Howard Dean on Religion and Politics

[johnnobts]

http://www.csmonitor.com/2006/0420/p03s03-usmb.htm


Howard Dean was quoted saying about the religious community:

"The religious community has to decide whether they want to be tax exempt or involved in politics."

Surely he means just Christian conservatives though right? Not social gospel liberal churches or Black Churches, where they invite congressmen and pundits to preach from the pulpit whenever they see fit. A little humorous that Pat Robertson's tax exemption status was repealed (I'm fine with that by the way, I don't bring politics to the pulpit), but when the IRS began to investigate a certain black church for going over the line, they were accused of being racists... dobule-standard. black churches can be as political as they want to be . I just wanted to vent. At the end of the day though, I agree with Dean's comments. I just want both sides of the aisle to agree to it.

 

[MadRat]

I hope you all write (and right) your religious leaders and tell them to stfu about politics, too.

Religion and politics don't mix any better than oil and water. Must we repeat the Jacobean era of France?

 

[Rainsford]

Well that was a nice little rant that had nothing to do with that Dean actually said. :roll:

But I agree, the standard should be applied equally, which is exactly the way I think Dean meant it. Sure, there are liberal churches doing the same thing, but the whole religion in politics thing is WAY more common on the right, which is probably why you hear Democrats say things like this, while the Republicans are silent.

 

[shrumpage]

Originally posted by: johnnobts
http://www.csmonitor.com/2006/0420/p03s03-usmb.htm


Howard Dean was quoted saying about the religious community:

"The religious community has to decide whether they want to be tax exempt or involved in politics."

Surely he means just Christian conservatives though right? Not social gospel liberal churches or Black Churches, where they invite congressmen and pundits to preach from the pulpit whenever they see fit. A little humorous that Pat Robertson's tax exemption status was repealed (I'm fine with that by the way, I don't bring politics to the pulpit), but when the IRS began to investigate a certain black church for going over the line, they were accused of being racists... dobule-standard. black churches can be as political as they want to be . I just wanted to vent. At the end of the day though, I agree with Dean's comments. I just want both sides of the aisle to agree to it.

I could not find any refernce to Pat Robertson's tax exemmption status being repealed, do you have any idea when that occured?

For the most part i think the rules are fine with churches and charities - they can weigh on issues but they can't support a particular canidate.

 

[CSMR]

Why isn't taxing for speaking about politcs a first amendment violation? Not that I mind: I think the world, and especially the USA, would be a much better place if no one were allowed to speak about politics.

 

[BarneyFife]

I think church's need to be taxed.

 

[Rainsford]

Originally posted by: CSMR
Why isn't taxing for speaking about politcs a first amendment violation? Not that I mind: I think the world, and especially the USA, would be a much better place if no one were allowed to speak about politics.

What?

You and I don't get taxed because we are speaking about politics, we get taxed because that is the default state of things. Certain organizations are exempt from the rules that apply to everyone else (whether or not they are involved in politics) as long as they adhere to the rules of tax exemption. The concept of taxing churches isn't to punish churches that get involved in politics, it's about lending a hand to non-profit, non-partisan religious organizations. They can even be involved in politics, so long as they don't take sides. Churches have always been involved in the issues of the day, and I would no more tax them for it than I'd tax the EFF or the ACLU for being advocates for civil liberties. What Dean and others object to is churches that basically turn into local campaign headquarters for the Republicans (and to a far lesser extent, the Democrats). And I think it's perfectly ok for the government to say that tax exemption only applies to non-partisan organizations. After all, while the 1st Amendment says you have a right to free speech, it doesn't say you have a right to not be taxed. If you want privledges above and beyond that of the average joe, don't expect to get them for free.

Also, in case you were wondering, you second thought there is perhaps the most disturbing and idiotic thing I've EVER read on P&N, and that's saying a lot.

 

[LumbergTech]

pat robertson is a scumbag, he deserves any taxes he gets...

 

[MadRat]

The Catholic Bishops in the U.S. declared it a sin to vote for John Kerry. You tell me how voting for Bush was no sin.

They had no business getting involved in the last elections.

 

[conjur]

Originally posted by: johnnobts
http://www.csmonitor.com/2006/0420/p03s03-usmb.htm


Howard Dean was quoted saying about the religious community:

"The religious community has to decide whether they want to be tax exempt or involved in politics."

Surely he means just Christian conservatives though right? Not social gospel liberal churches or Black Churches, where they invite congressmen and pundits to preach from the pulpit whenever they see fit. A little humorous that Pat Robertson's tax exemption status was repealed (I'm fine with that by the way, I don't bring politics to the pulpit), but when the IRS began to investigate a certain black church for going over the line, they were accused of being racists... dobule-standard. black churches can be as political as they want to be . I just wanted to vent. At the end of the day though, I agree with Dean's comments. I just want both sides of the aisle to agree to it.

Congrats on the troll!


