dangin

Let the churches say and do what they want, and then tax the holy hell out of them. Thank about the property tax that could be brought against some churches, in Beverly Hills, Manhattan, any wealthy area. The poor churches would go out of business, the big churches would be cash cows. Conservative churches, and liberal churches would balance each other out, and finally . . .

Most christians don't live life according to what the church tells them anyway, so who cares?

Oresta

fromtheright:
That is an issue. Non-profits, including churches, can most certainly advocate positions on issues. That was my point: spokespersons for non-profits can speak out on issues, but cannot advocate or campaign specifically for candidates. Of course the "fine reverends" address political issues from the pulpit. What could be more "political" than the human issues that churches are supposed to address?

theyeti

No one doubts that Jackson et al advocate for political issues, just like no one doubts that Pat Robertson does. But that's not the issue. The issue is this:

1) Have any of these people endorsed a candidate for office while acting as an officer of their church?

2) Have any of these people used tax-exempt church money for supporting a political campaign or party?

This is what the recently defeated bill pertained to, and that's all it pertained to. As you must be aware by now, the claims of "muzzling" preachers' political speach are nothing but lies. They can say what they want about any issue, but they can't endorse candidates from the pulpit or give church money to political campaigns. They're allowed to do this only if they give up their tax-exempt status. It's pretty simple.

Advocacy is allowed. But if Jackson or Sharpton endorsed one or more candidates from the pulpit, I agree that they should have their tax-exempt status revoked. (Though the IRS usually just gives a warning -- the law is underenforced, contrary to the lies being told by some conservatives.)

I have a problem with someone using tax-exempt money for doing so. If they pay taxes on that money, I've got no problem. Or if they tell people that they should favor certain issues over others, and don't tell them which candidate or party to vote for, then they can do that with tax-exempt monies.

No objection. I disagree with them, but I stand up for their right to express their views.

theyeti