Time to stop the nonsense about revoking tax-ex status of churches

[Atman]

I've seen some crazy shit posted the last few days, but as far as politically suicidal ideas go, this one takes the cake!

First of all, let me say that I agree 100% that churches who are basically big-businesses should be treated like business. Unfortunately, in the Bush era that means pretty-much tax-free anyway. But I digress...

Do you recall the statistics on the number of people who consider themselves religious in the United States? How many churches there are? The second this idea is presented to the public, it will throw a big oil-soaked rag on the political fires, as any republican would be crazy not to use it in his/her campaign advertising: "We told you the liberals were godless heathens...now they want to tax GOD, too! Call Congress, tell them not to let the democrats close your place of worship!"

Once in power, and firmly there, and with principled, responsible leadership, a dialogue should be begun on this very important issue. But guys, we're still standing in the flower bed with our noses pressed to the window, wishing we could come in for a scrap. Like another earlier proposal that the Democrats declare that we will drastically cut the military -- at a time when America thinks we're under siege by terrorists -- it is just pure lunacy. And the republicans would LOVE to have us take up either issue. They'd probably sponsor the legislation!

[BlueEyedSon]

1. Bullsh*t, Atman, they are breaking the law. When they go over the line

they need to be whacked on the nose with a rolled up newspaper.... JUST LIKE ANYONE ELSE.

Our Democracy will be better for it.

[Atman]

6. Principles and $2.50 will get you a Starbuck's coffee

But any democrat would be run out of Dodge on a rail should they present such legislation. You cannot leave the politics out of a political equation. Republicans are not going to just sit back and say, "You know, they have a good point." If you're going to play the game, you have to get onto the field first. This is an imporant issue, but it MUST take a back seat to the more pressing issues facing us -- the economy, the media, the war, and the rampant corruption among congress. If the Church issue comes up as an aside or cause or somehow related to the other issues, great, let's discuss it. But look at the numbers. Such a stance as revoking Church tax status, while appealing to us pissed of Patriots, simply will not play in middle America. You know those buildings on every corner of your town, with the tall pointy thing on the roof? Those are churches, and each one is full of voters. And you wan't to tell them that part of the coinage they're dropping into the basket every weekend is going to go to the Federal Government?

Yeah, go on...you tell 'em. Go on!

[BlueEyedSon]

12. So you're OK with the coming Theocracy?

Enjoy!

[Atman]

23. That is ridiculous to the point of absurdity

You've completely missed the point. I absolutely agree that this display by Frist and the Sunday Thingy is out-of-control church badness. I agree. So, let us take up legal proceedings against Bill Frist, and his constituency of one. If he caused the church to break the law by attending, SHAME ON HIM! Bring down another Bush toady.

But if you take on The Church, you are taking on the churches. Your grandma's church, your neighbor's church, your grocer's church, ad infinitum. To what end? No matter how lofty your goals, the RW Corporate Media will be giving free airtime to the republicans' outrage about the democrat's trying to tax religion out of existence in the United States.

I promise you, that is what will happen. I'd bet everything one. Everything. We have their own track record to go on! Unfortunately, in order to win this bet, we'd have to all lose anyway, and then we'd all be fooked.

This is a tough political pill to swallow, but it is politics at it purest. In order to win a larger battle, this particular battle must wait. The democrats don't have the troops in key positions, nor do we sufficient footholds to hold on to power if we took such an ambitious battle plan on as a priority. No instant gratification, America...it took the republicans time to fuck it all up, and it's gonna take time for democrats to clean up the mess.

Once again.

[BlueEyedSon]

26. How much political activity by a church (or group of churches) is enough

for you? Where is the line? Do you think we should threaten legal action (i.e. IRS) if and when they cross it? Do you think they will stop short of that line if no one challenges them?

I'm just askin'....

[Atman]

28. I think legal action should be threatened, and taken.

It can easily be tied back to Bill Frist, in this particular case in the news, and therefore has the added benefit of helping take down an A-#1 Asshole and Plunderer for BushCo. Whichever particular church could see action against it, sending a very clear message to others. At the same time it could be used for a very public, needed lesson in why the separation is so important. But as I've said, that takes principled leadership, and I don't think there is anyone on the dem side right now who truly commands the respect (and airtime) to pull it off. Yet.

