| Welcome to Perspectives. We hope you enjoy your visit. You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free. Join our community! If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features: |
| In debate over political speech, pastors say they fear the IRS ‘pulpit police’ | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Jul 16 2017, 05:53 PM (238 Views) | |
| Deleted User | Jul 16 2017, 05:53 PM Post #1 |
|
Deleted User
|
As Washington struggles to come up with a new health care insurance system, Jim Garlow believes he has a solution, but he worries about sharing it publicly — simply because he is a pastor. Garlow, lead pastor of Skyline Church in La Mesa, Calif., blames a provision in the federal tax code known as the Johnson Amendment for what he calls the “self-censorship” of pastors across the nation. It forbids 501(c)(3) nonprofits, a category that includes most of the nation’s churches and other charitable organizations, from getting directly involved in elections. (It is not a criminal statute; violators face only the loss of the organization’s tax-exempt status.) Many hail it as a protector of Thomas Jefferson’s famous “wall of separation” between church and state, but to Garlow and other outspoken pastors around the nation, it is an unconstitutional restriction on free speech. “Morally and theologically, I don’t believe the government has any role in dictating what a church or faith community says or does not say in the pulpit at all,” Garlow said. “It a matter of conscience, based on that particular pastor and that congregation.” The amendment only explicitly prohibits outright endorsements or opposition of candidates running for office, but Garlow, along with thousands of other pastors and advocacy groups, fears that speaking out on hot-button political issues, such as health care or immigration, could also violate the amendment, causing their organizations to lose their tax-exempt status. As a result, Garlow calls the IRS “the pulpit police.” The picture that suggests — of federal agents surreptitiously monitoring sermons — conflicts with reality. The amendment has been enforced only once in the six decades it has been on the books, against a church that took out a full-page newspaper ad against Bill Clinton. Yet Garlow still sees reason for concern. “Now where the ambiguity sets in is even the IRS has been a bit challenged by explaining what the Johnson Amendment is,” he said. “For example, if one candidate is pro-abortion and the other candidate is pro-life and you say, ‘Christians should vote pro-life,’ and you don’t even mention the names of the candidates, is that not in fact a de facto endorsement? I would contend it probably is.” https://www.yahoo.com/news/debate-political-speech-pastors-say-fear-irs-pulpit-police-090005721.html |
|
|
| The Inquisitor | Jul 17 2017, 01:21 AM Post #2 |
![]()
|
Are you worried that “the pulpit police.” will come and get you? Edited by The Inquisitor, Jul 17 2017, 01:23 AM.
|
| Warning....Leftist's Post Here....Take Precautions | |
![]() |
|
| Coast2coast | Jul 17 2017, 02:53 AM Post #3 |
|
As citizens they can speak out all they like, separate from their congregation, their places of worship and 'the cloth'. But as Americans in a focus group, social media group, voter or sitting around their kitchen table or local diner... have at it. But if want your business to be tax exempt than make it your business to keep you politics out of it and out of your 'pulpit' |
![]() |
|
| jake58 | Jul 17 2017, 01:12 PM Post #4 |
|
Do Sharpton and Jesse know about this? |
| That which can be asserted without evidence; can be dismissed without evidence- Christopher Hitchens | |
![]() |
|
| thoughtless | Jul 17 2017, 01:24 PM Post #5 |
|
Political contributions are not tax deductible, so why should you be able to give tax deductible contributions to a religious organization, that uses that money to support a political candidate? If the law were not in place, there would be a lot of new "churches" organized to launder money for politicians. Edited by thoughtless, Jul 17 2017, 01:25 PM.
|
| Without geometry, life is pointless. | |
![]() |
|
| Mr. Tik | Jul 17 2017, 01:26 PM Post #6 |
![]()
|
It's creepy how Trump has surrounded himself with so many shysty preachers. |
|
You may be a conservative republican..if you are pro life until you get your mistress knocked up | |
![]() |
|
| Opinionated | Jul 17 2017, 01:32 PM Post #7 |
|
And why wouldn't they? It would be perfectly legal and as we all know, if it's not illegal then at the very least Republicans will do it. |
![]() |
|
| Mr. Tik | Jul 17 2017, 01:52 PM Post #8 |
![]()
|
Like this corrupt POS for example |
|
You may be a conservative republican..if you are pro life until you get your mistress knocked up | |
![]() |
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
![]() ZetaBoards gives you all the tools to create a successful discussion community. Learn More · Register for Free |
|
| « Previous Topic · Op EDITORIALS: personal & political governance · Next Topic » |









3:36 PM Jul 11