The new forums will be named Coin Return (based on the most recent vote)! You can check on the status and timeline of the transition to the new forums here.
The Guiding Principles and New Rules document is now in effect.

Should churches that del. Preach Politics from the Pulpit lose their tax exemption?

2»

Posts

  • ThanatosThanatos Registered User regular
    edited November 2008
    Johannen wrote: »
    Sheep wrote: »
    Johannen wrote: »
    Christ has no political party affiliation, obviously. And I'm quite disgusted by all of the political churches since the American government is anything but Christian. However, LBJ's amendment was unnecessary in the first place. Churches are tax exempt in the United States. Do you realize what you are asking for?
    What?!
    I haven't seen anything very Christian in the US government for a while. Greedy warmonger for 8 years. Adulterer before that.
    Isn't the national government motto "one nation under God"?
    Actually, it's "In God We Trust."

    Thanatos on
  • Dunadan019Dunadan019 Registered User regular
    edited November 2008
    heres a question, if you were to write a law about churches losing their tax exempt status are churches not allowed to have an official position on that?

    Dunadan019 on
  • KageraKagera Imitating the worst people. Since 2004Registered User regular
    edited November 2008
    And the one nation under God was added in retaliation to the evil godless Communist menace in the 50s.

    Kagera on
    My neck, my back, my FUPA and my crack.
  • ThanatosThanatos Registered User regular
    edited November 2008
    Yar wrote: »
    It would be nice if the history of SoCaS was merely a matter or the State turning a logical blind eye to religion. But there is another piece - of not getting overly involved in the affairs of a church.

    If we are really going to propose that pulpit speech be closely regulated to maintain tax-free status, exactly how is this implemented? Speech codes for preachers? Government regulators in the pews taking notes? Does that really sound like it achieves SoCaS?

    The intent of 501c3 as far as I can tell is to prevent an organization that is entirely political from calling itself a charity to avoid taxes. An organization that is primarily a religion is not taxed, going back to well before 501c3.
    This is what I'm saying -- we shouldn't be regulating pulpit speech at all. They should be able to say whatever the hell they want to, and that's very easily done, by taking away their 501(c)(3) status.

    And even if they weren't a 501(c)(3), they would still be a non-profit, and therefore not be taxed.

    Thanatos on
  • ThanatosThanatos Registered User regular
    edited November 2008
    National motto, people, not the Pledge of Allegiance.

    Thanatos on
  • Andrew_JayAndrew_Jay Registered User regular
    edited November 2008
    Thanks Than for laying it out like that. I think that here any donation to a qualifying charity - whether it does political work or not - gets you a tax credit. Political parties are handled differently, I think, but also with a tax credit. So we've essentially gone the "make PACs into 501(c)(3) groups" . . . though that kind of political activity isn't so strong in Canada . . . though one can create a third-party campaign and register it with Elections Canada.

    EDIT - turns out that an organisation's political lobbying does have a bearing on whether its donations are tax exempt (for example, donations to the Council of Canadians are not tax exempt) . . . so maybe we are more similar to the U.S. than I thought.

    Andrew_Jay on
  • MuddBuddMuddBudd Registered User regular
    edited November 2008
    If the Mormon church loses their tax exemption over this, wouldn't it be basically punishing them for the amount of control (or loyalty, depending on your viewpoint, I suppose) they have over their parishioners? Cause they've got nothing on the level of brainwashing the Scientologists have.

    I mean, I personally think a line was crossed somewhere, but I can't really define that line, so I'm honestly not sure there's a case. How do you prove that the church forced these people to donate?

    MuddBudd on
    There's no plan, there's no race to be run
    The harder the rain, honey, the sweeter the sun.
  • JohannenJohannen Registered User regular
    edited November 2008
    Thanatos wrote: »
    Johannen wrote: »
    Sheep wrote: »
    Johannen wrote: »
    Christ has no political party affiliation, obviously. And I'm quite disgusted by all of the political churches since the American government is anything but Christian. However, LBJ's amendment was unnecessary in the first place. Churches are tax exempt in the United States. Do you realize what you are asking for?
    What?!
    I haven't seen anything very Christian in the US government for a while. Greedy warmonger for 8 years. Adulterer before that.
    Isn't the national government motto "one nation under God"?
    Actually, it's "In God We Trust."
    Why would you trust someone you can't see or hear, and who doesn't actually tell you to do anything?

    But more seriously, I thought pretty much every president there has been is religious.