That's all I'm sayin'.

[annabanana]

2. ..not ALL the Churches,...tsk

Just the ones who have done a 'blowaway' of that fig leaf of not meddling.

[fasttense]

3. Who cares?

It's not like the Democrats have anything to lose. These politicians on the pulpit need to pay their share of taxes.

[Democrats_win]

4. Political churches should Volunteer to pay taxes because its the right

thing to do. If the church stays out of politics, then they shouldn't feel guilty about not paying taxes.

However, the immorality of political churches not paying taxes while taking part in politics is wrong. Their beacon shines and says, "we are

FREELOADERS

HYPOCRITES

and we don't even follow our own Bible which says that we should pay taxes to help pay for our nation's needs."

[flamin lib]

5. Atman is right. Although I personally think that all churches

should be taxed it is one big looser of an issue.

The Right has successfully painted us as anti religious and anti Christian. Even going after the blatant offenders of promoting a party would only give ammunition to the already influenced "Christian voter".

Better we bide our time, regain power however long it takes, and work for incremental change. It would only take one clearly offensive Church getting busted to put a chill on the others using the congregation as a political tool. We just can't do it now.

[Atman]

9. BINGO!

"Better we bide our time, regain power however long it takes, and work for incremental change."

That is exactly how the republicans took control. Patience. When they finally seized power, though, they knew they only had a tenuous grasp, so they went crazy with power-lust. It has blown up in their faces, because the changes are too large, too sweeping, too Draconian to ignore. We cannot afford to make the same mistakes.

And we shouldn't have to. We have a genuinely better platform to offer real Americans, not just the top 1%.

[RevCheesehead]

7. THANK YOU!

People here don't realize that most churches have fewer than 200 members (the two I serve are 112 and 24 members).

Why not reframe the debate, calling for the IRS to "Tax CORPORATE Churches" - say, those with an annual budget exceeding $2 million... Or, at the very least, demand an independent audit of these groups?

My conference and denomination require an annual audit. I would have no objection if a copy of the audit were sent to the IRS.

Remember that most of these Mega-Churches are INDEPENDENT, or Non-Denominational.

TAX THE MEGA-CHURCHES, not the little country churches!

[LdyGuique]

20. I agree with your take on the issue, RevCheesehead

You have both insider knowledge about policies and procedures but know that there are currently laws on the books with the IRS -- this could actually proceed through IRS taxing laws currently on the books.

Of course, we've also already read that the IRS is gravely underfunded and lacks human resources to conduct such audits. So, it becomes just another pipedream wish of fairness.

[Zhade]

25. No, it's about taxing POLITICAL churches.

Are most churches violating the separation of church and state? No. So would they be taxed? No!

What is so hard about taxing those churches that violate the separation of church and state? I'm pretty sure the vocal fundie minority who disbelieves in the concept does not speak for all Christians - and most Christians want the church out of politics and politics out of their church.

[RevCheesehead]

33. The problem we run into here are with non-white churches

Take, for example, the African-American churches. During the 1960's, many of these churches were actively involved in the Civil Rights movement. On the one hand, it was a political activity, but for the churches and its leaders (MLK, Jr., etc...) it was also a justice issue (a spiritual issue), one which could not be separated neatly into sacred vs. secular.

How do you decide what is political vs. what is spiritual? How do you make allowances for various cultures and traditions, especially for those churches not in "the mainstream" protestant tradition? Who will make these decisions?

[kevsand]

34. You decide it the same way you do for other non-profits.

I've worked in the non-profit sector for over twenty years. We can't endorse and we can't lobby. But we can and do facilitate citizen lobbyists in visiting their legislators, we can and do organize informational rallies and pickets, and we can and do keep anyone who's registered as a member up to date on the issues. Labor unions follow similar guidelines in regards to member-to-member communications.

