Ministers to Defy I.R.S. by Endorsing Candidates

[TK Burk]

The New York Times reported: "Defying a federal tax law they consider unjust, 33 ministers across the country will take to their pulpits this Sunday and publicly endorse a candidate for president."

For a minister or church to be under a 501c3, they have to agree to certain IRS guidelines. One of these is to obey the Federal Tax Law that bars religious organizations and other nonprofits that accept tax-deductible contributions from involvement in partisan political campaigns. So if a minister has agreed to these stipulations, can he then break that law by officially supporting a candidate from the pulpit? Do you think the ministers mentioned in the NY Times article is doing the right thing?

[Ferd]

got no problem with it. lets level the playing field.

liberals get away with it all the time and cons get nailed to the wall when they make the mistake of supporting conservitives.

[ManOfWord]

I found out about this a week or two ago. It infuriates me to no end!!! These guys, and I'm quite familiar with their group, do NOT speak for me, neither do I want them to swat the "bees nest", simply because THEY want to endorse from their pulpits. Ministers don't need to use their pulpits for a direct endorsement. There are many other ways to let it be known how you feel about a certain candidate.

I certainly don't want them messing up the church's tax exempt status for the rest of us!! These guys are arrogant, pompous (IMO) and really do believe that they are responsible for George Bush being elected last election. This is an elitist group who really think they have WAY more authority than they really do!

Want to know how I REALLY feel about this?

Needless to say, I will not be following their lead!

[Ferd]

Originally Posted by ManOfWord

I found out about this a week or two ago. It infuriates me to no end!!! These guys, and I'm quite familiar with their group, do NOT speak for me, neither do I want them to swat the "bees nest", simply because THEY want to endorse from their pulpits. Ministers don't need to use their pulpits for a direct endorsement. There are many other ways to let it be known how you feel about a certain candidate.

I certainly don't want them messing up the church's tax exempt status for the rest of us!! These guys are arrogant, pompous (IMO) and really do believe that they are responsible for George Bush being elected last election. This is an elitist group who really think they have WAY more authority than they really do!

Want to know how I REALLY feel about this?

Needless to say, I will not be following their lead!

its odd to me that you feel like this.

liberal preachers do this kind of thing nearly every sunday. the IRS generally leaves them alone.

whats wrong with challenging some aspect of the tax exempt law? shouldnt a congregation decide what they want to support?

[Pragmatist]

I personally don't want my pastor or anyone else telling me who to vote for.

[Ferd]

Originally Posted by Pragmatist

I personally don't want my pastor or anyone else telling me who to vote for.

But do you want the government in control of that decision?

I dont either. but I dont want that decision resting with the federal govenment. I want it resting with me and the people I go to church with.

[ManOfWord]

Originally Posted by Ferd

its odd to me that you feel like this.

liberal preachers do this kind of thing nearly every sunday. the IRS generally leaves them alone.

whats wrong with challenging some aspect of the tax exempt law? shouldnt a congregation decide what they want to support?

I do all the time and I don't thumb my nose at the IRS while doing it. The law is the law and I have no problem with it. I'm not stupid. I well know how to let my feelings be known about a candidate. It has never bothered me. Don't swat the bees nest unless you're certain you can outrun the bees. Arrogance thinks it is faster than the bees.

We will NEVER change our culture through politics or political endorsements. That is the fallacy of the religious right. And remember, I am the Executive Director of a Federal PAC.

[Pragmatist]

Originally Posted by Ferd

But do you want the government in control of that decision?

I dont either. but I dont want that decision resting with the federal govenment. I want it resting with me and the people I go to church with.

I guess I don't care enough to put much effort into changing the law. There are things I would call my congressmen about. This isn't one of them.

[Ferd]

Originally Posted by ManOfWord

I do all the time and I don't thumb my nose at the IRS while doing it. The law is the law and I have no problem with it. I'm not stupid. I well know how to let my feelings be known about a candidate. It has never bothered me. Don't swat the bees nest unless you're certain you can outrun the bees. Arrogance thinks it is faster than the bees.

We will NEVER change our culture through politics or political endorsements. That is the fallacy of the religious right. And remember, I am the Executive Director of a Federal PAC.

my point is that this particular regulation seems to be heavy handed.

im not trying to change American culture in any way. but i dont mind when someone makes a challenge.

how are you harmed by this? you dont violate this restriction.

[TK Burk]

Originally Posted by Ferd

got no problem with it. lets level the playing field.

liberals get away with it all the time and cons get nailed to the wall when they make the mistake of supporting conservitives.

I don't see this as just them publically approving or disapproving of a candidate; rather it is more of an issue about their honesty. Remember, by publically speaking in favor of one candidate over another, they are breaking a law that they agreed to uphold. Do you think them doing this is still "no problem"?