    Johannen on
  • YarYar Registered User regular
    edited November 2008
    Thanatos wrote: »
    This is what I'm saying -- we shouldn't be regulating pulpit speech at all. They should be able to say whatever the hell they want to, and that's very easily done, by taking away their 501(c)(3) status.

    And even if they weren't a 501(c)(3), they would still be a non-profit, and therefore not be taxed.
    So then just their donations would no longer be tax-deductible?

    Yar on
  • SheepSheep Registered User, __BANNED USERS regular
    edited November 2008
    Smurph wrote: »
    I think the wording of the title could be improved. What exactly are churches supposed to do from a pulpit other than preach? It should be "Should churches that deliberately Preach Politics from the Pulpit lose their tax exemption?"


    That's what it was supposed to be. Limited space, etc. I was more specific in the OP.
    It is an entire other thing to ask your congregation to fund a political campaign about it.

    This is the point I'm getting at.
    or unless you as a church endorse a specific vote or candidate for political reasons.

    This is what happened with the Mormon Church and Prop 8 and the backlash against Obama.

    Sheep on
  • ThanatosThanatos Registered User regular
    edited November 2008
    Yar wrote: »
    Thanatos wrote: »
    This is what I'm saying -- we shouldn't be regulating pulpit speech at all. They should be able to say whatever the hell they want to, and that's very easily done, by taking away their 501(c)(3) status.

    And even if they weren't a 501(c)(3), they would still be a non-profit, and therefore not be taxed.
    So then just their donations would no longer be tax-deductible?
    There may be some other tax advantages that go along with that with which I'm not familiar; they may end up having to pay sales tax, or something like that, depending on what state they're in (I think 501(c)(3)s have a sales tax exemption in California). Non-profits aren't exactly my forté when it comes to finance. Even so, a slightly increased tax burden seems like it would be well worth complete freedom of speech, and eliminating the fundamental unfairness of churches getting to lobby people as 501(c)(3)s while groups like Planned Parenthood and PFLAG are stuck as normal non-profits. It's literally saying "religious speech is better than non-religious speech, even if it's speaking on the same issues." It's fucking ridiculous.

    Thanatos on
  • ThanatosThanatos Registered User regular
    edited November 2008
    Andrew_Jay wrote: »
    Thanks Than for laying it out like that. I think that here any donation to a qualifying charity - whether it does political work or not - gets you a tax credit. Political parties are handled differently, I think, but also with a tax credit. So we've essentially gone the "make PACs into 501(c)(3) groups" . . . though that kind of political activity isn't so strong in Canada . . . though one can create a third-party campaign and register it with Elections Canada.

    EDIT - turns out that an organisation's political lobbying does have a bearing on whether its donations are tax exempt (for example, donations to the Council of Canadians are not tax exempt) . . . so maybe we are more similar to the U.S. than I thought.
    Yeah, I have difficulty imagining that happening without creating a huge corruption problem.

    Though, Canada and most of Western Europe can get away with a lot looser laws on stuff like that than we can.

    Thanatos on
  • JebusUDJebusUD Adventure! Candy IslandRegistered User regular
    edited November 2008
    Thanatos wrote: »
    Johannen wrote: »
    Sheep wrote: »
    Johannen wrote: »
    Christ has no political party affiliation, obviously. And I'm quite disgusted by all of the political churches since the American government is anything but Christian. However, LBJ's amendment was unnecessary in the first place. Churches are tax exempt in the United States. Do you realize what you are asking for?
    What?!
    I haven't seen anything very Christian in the US government for a while. Greedy warmonger for 8 years. Adulterer before that.
    Isn't the national government motto "one nation under God"?
    Actually, it's "In God We Trust."
    wikipedia wrote:
    In God We Trust is the official national motto of the United States and the U.S. state of Florida. The motto first appeared on a United States coin in 1864, but In God We Trust did not become the official U.S. national motto until after the passage of an Act of Congress in 1956.

    It was an anti communist thing too. Plus it wasn't even on the money till the civil war.

    JebusUD on
    and I wonder about my neighbors even though I don't have them
    but they're listening to every word I say
  • SmurphSmurph Registered User regular
    edited November 2008
    Dunadan019 wrote: »
    heres a question, if you were to write a law about churches losing their tax exempt status are churches not allowed to have an official position on that?

    I think they can have a position on it until it was passed without any penalty as laws are not supposed to be retroactive. I guess they could still have unofficial positions though.

    Smurph on
  • Zombie NirvanaZombie Nirvana Registered User regular
    edited November 2008
    Thanatos wins.

