Friday, September 12, 2008



Challenge set for pulpit endorsement ban

We read:
"A conservative advocacy group plans to test a U.S. legal prohibition on clergy endorsing candidates from the pulpit, The Washington Post reported Monday. The Alliance Defense Fund maintains that the ban is unconstitutional and plans to try to make its point by having several pastors violate the Internal Revenue Service rule Sept. 28, the newspaper said.

The organization, based in Arizona, intends to persuade the U.S. Supreme Court to overturn the prohibition, which was imposed in a 1954 amendment to the Internal Revenue Code that bans non-profit, tax-exempt entities from participating or intervening in "any political campaign on behalf of any candidate for public office."

ADF attorney Erik Stanley told the Post: "It is the job of the pastors of America to debate the proper role of church in society. It's not for the government to mandate the role of church in society."

Source

The IRS ruling looks like a straightforward breach of the 1st Amemndment to me. It is a wonder that it has not been challenged before.

13 comments:

Anonymous said...

I always wondered why a pastor could not endorse a candidate to the 100% volunteer congregation but yet a labor union whose membership is forced to join and pay, if they want to work, can endorse anyone they like.

Anonymous said...

The difference (which I personally disagree with) is that "religion" is a component of the issue, so the "freedom FROM religion" crowd mandates that this is covered under the first amendment. And because the "freedom OF religion" crowd's voice is declined to be acknowledged, there will ALWAYS be this unfortunate bias.

Anonymous said...

I think that there is a nuance that is not really being represented. I do not believe that it is "Illegal" for a minister to endorse a candidate from the pulpit. However, the IRS can revoke the congregations Non-profit status, meaning that its taxes will go way up. In that sense, a minister can say whatever he wants, but there are still consequences to it.

Anonymous said...

Anony number 3... no one said it was "illegal". We all know it is a matter of losing the tax exempt status, which is punishment for not obeying the laws that govern tax status.... gee I guess it is "illegal". At any rate, unions are tax exempt too, so why do they get to spew all their anti conservative crap using the forced "work tax" imposed on millions of people who have no say where the money the union stole from them goes.

Anonymous said...

Unions get away with this because they're almost always pro-Left. And based on that fact, this challenge should be successful assuming the SCOTUS chooses to hear it. But they'd better hurry, because if the Marxist wins in Nov. the SCOTUS is going to change, big time! It is the Court, not the White House, that is the major prize in this election.

John A said...

Odd that 1954 is also the period during which "under God" phrase was added to the Pledge of Allegiance.

Anonymous said...

I really can't find the logic for the tax prohibition. I mean, it keeps the Church out of politics to some degree, but only as "specific candidates" go. It doesn't stop the churches from being "pro-life, pro-guns, pro-bitterness," does it?

It's not like nobody knows where different churches stand on different issues. To prevent specific "candidate" endorsements is simply a restriction on speech.

Anonymous said...

But the party lines are blurring more and more. When you have "conservatives" that are pro-choice and "liberals" who are pro-gun, it breaks down all the historical trends. Many people need clarification about the candidates, and they often turn to their pastors who they trust to have a grounded Christian world view. The reality is that pastors and churches are becoming the ONLY "safe havens" for conservative talk, and now the liberals want to get rid of that.

Anonymous said...

Hey, this is GREAT! Ya'll can have all the free speech you like. Just as soon as you drop that 501c3 status and start paying taxes like the rest of us. Then, when I am no longer forced to subsidize you, blather away.

All tax exempt orgs need to stay outta politics or be taxed. Thanks for playing.

Anonymous said...

"All tax exempt orgs need to stay outta politics or be taxed."

That's a good point, but the key word is "all". Not just Christians, but all!

Anonymous said...

Nobody blinks when the "Revs." Al Sharpton and Jessie Jackson deliver their political agendas from their pulpits.

Ultra-left orgs like PETA, Sierra Club, and Planned Parenthood sponsor and endorse political candidates.

But let a Conservative Pastor speak his mind, and the IRS shuts him down!

I'm hoping my church participates in this!

Anonymous said...

Forgive me for not knowing the answer, but is MoveOn.org a tax-exempt organization, for example?

Anonymous said...

Something not mentioned here, but it was Lyndon Baines Johnson, when he was a Senator from Texas that introduced this modification to the Tax Code.

Mobius