Barry, I am sympathetic with the frustration felt by many pastors who try to fully articulate their religious worldviews during the election season while having to censor themselves due to the IRS gag rule. As I have stated before, I believe that the best way to restore unfettered freedom of speech for pastors is to call on Congress to repeal the IRS restrictions on pastors' speech.
Our law firm does not counsel our church clients to violate the 501(c)(3) rules; we do not have our first contact with them until after they have already been threatened by an IRS letter or a letter from a liberal "watchdog" organization. We represent churches and religious institutions in proceedings initiated by the IRS and, in doing so, raise statutory and constitutional arguments in their defense.
Without getting into privileged attorney-client discussions from the Pierce Creek case, I can say that we thought the court of appeals' decision provided a blueprint for churches to express their beliefs in a political context through the formation of a separate 501(c)(4) entity. And I can't say how the Supreme Court would rule in a future case if one gets there (although I doubt one will); it's always tough to predict, especially without seeing how the law is being applied to the facts of a particular case. The uncertainty of litigation is another reason why a legislative repeal of the IRS gag rule is needed.
In addition, the IRS rules for political speech are different for churches and other religious non-profit organizations than they are for some non-profit organizations, such as labor unions, whose leadership is free to endorse or oppose any political candidate in their official capacity. The rationale for the difference is that religious organizations are subsidized because the contributions they receive are tax-deductible by the donor. But by that explanation, labor unions are just as subsidized because union dues are deductible as an employee expense.
Barry, this is not a conservative or liberal issue - all religious leaders should be able to speak freely about the intersection of faith and government if they desire to do so. Religious leaders of all faiths have a right to speak up for the unborn, the weak, the defenseless, and the unwanted, and they should be able to encourage their congregations to support candidates for office who do the same.
In addition, religious Americans have the same right to voice their opinions and support government actions that are consistent with their beliefs that is enjoyed by other Americans. It is simply offensive to imply that religious believers should just keep their ideas to themselves and let everyone else deal with elections and public policy. The next President and Congress will make countless important decisions on a broad range of issues that will affect every American, and religious leaders should be able to weigh in, if they so choose, on how various candidates will deal with those issues.

Add to Newsvine
Add to StumbleUpon
You folks want the tax laws for unions and churches to be identical? Fine.
Let the audits and criminal prosecutions begin!
ds0490: "You folks want the tax laws for unions and churches to be identical? Fine."
No, it's not fine. The 1st Amendment does not preclude the "respecting" of a labor union by the government -- it specifically lists "an establishment of religion".
That means different rules for different organizations is perfectly Constitutional. What is unconstitutional is exempting ("respecting") churches ("establishments of religion") from their tax liability. Apparently some churches are selling-out their spiritual high ground for a temporal, tax-deductible body.
The Bible says when God "incorporated" as Jesus, He reached into the mouth of the fish (that's the body of the church to the symbolically-challenged) to pay his taxes. He did not expect a tax exemption from Caesar...
Mr. Sekulow, I worked for Very Special Arts for a number of years. Very Special Arts advocates for arts opportunities for people with disabilities. Part of its mission is to encourage arts education in the schools. There is research that proves that while many teaching methods are effective with some students, teaching through the arts is effective with all students, able-bodied and disabled.
We saw quite a few state politicians who wanted to take arts education out of schools in order to focus more time on the traditional subjects - the three Rs if you will.
It would have been easy for Very Special Arts to inform our constituency that candidate x wanted to take arts out of the schools, and that they should vote for candidate y to prevent this from happening. But we couldn't.
Why?
Because we were a 501(c)(3) organization. We were tax exempt. In fact, if we had had to pay taxes on the donations we received, we likely would have gone out of business.
You act as if churches are the only group that is prevented from speaking about political candidates. That is just not so. Every tax exempt group, from your local historical society, art gallery and community theater to your kids' scout troop, your state branch of Special Olympics and... your church is constrained from speaking about candidates in exchange for their tax exempt status.
I wish that churches and clergy would understand this simple fact. No one is picking on churches. The law applies to tax exempt groups generally.
In other words, I think you all need to get over yourselves!
I agree with Jay.
As Dr. Jay stated in a previous post, it is quite interesting that a pastor is allowed to express their views on political issues but is unable to endorse a particular candidate. In essence, what is the difference? This is just another scheme of the liberal left to gag the religious right's voices because they feel threatened by them, in violation of the First Amendment.
Post a Comment
By submitting these comments, I agree to the beliefnet.com terms of service, rules of conduct and privacy policy (the "agreements"). I understand and agree that any content I post is licensed to beliefnet.com and may be used by beliefnet.com in accordance with the agreements.