Anyway, it's way past time for the 501(c)(3) designation to be scrutinized and revoked if churches get involved politically (and not just promoting one candidate over another).

From what I recall growing up and going to church, sermons were about the Bible and the priests taught about trying to live a good life and honor God through actions and words. I don't recall anything about "activist judges", Dominionism, "faith-based Federal spending", etc.


Oh, and this goes for "Christian" theme parks, too. Why the hell do they deserve to be tax-exempt? That's insane!

 

[shrumpage]

Originally posted by: conjur

Originally posted by: johnnobts
http://www.csmonitor.com/2006/0420/p03s03-usmb.htm


Howard Dean was quoted saying about the religious community:

"The religious community has to decide whether they want to be tax exempt or involved in politics."

Surely he means just Christian conservatives though right? Not social gospel liberal churches or Black Churches, where they invite congressmen and pundits to preach from the pulpit whenever they see fit. A little humorous that Pat Robertson's tax exemption status was repealed (I'm fine with that by the way, I don't bring politics to the pulpit), but when the IRS began to investigate a certain black church for going over the line, they were accused of being racists... dobule-standard. black churches can be as political as they want to be . I just wanted to vent. At the end of the day though, I agree with Dean's comments. I just want both sides of the aisle to agree to it.

Congrats on the troll!


Anyway, it's way past time for the 501(c)(3) designation to be scrutinized and revoked if churches get involved politically (and not just promoting one candidate over another).

From what I recall growing up and going to church, sermons were about the Bible and the priests taught about trying to live a good life and honor God through actions and words. I don't recall anything about "activist judges", Dominionism, "faith-based Federal spending", etc.


Oh, and this goes for "Christian" theme parks, too. Why the hell do they deserve to be tax-exempt? That's insane!

We have had this discussion before.

Currently:

Under the Internal Revenue Code, all section 501(c)(3) organizations are absolutely prohibited from directly or indirectly participating in, or intervening in, any political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for elective public office. Contributions to political campaign funds or public statements of position (verbal or written) made on behalf of the organization in favor of or in opposition to any candidate for public office clearly violate the prohibition against political campaign activity. Violation of this prohibition may result in denial or revocation of tax-exempt status and the imposition of certain excise tax.

So they charities are allowed to weigh in on political issues. They can't endorse a particular canidate. They are even allowed to lobby, but are limited in the amount of funds.

Changing the rules for for all 501 c 3, not just churches and that would affect any:

charitable, religious, educational, scientific, literary, testing for public safety, fostering national or international amateur sports competition, and the prevention of cruelty to children or animals

irs rules

btw i did some digging on the theme park, and it was brought before a judge who did rule in ithe parks favor. One of the deciding factors was museums charge for admittance, even if the are a 501 c 3.

 

[Genx87]

Originally posted by: johnnobts
http://www.csmonitor.com/2006/0420/p03s03-usmb.htm


Howard Dean was quoted saying about the religious community:

"The religious community has to decide whether they want to be tax exempt or involved in politics."

Surely he means just Christian conservatives though right? Not social gospel liberal churches or Black Churches, where they invite congressmen and pundits to preach from the pulpit whenever they see fit. A little humorous that Pat Robertson's tax exemption status was repealed (I'm fine with that by the way, I don't bring politics to the pulpit), but when the IRS began to investigate a certain black church for going over the line, they were accused of being racists... dobule-standard. black churches can be as political as they want to be . I just wanted to vent. At the end of the day though, I agree with Dean's comments. I just want both sides of the aisle to agree to it.

Expect to see Hillary in a black church 6 days before the election in 08 then not a visit again until 6 days before the election in 12.

 

[Thump553]

What makes you think Dean was limiting his comments to so-called Christian conservatives (who, in my opinion, neither display Christian behavior nor are they true conservatives)? I think Dean is 100% correct here. Either get (and utilize) a decent enforcement mechanism for this tax exemption or repeal it in it;s entirety.

If these institutions will pay their fair share of taxes to support this country they can talk about politics 24/7 as far as I care.

 

[BriGy86]

thats a great quote i think, the fact that religious representatives are lobbying for stuff should have not bearing at all on how a congressman votes

church and state should be seperate and no religious figure should have any influence on what laws are passed

 

[shrumpage]

Originally posted by: BriGy86
thats a great quote i think, the fact that religious representatives are lobbying for stuff should have not bearing at all on how a congressman votes

church and state should be seperate and no religious figure should have any influence on what laws are passed

So religous people should be excluded from the democratic process?

 

[Sheik Yerbouti]

Originally posted by: shrumpage

Originally posted by: BriGy86
thats a great quote i think, the fact that religious representatives are lobbying for stuff should have not bearing at all on how a congressman votes

church and state should be seperate and no religious figure should have any influence on what laws are passed

So religous people should be excluded from the democratic process?

Yea, that's what he's saying :disgust:
More like we don't want to get laws from any religous figurehead. I think one of the reasons we split from England was to get away from papal doctrine. Personally I don't want the pope telling me what's right and wrong, even if I was christian.