    Zombie Nirvana on
  • ThanatosThanatos Registered User regular
    edited November 2008
    Dunadan019 wrote: »
    heres a question, if you were to write a law about churches losing their tax exempt status are churches not allowed to have an official position on that?
    As it stands now, they can have whatever official position on whatever law they want to.

    Thanatos on
  • YarYar Registered User regular
    edited November 2008
    If all we're talking about is removing the tax-deductibility of money someone puts in the coffer, then I'm all for it. Never should have been tax deductible to begin with.

    Yar on
  • MikeManMikeMan Registered User regular
    edited November 2008
    i am a goddamned moron

    MikeMan on
  • ThanatosThanatos Registered User regular
    edited November 2008
    MikeMan wrote: »
    I realize what you asked and am saying that I think you are looking at the issue from the wrong viewpoint. 501(c)(3) didn't grant the Churches anything. It took away freedom of expression. I'm aware of the decision by the D.C. circuit. They went the wrong way because they were scared. It would also have involved litigation until the end of time from, as mentioned by ElJeffe, political groups posing as churches. It is the concise and easy way to deal with the problem, but it seems fundamentally wrong to me. Basically we've chosen to put the burden on the church to watch their tongue rather than put the burden on the state to weigh the true intentions of a group of people.
    What you guys don't seem to realize is that you've already won the fight. It is only a matter of time until enough precedent is set to make these things easier to swat down.
    why are you even posting if we're all idiots?
    Different person, Mikeman.

    Thanatos on
  • MikeManMikeMan Registered User regular
    edited November 2008
    Thanatos wrote: »
    MikeMan wrote: »
    I realize what you asked and am saying that I think you are looking at the issue from the wrong viewpoint. 501(c)(3) didn't grant the Churches anything. It took away freedom of expression. I'm aware of the decision by the D.C. circuit. They went the wrong way because they were scared. It would also have involved litigation until the end of time from, as mentioned by ElJeffe, political groups posing as churches. It is the concise and easy way to deal with the problem, but it seems fundamentally wrong to me. Basically we've chosen to put the burden on the church to watch their tongue rather than put the burden on the state to weigh the true intentions of a group of people.
    What you guys don't seem to realize is that you've already won the fight. It is only a matter of time until enough precedent is set to make these things easier to swat down.
    why are you even posting if we're all idiots?
    Different person, Mikeman.
    man i feel dumb

    MikeMan on
  • DarkCrawlerDarkCrawler Registered User regular
    edited November 2008
    Thanatos wrote: »
    Johannen wrote: »
    Sheep wrote: »
    Johannen wrote: »
    Christ has no political party affiliation, obviously. And I'm quite disgusted by all of the political churches since the American government is anything but Christian. However, LBJ's amendment was unnecessary in the first place. Churches are tax exempt in the United States. Do you realize what you are asking for?
    What?!
    I haven't seen anything very Christian in the US government for a while. Greedy warmonger for 8 years. Adulterer before that.
    Isn't the national government motto "one nation under God"?
    Actually, it's "In God We Trust."

    I thought it was "Out of many, one"

    Which is a much better one in my opinion since the huge immigration to America is kind of the reason why it's such a powerful country. :(

    DarkCrawler on
  • TylerM23TylerM23 Registered User regular
    edited November 2008
    Just thought I should offer up a link to a site that explains how Churches are tax exempt and what the deal with 501c3 is:

    http://hushmoney.org/501c3-facts.htm

    Churches are tax exempt without 501c3, and donations to them are tax deductible whether they are 501c3 or not. Freedom of speech still applies to the Church.

    TylerM23 on
  • ThanatosThanatos Registered User regular
    edited November 2008
    TylerM23 wrote: »
    Just thought I should offer up a link to a site that explains how Churches are tax exempt and what the deal with 501c3 is:

    http://hushmoney.org/501c3-facts.htm

    Churches are tax exempt without 501c3, and donations to them are tax deductible whether they are 501c3 or not. Freedom of speech still applies to the Church.
    That site is roughly as reliable as the editorial section of The Wall Street Journal.

    Do you maybe have a link to something on the IRS' site, or something like that, because the section on 501(c)(3)s would seem to indicate that a church has to qualify for tax exemption in order to take advantage of it, which would mean that they would still be forbidden from endorsing candidates.

    Thanatos on
  • emnmnmeemnmnme Registered User regular
    edited November 2008
    I saw a news story yesterday about how some Catholic churches were encouraging their followers to not vote for Obama before the election on the grounds that he was the pro-choice candidate. They said firmly that abortion is murder. 54% of Catholics voted for Obama, going by CNN's stats.

