issue here. The First Amendment says:

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.

Churches are not required to incorporate or file for tax exempt status. IRS publications say that. But if they want these things, there is nothing illegal about them promising to give up their rights in exchange for the “benefits” of incorporation and tax exemption. When Christian Echoes had its tax exempt status removed by the IRS, the 10th District Court said:

In light of the fact that tax exemption is a privilege, a matter of grace rather than right, we [the 10th District Court] hold that the limitations contained in section 501©(3) withholding exemption from nonprofit corporations do not deprive Christian Echoes of its constitutionally guaranteed right of freedom of speech. (Christian Echoes National Ministry, Inc. v. United States, 470 F.2d 849 (10th Cir. 1972); cert. denied, 414 U.S. 864 (1973)).

The Supreme court declined to hear an appeal of the above case, letting the ruling stand as a legal precedent.

[Tino]

Please realize that constitutional rights are not an issue here. The First Amendment says:

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.

Churches are not required to incorporate or file for tax exempt status. IRS publications say that. But if they want these things, there is nothing illegal about them promising to give up their rights in exchange for the “benefits” of incorporation and tax exemption. When Christian Echoes had its tax exempt status removed by the IRS, the 10th District Court said:

In light of the fact that tax exemption is a privilege, a matter of grace rather than right, we [the 10th District Court] hold that the limitations contained in section 501©(3) withholding exemption from nonprofit corporations do not deprive Christian Echoes of its constitutionally guaranteed right of freedom of speech. (Christian Echoes National Ministry, Inc. v. United States, 470 F.2d 849 (10th Cir. 1972); cert. denied, 414 U.S. 864 (1973)).

The Supreme court declined to hear an appeal of the above case, letting the ruling stand as a legal precedent.

I'm not a lawyer but from what I've read of the Christain Echoes case, they were specifically not endorsing a political candidate, and were found instead to be pursuing religious goals, so I don't know if that's the right precedent case to look at in the OP's situations.

[kılıç_mehmet]

http://www.opposingviews.com/i/religion/...it-freedom

Can we start taxing them now?

If taxes is all that you want, that you shall receive.
You cannot do anyting with threatening a single person, or a group of people. These people ought to know by themselves that their pastor or priest should not be the wingman of a political party or platform. But you cannot teach them this by simply taxing them.

[Jaysyn]

With any luck, we'll see half of those churches fold after the IRS gets thru with them.

---

I'm not a lawyer but from what I've read of the Christain Echoes case, they were specifically not endorsing a political candidate, and were found instead to be pursuing religious goals, so I don't know if that's the right precedent case to look at in the OP's situations.

Yeah, but the Robert's court, as conservative as it is, still sees no issues with politically motivated non-profits getting taxed. These guys have probably screwed up big time.