Christian Nationalists may Fight for Partisan, Political Churches
They don't have to refrain from speaking out on political issues, they just can't take sides in political campaigns and that's what they really want. Now the Alliance Defense Fund is trying to organize theocatic-minded ministers to make partisan, political sermons shortly before the next presidential election. The intent is to create test cases so a sympathetic judge can declare it unconstitutional that churches aren't allowed to use tax-exempt money to interfere in political campaigns.
Erik Stanley, senior legal counsel for the alliance, said about 80 ministers, including a Catholic priest, have said they might join the protest. He said he hopes to get 40 to 50 to participate, including some liberals.
The Rev. Steve Riggle of Grace Community Church in Houston said he told his flock before the Texas primary he supported former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee.
"The government should not be telling the church what it should or should not be saying," Riggle said. "As a pastor, a private citizen, I can speak for myself. The IRS cannot quench my voice."
Source: UPI (via Hullaballo)
Rev. Steve Riggle of Grace Community Church is not being accurate in his description of the situation. He is free to say whatever he likes and his church is free to endorse political candidates if they want — they just can't do it with tax-exempt money. Steve Riggle's real complaint, then, boils down to money: he wants to have his tax-exempt cake and eat it too. Secular organizations that are tax-exempt also can't endorse political candidates, but I don't see the Alliance Defense Fund or Steve Riggle complaining about that. I wonder why?
Every time courts have had to rule on cases involving tax-exempt religious organizations engaged in illegal political activity, the courts have ruled against the churches. The only times that churches have gotten a favorable ruling is when they haven't actually been engaged in impermissible activity. At no point has any court ruled that there is anything unconstitutional about requiring tax-exempt organizations to stay out of politics. The Supreme Court has ruled that tax-exempt status is a privilege created by Congress, not a constitutional right. It can, then, be taken away without involving the Constitution.
Comments
Frankly, I don’t know why they need to go this far. They can preach about issues, and have been doing so for some time, which allows them to ID any politician with a wink and a nod–but not a name.
If I say to my flock that we cannot support baby killing, I’ve pretty much unambiguously told my congregation to not vote for the candidate who supports women’s rights. Generally speaking, the democrat.
It’s pretty flagrant that they want the right to just come out and say “Vote Republican.” But I mean, as far as I’m concerned, they’re doing that now. Is anyone really fooled by the less than subtle code-words that are used currently?
These churches obviously have people who believe that God rewards them who trust in Him. If God is “prolife” then why can’t he make up the difference in the loss of monies in loss of tax exemption? And easily? After all he is reputed to be the maker of everything so money can’t be that big of a stretch.
Now that I think about it I’m a nonbeliever and I don’t get any tax breaks at all. If I become an atheist would that be enough religion to qualify? According to some it would be enough to qualify as a religion. But then building a church for something that doesn’t exist might not get the tax break and, more problematically, raise some difficult architectural problems.