Saturday, June 02, 2007

IRS Warns Church Against "Political Activity"

No, not Snuffy Pfleger's. The government likes his kind of "activism"...
Posted by David Codrea at 6/02/2007 09:25:00 AM

6 comments:

Brent said...

After reading the WND article "IRS to church: Shut up – Church to IRS: No way" it becomes quite clear that the IRS does not understand the 1st Amendment to the U.S. Constitution which states:

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

The federal government cannot give a tax exemption to religious organizations and then use that leverage to strong arm them in order to regulate their exercise of speech and religion. This is an obvious infringement to the 1st Amendment. The IRS should get out of peoples' business. If a church or religious group wants to talk about politics that is their right to do so.

It is events like this that highlight the current state of our "constitutional crisis." We must either abide by our constitution or change it. From the 1st amendment, to the 2nd, to the 4th and others, we constantly have those who would wish for convenience to either ignore or reinterpret our founding documents.

Hopefully our Supreme Court, the only authority who can right these wrongs, as Congress certainly never will, will step in in time and restore the rule of law.

When the Supreme law of the land, our U.S. Constitution, can be ignored or reinterpreted at will, and laws repugnant to it are allowed to stand and are enforced, then the rule of law does not exist. When those under trial for crimes are not allowed to appeal to the law, and especially our Supreme law of the land, for their defense (i.e. the Wayne Fincher case) then the rule of law does not exist.

No nation can stand for long without the respect for and rule of law.

6/02/2007 10:34 AM
Anonymous said...

The IRS position is not to curtail the speech, although it seems that way on first blush; the IRS' real threat is "stop espousing political positions, or we'll take away your tax exempt status, and make you file tax returns like everybody else". That was one of the conditions the church AGREED to when they acquired tax-exempt status, after all; all the IRS is trying to do is to get the church to live up to their end of the bargain...

--Cousin G.

6/02/2007 12:41 PM
Brent said...

Yes, but the end result is the regulation of both speech and religion.

As far as an agreement, the choices a church is left is, either we take your money or we regulate your speech. What if a church does not agree to either of those choices?

The end result is regulation of speech and religion and is therefor repugnant to the U.S. Constitution.

Just like the National Firearms Act of 1934 and the Gun Control Act of 1968 "agreements." In the 1934 agreement either I pay a $200 tax for certain firearms or I can't own those firearms.

Sorry, but anyway you look at it the IRS actions are unconstituional. They are giving preferred status to groups who allow speech and religion to be regulated.

What if the IRS gave individuals the same choice? They offer to give individuals a $5000 tax exemption if they refrain from putting political campaign signs on their front lawn or from engaging in public political speech. I would be willing to bet that thousands, if not millions of Americans would come to an "agreement" with the IRS for $5000. But would this be constitutional? Only in an Orwellian 1984 society.

6/02/2007 1:02 PM
Anonymous said...

Brent makes some very good points, but I think missed one of great importance.

IRS isn't just regulating speech and religion, but functioning as a propaganda arm of the totalitarians via their selective enforcement of "political activity prohibition" for 501 c 3's. Haven't heard a damn thing about them going after the Catholic church, ST. Sabina's, or the murder-mongering priest who exhorts his followers to kill politicians and tradesman that don't follow his political philosophy.

As well as a propaganda arm, their inaction equates to approval of and encouragement of murder and violation of tax law, if the message erodes the rights of citizens.

6/02/2007 6:52 PM
Brent said...

straightarrow, I agree with you that selective enforcement for political reasons is wrong, and it is worthwhile to point out the IRS's lack of enforcement for "politically correct" positions while they enforce others who don't hold thier "polically correct" views.

However, I disagree with the entire concept of a tax agency, or any government agency for that matter, being involved with the regulation of speech and religion. We do not need tax incentives for religious organizations in order to control their speech. This is repugnant to our Constitution.

As for death threats, a federal tax agency is not the proper entity to deal with death threats. State legislatures would be a more proper place.

6/03/2007 2:20 PM
Anonymous said...

You didn't need the "however". We agree.

6/03/2007 5:49 PM

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)