    Yes, abortion is murder. So are capital punishment, participating in wars, euthanasia or mercy killing, and martyrdom. It's not like all murder is unacceptable to Christian churches.

    emnmnme on
  • Premier kakosPremier kakos Registered User, ClubPA regular
    edited November 2008
    Is the LDS clearly in violation of current tax codes? Absolutely.

    Should Churches have automatic exemption from taxes? Hell no.

    Premier kakos on
  • CantidoCantido Registered User regular
    edited November 2008
    JebusUD wrote: »
    Thanatos wrote: »
    Johannen wrote: »
    Sheep wrote: »
    Johannen wrote: »
    Christ has no political party affiliation, obviously. And I'm quite disgusted by all of the political churches since the American government is anything but Christian. However, LBJ's amendment was unnecessary in the first place. Churches are tax exempt in the United States. Do you realize what you are asking for?
    What?!
    I haven't seen anything very Christian in the US government for a while. Greedy warmonger for 8 years. Adulterer before that.
    Isn't the national government motto "one nation under God"?
    Actually, it's "In God We Trust."
    wikipedia wrote:
    In God We Trust is the official national motto of the United States and the U.S. state of Florida. The motto first appeared on a United States coin in 1864, but In God We Trust did not become the official U.S. national motto until after the passage of an Act of Congress in 1956.

    It was an anti communist thing too. Plus it wasn't even on the money till the civil war.

    "under God" was added to differentiate the United States from the filthy godless commie demons.

    Cantido on
    3DS Friendcode 5413-1311-3767
  • TylerM23TylerM23 Registered User regular
    edited November 2008
    Thanatos wrote: »
    TylerM23 wrote: »
    Just thought I should offer up a link to a site that explains how Churches are tax exempt and what the deal with 501c3 is:

    http://hushmoney.org/501c3-facts.htm

    Churches are tax exempt without 501c3, and donations to them are tax deductible whether they are 501c3 or not. Freedom of speech still applies to the Church.
    That site is roughly as reliable as the editorial section of The Wall Street Journal.

    Do you maybe have a link to something on the IRS' site, or something like that, because the section on 501(c)(3)s would seem to indicate that a church has to qualify for tax exemption in order to take advantage of it, which would mean that they would still be forbidden from endorsing candidates.

    http://www.irs.gov/irm/part7/ch10s01.html#d0e85711 - the same IRS code as cited on that website. Yes, I know the site has bias, but it does actually cite the law.

    TylerM23 on
  • ThanatosThanatos Registered User regular
    edited November 2008
    TylerM23 wrote: »
    Thanatos wrote: »
    TylerM23 wrote: »
    Just thought I should offer up a link to a site that explains how Churches are tax exempt and what the deal with 501c3 is:

    http://hushmoney.org/501c3-facts.htm

    Churches are tax exempt without 501c3, and donations to them are tax deductible whether they are 501c3 or not. Freedom of speech still applies to the Church.
    That site is roughly as reliable as the editorial section of The Wall Street Journal.

    Do you maybe have a link to something on the IRS' site, or something like that, because the section on 501(c)(3)s would seem to indicate that a church has to qualify for tax exemption in order to take advantage of it, which would mean that they would still be forbidden from endorsing candidates.

    http://www.irs.gov/irm/part7/ch10s01.html#d0e85711 - the same IRS code as cited on that website. Yes, I know the site has bias, but it does actually cite the law.
    You should probably, I don't know, actually read what you're citing:
    IRC 508(a) and the regulations require organizations described in IRC 501(c)(3) that are organized after October 9, 1969, to apply for recognition of exemption on Form 1023, Application for Recognition of Exemption. Form 1023 is also the way an organization described in IRC 501(c)(3) gives the required notice that it is not a private foundation. Excepted from this requirement by IRC 508(c) are churches and organizations that are not private foundations and that normally have not more than $5,000 in gross receipts each taxable year.
    How many churches do you know of that bring in less than $5,000 a year? I mean, that doesn't even come close to covering living expenses for a full-time priest.

    Thanatos on
  • TylerM23TylerM23 Registered User regular
    edited November 2008
    By reading, does that include the footnotes:

    1Unless excepted under IRC 6033(a)(2). A mandatory exception is for " churches, their integrated auxiliaries, and conventions or associations of churches."

    The statement about $5,000 gross is confusing at face value, but ultimately it comes out as (churches) and ( organizations that are not private foundations and that normally have not more than $5,000 in gross receipts each taxable year.) are exempt.

    I'm just trying to point out that Churches are tax exempt automatically. That's all, no more and no less.

    TylerM23 on
Sign In or Register to comment.