» GC Stats |
Members: 330,353
Threads: 115,697
Posts: 2,207,248
|
Welcome to our newest member, RickyTus |
|
 |

09-10-2008, 02:42 PM
|
GreekChat Member
|
|
Join Date: May 2003
Location: my office
Posts: 1,492
|
|
It would bother me if my pastor did that. I think it's somewhat of an abuse of power. But then again, I don't like when celebs do it either. Even Oprah, and I agree with her.
__________________
Chi Omega
|

09-10-2008, 02:55 PM
|
GreekChat Member
|
|
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Atlanta area
Posts: 5,382
|
|
Is there really a ban or is it a condition of tax exempt status?
Does that distinction make sense to anyone but me?
A church could always elect to be taxed just like any other entity and make as many endorsement as it chose, right?
Will someone with a really strong understanding of the tax exempt status rules and background weigh in?
|

09-10-2008, 03:00 PM
|
GreekChat Member
|
|
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: a little here and a little there
Posts: 4,837
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by UGAalum94
Is there really a ban or is it a condition of tax exempt status?
|
According to the article (and what I heard on KLOVE) its a 54 year old ban (done by the Supreme Court) on political endorsements by tax-exempt houses of worship. If a pastor voiced his "endorsement" of a candidate, his church/synagogue/etc would be in violation of their tax-exempt status and thus be investigated by the IRS.
Quote:
What is different is the Alliance Defense Fund's direct challenge to the rules that govern tax-exempt organizations. Rather than wait for the IRS to investigate an alleged violation, the organization intends to create dozens of violations and take the U.S. government to court on First Amendment grounds.
|
What I wonder is if there is a difference between saying it from the pulpit or saying it in private. Would a pastor still be in violation if it a private conversation between him and another person?
Last edited by epchick; 09-10-2008 at 03:02 PM.
|

09-10-2008, 03:06 PM
|
GreekChat Member
|
|
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Atlanta area
Posts: 5,382
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by epchick
According to the article (and what I heard on KLOVE) its a 54 year old ban (done by the Supreme Court) on political endorsements by tax-exempt houses of worship. If a pastor voiced his "endorsement" of a candidate, his church/synagogue/etc would be in violation of their tax-exempt status and thus be investigated by the IRS.
What I wonder is if there is a difference between saying it from the pulpit or saying it in private. Would a pastor still be in violation if it a private conversation between him and another person?
|
With the consequence only being they would lose tax exempt status and maybe pay a tax penalty?
I suspect that private individuals making private statements aren't limited but if the pastor spoke as a pastor of the church, the church would be in danger of losing the exemption.
|

09-10-2008, 03:30 PM
|
GreekChat Member
|
|
Join Date: May 2002
Location: A dark and very expensive forest
Posts: 12,737
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by UGAalum94
Is there really a ban or is it a condition of tax exempt status?
|
It's the latter.
__________________
AMONG MEN HARMONY
18▲98
Last edited by MysticCat; 09-11-2008 at 09:23 AM.
Reason: because I really do know the difference between "later" and "latter"
|

09-10-2008, 02:56 PM
|
GreekChat Member
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: New England
Posts: 9,328
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by OtterXO
It would bother me if my pastor did that. I think it's somewhat of an abuse of power. But then again, I don't like when celebs do it either. Even Oprah, and I agree with her.
|
I absolutely agree with every bit of this (except for the agreeing with Oprah part). Specifically for the topic at hand, I wouldn't want my Pastor/Religious Leader talking about politics from the pulpit.
|

09-10-2008, 03:04 PM
|
GreekChat Member
|
|
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Atlanta area
Posts: 5,382
|
|
Not making an actual endorsement also seems pretty easy anyway. Any pastor who wants to be political can address social issues in such a way as to make a implicit endorsement without probably breaching the tax exempt status rules, right?
What's up with this move really? Firing up the perception of hostility on the part of the government for religion?
It seems like kind of a dumb move right now with more potential backlash than real support.
|
 |
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
|
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 04:56 PM.