 

[BriGy86]

Originally posted by: shrumpage

Originally posted by: BriGy86
thats a great quote i think, the fact that religious representatives are lobbying for stuff should have not bearing at all on how a congressman votes

church and state should be seperate and no religious figure should have any influence on what laws are passed

So religous people should be excluded from the democratic process?

not really, its some what of a gray area, i was thinking more about lobbyists that want a law passed to ban abortion purely because its against some religion

in that case abortion would be against a certain religion, so if a law is passed, it affects other people that don't believe that same religion and have no problem with abortion

(im using that as an example only)

all in all i just don't think we should be making laws based solely on "because my god says its wrong"

 

[Future Shock]

Originally posted by: shrumpage

Originally posted by: BriGy86
thats a great quote i think, the fact that religious representatives are lobbying for stuff should have not bearing at all on how a congressman votes

church and state should be seperate and no religious figure should have any influence on what laws are passed

So religous people should be excluded from the democratic process?

Religious PEOPLE are quite allowed to participate in the democratic process as individuals.

Religious INSTITUTIONS are not allowed to participate and claim tax exempt status. Doing so allows a huge campagin finance loophole that is basically uncontrollable and corrupts the democratic process.

Why is this so hard for you?

Future Shock

 

[shrumpage]

Originally posted by: Future Shock

Originally posted by: shrumpage

Originally posted by: BriGy86
thats a great quote i think, the fact that religious representatives are lobbying for stuff should have not bearing at all on how a congressman votes

church and state should be seperate and no religious figure should have any influence on what laws are passed

So religous people should be excluded from the democratic process?

Religious PEOPLE are quite allowed to participate in the democratic process as individuals.

Religious INSTITUTIONS are not allowed to participate and claim tax exempt status. Doing so allows a huge campagin finance loophole that is basically uncontrollable and corrupts the democratic process.

Why is this so hard for you?

Future Shock

Actually they can, but they have certian limits. They can lobby on issues, and they can comment on issues - but they can not support specific canidates.

 

[BriGy86]

Originally posted by: shrumpage

Originally posted by: Future Shock

Originally posted by: shrumpage

Originally posted by: BriGy86
thats a great quote i think, the fact that religious representatives are lobbying for stuff should have not bearing at all on how a congressman votes

church and state should be seperate and no religious figure should have any influence on what laws are passed

So religous people should be excluded from the democratic process?

Religious PEOPLE are quite allowed to participate in the democratic process as individuals.

Religious INSTITUTIONS are not allowed to participate and claim tax exempt status. Doing so allows a huge campagin finance loophole that is basically uncontrollable and corrupts the democratic process.

Why is this so hard for you?

Future Shock

Actually they can, but they have certian limits. They can lobby on issues, and they can comment on issues - but they can not support specific canidates.

i don't see why they are even allowed to be lobbyists though

 

[shrumpage]

Originally posted by: BriGy86

Originally posted by: shrumpage

Originally posted by: Future Shock

Originally posted by: shrumpage

Originally posted by: BriGy86
thats a great quote i think, the fact that religious representatives are lobbying for stuff should have not bearing at all on how a congressman votes

church and state should be seperate and no religious figure should have any influence on what laws are passed

So religous people should be excluded from the democratic process?

Religious PEOPLE are quite allowed to participate in the democratic process as individuals.

Religious INSTITUTIONS are not allowed to participate and claim tax exempt status. Doing so allows a huge campagin finance loophole that is basically uncontrollable and corrupts the democratic process.

Why is this so hard for you?

Future Shock

Actually they can, but they have certian limits. They can lobby on issues, and they can comment on issues - but they can not support specific canidates.

i don't see why they are even allowed to be lobbyists though

A city is making changes to how it manges its public parks - it will affect the little league, which operates under 501(c)(3), would you bar the little league from lobbying city officals about those changes?

 

[piasabird]

First of all you are somewhat uneducated.

Freedom of speech applies to both the gay activist as well to all christians or anyone else for that matter. This has nothing to do with Tax! Are you going to make the AFLCIO pay a tax or the ACLU pay a tax every time they get involved in politics?

Dont you see how weak your logic is?

 

[Fern]

Originally posted by: conjur

Oh, and this goes for "Christian" theme parks, too. Why the hell do they deserve to be tax-exempt? That's insane!

Tax exempt organizations that have operations (such as coffee shops, selling ads in publications, and most likely theme parks) similar to regular for-profit businesses must report the income on Form 990-T (IIRC) and pay income taxes on it.

Why do you say they are tax exempt on theme park operations?

Fern

 

[conjur]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/4678897.stm

 

[BriGy86]

Originally posted by: shrumpage

A city is making changes to how it manges its public parks - it will affect the little league, which operates under 501(c)(3), would you bar the little league from lobbying city officals about those changes?

what does a religious organization have to do with the little league?