Volconvo is a debate forum for the discussion of political, religious, and news-based topics.

italiangm · Jun 10, 2004, 06:10 pm

Summary: House Republican leaders are attempting to graft a provision onto the American Jobs Creation Act of 2004 allowing church leaders greater participation in politics without endangering their tax-exempt status.

Read the Washington Post article

Read the original text of SEC. 692. SAFE HARBOR FOR CHURCHES

Poetic_Justice · Jun 10, 2004, 06:40 pm

No, absolutely not!

Preachers and pastors have too great a position of confidence... Look at what happened in Ireland with the priests there in the 18th and 19th centuries upholding British rule from th epulpit...

italiangm · Jun 30, 2004, 04:06 pm

Just to followup... the Safe Harbor portion was eliminated.

Kyran · Jun 30, 2004, 04:42 pm

Should church clergy be restricted from participating in the electoral process merely because they are religious? No. I find it very hostile for the government to try to put these people in a position where they are basically told to pay for your rights.

Charities deserve tax-exempt status if they follow the law. NPOs pay people too and even though I'm not sure whether they are treated equally, I still say they should be. The law should not infringe on the individual's right to vote or assemble merely because they are in the business of religion, charity, or other humanitarian service. That is clearly an infringement on civil liberties.

As far as how church clergy should be taxed, it oughtta depend on individual income; to be in concordance with standard income tax. There shouldn't be an option in the first place for anyone to get out of paying taxes. But this is another topic, and I won't stray too far into it because I really don't understand how NPOs and charities get treated by the IRS.

italiangm · Jun 30, 2004, 05:10 pm

Kyran, the law says clergy can take sides on issues, initiatives, and amendments. They can conduct campaigns to register voters. They can even sponsor debates with all candidates present.

Clergy cannot, however, endorse an individual candidate or party from the pulpit if they wish to retain their tax-exempt status.

All tax-exempt NPOs must meet this requirement.

Gorgo · Jun 30, 2004, 05:27 pm

Yes, I think tax-exempt status for churches should end, and then they can promote whatever they want.

castille · Jun 30, 2004, 10:47 pm

Burn the churches. Problem solved.

PatrickHenry · Jul 1, 2004, 05:26 am

Quote:

Originally posted by castille,
Burn the churches. Problem solved.

You oughta be banned from this site, castille. You don't even try to debate. I'd truly like to lay some choice ad hominems on ya'. Maybe I'll start a thread of your collected crap....

Kyran · Jul 2, 2004, 05:31 pm

italian, I see. I disagree with prohibiting NPOs from endorsing individuals or parties, whether they have a pulpit or not. Tax-exempt status should only be a bonus for Americans who do humanitarian work.

The underlying question here is "Can the Federal Government give out a status that allows it to infringe upon civil rights?" No. It does not have the authority to do so.

italiangm · Jul 2, 2004, 06:18 pm

Quote:

Originally posted by Kyran
I disagree with prohibiting NPOs from endorsing individuals or parties, whether they have a pulpit or not.

OK. Let's pretend the prohibition no longer exists.

A candidate convinces the clergy of a church to support them. Each time the clergy speaks to their flock, a ringing endorsement in the name of (favored deity) occurs and an extra offering is encouraged to support the candidate. In turn, the clergy channels a portion of the offering to the candidate's campaign fund.

The church owes no tax on the campaign fund contribution. The person who made the offering takes a charitable gift tax deduction. The candidate's campaign fund pays no taxes on contributions.

Discuss.

Jun 30, 2004, 10:47 pm	#7 (permalink) (top)
castille Citizen #21521 Posts: 2,599	Burn the churches. Problem solved. Ideological loyalty is the act of giving your soul to a vague concept, to be manipulated by people smarter than you.

Jun 10, 2004, 06:10 pm	#1 (permalink) (top)
italiangm Chocoholic Posts: 915	Summary: House Republican leaders are attempting to graft a provision onto the American Jobs Creation Act of 2004 allowing church leaders greater participation in politics without endangering their tax-exempt status. Read the Washington Post article Read the original text of SEC. 692. SAFE HARBOR FOR CHURCHES

Jun 10, 2004, 06:40 pm	#2 (permalink) (top)
Poetic_Justice Igneous Magma Location: Edmonton, Canada Posts: 209	No, absolutely not! Preachers and pastors have too great a position of confidence... Look at what happened in Ireland with the priests there in the 18th and 19th centuries upholding British rule from th epulpit...

Jun 30, 2004, 04:06 pm	#3 (permalink) (top)
italiangm Chocoholic Posts: 915	Just to followup... the Safe Harbor portion was eliminated.

Jun 30, 2004, 04:42 pm	#4 (permalink) (top)
Kyran Igneous Magma Location: East Coast, USA Posts: 451	Should church clergy be restricted from participating in the electoral process merely because they are religious? No. I find it very hostile for the government to try to put these people in a position where they are basically told to pay for your rights. Charities deserve tax-exempt status if they follow the law. NPOs pay people too and even though I'm not sure whether they are treated equally, I still say they should be. The law should not infringe on the individual's right to vote or assemble merely because they are in the business of religion, charity, or other humanitarian service. That is clearly an infringement on civil liberties. As far as how church clergy should be taxed, it oughtta depend on individual income; to be in concordance with standard income tax. There shouldn't be an option in the first place for anyone to get out of paying taxes. But this is another topic, and I won't stray too far into it because I really don't understand how NPOs and charities get treated by the IRS.

Jun 30, 2004, 05:10 pm	#5 (permalink) (top)
italiangm Chocoholic Posts: 915	Kyran, the law says clergy can take sides on issues, initiatives, and amendments. They can conduct campaigns to register voters. They can even sponsor debates with all candidates present. Clergy cannot, however, endorse an individual candidate or party from the pulpit if they wish to retain their tax-exempt status. All tax-exempt NPOs must meet this requirement.

Jun 30, 2004, 05:27 pm	#6 (permalink) (top)
Gorgo BANNED-Warned multiple times about instigating. User then reported topics multiple times to mess with staff. Posts: 4,412	Yes, I think tax-exempt status for churches should end, and then they can promote whatever they want.

Jul 2, 2004, 05:31 pm	#9 (permalink) (top)
Kyran Igneous Magma Location: East Coast, USA Posts: 451	italian, I see. I disagree with prohibiting NPOs from endorsing individuals or parties, whether they have a pulpit or not. Tax-exempt status should only be a bonus for Americans who do humanitarian work. The underlying question here is "Can the Federal Government give out a status that allows it to infringe upon civil rights?" No. It does not have the authority to do so.