Basically, the law allows churches to say anything they want to members of their congregation, but they can not in any way make partisan statements to the general public. This includes events to which the general public is invited, and that may mean many church services, unless I'm mistaken.

We've been interpreting and enforcing the law regarding tax-exempt non-profit organizations for decades. It's time churches obeyed the law.

[ltfranklin]

32. Perhaps...

...the government should be looking on these type of efforts as in-kind contributions to whatever party that the church is helping, and require that whatever monetary value that they set to these efforts, based on time, materials, labor, etc. be taxable. In other words, If a church spends money or labor on supporting some political end, the calculated value of the money/labor should be taxable, because it is NOT being spent on religious ends.

[peacetalksforall]

8. I think you're wrong...obtaining a tax-exempt license and then tossing

it out the window is breaking the law. Active partisanship is wrong and actively following a partisan agenda by the reverend and his or her membership is breaking the law. Most Americans believe in obeying the law.

Frist and others can scream all they want...this is something that even a journalist working for Fox could understand but could not defend.

If they try to change the law - it will be a huge, huge event.

[RevCheesehead]

10. For Clarity: is it revoke tax-exempt for ALL churches? or just some?

I have little patience for those who call for ALL churches to have tax-exempt status revoked. That's inflammatory, and really causes more damage to us (Dems) than any good that could be gleaned from it.

But, of course, if there are churches in violation, then the onus is on the IRS. They're the ones who need to be enforcing the code. Again, if one or two churches would be found guilty, it would indeed send a chilling message that would make others re-think their politics.

[AntiCoup2K4]

11. If a church is acting as a political organization, it should be taxed.

They did exactly that to Pat Robertson. He had to legally seperate the "Christian Coalition" - obviously a right wing political organization - from his CBN/700 Club ministries.

It should be the same with any other church which is blatantly political. And the one that sponsored that fucking joke of a telecast yesterday should be the first one on the IRS list.

Jesus said "Give to Caesar what is Caesar's and to God what is God's", so if a clear seperation between the religious and the political was good enough for Him, it's good enough for me.

[ComerPerro]

19. LOL, i said the same thing below

Took me 40 minutes to post it though, I'm at work

[DoYouEverWonder]

27. This will hurt Democrats too

especially in the black community where there is little separation between church and state, at least on a local level.

For example, I use to run public community meetings (sometimes at local churches) in a black neighborhood and I would never think about starting without asking one of the community leaders to give the invocation.

[Name removed]

13. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[annabanana]

15. unless your place of worship

has a little bookstore that carries religious materials...

you should be taxed. Period.

[Name removed]

21. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[lenidog]

14. Atman, I salute you and your post

In a way you have taken a unpopular stand but from a pragmatic point of view it is the only thing to do. Right now we are on the outside and I agree with you if we take this up and run with it the firestorm would be incredible. The Democratic Party would be massacred from inside and out. I could see this not sitting well with some of the parties most ardent blocs of supporters say African Americans and Hispanics. I once hear James Carville say that there are are two things that the Dems and the Republicans should leave alone. It does them far more harm then good. For us it was gun control for the Republicans it was abortion. I think we could easily add this one for our side.

[More Than A Feeling]

16. I agree with you on this one, however...

Tax-exempt status should be revoked on a case-by-case basis when candidate endorsement or too much political involvement can be proven in accordance with the rules regarding tax exempt status. Wholesale elimination of the status would be both political suicide and bad policy.

on edit: if my thread is the one you are referring to in regard to the military, I said liberal grassroots, netroots, and think tanks. Not the Democratic Party itself, or its elected officials. I would ask that if you are going to refer to something as 'complete lunacy', you at least describe it accurately.

Here is the original thread, for the curious:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=104&topic_id=3538050&mesg_id=3538050

[necso]

17. Playing into the ongoing propaganda line that we

(Dems) are anti-religious is a recipe for (further) disaster. (And it will be easy to "sell" taxing organized religions as being anti-religious.)

The overwhelming majority of voters believe in God, although many are not formally associated with a church. And currently (on the federal level) we need the cooperation of a few Republicans to influence important events. -- This type of position (taxing organized religions) is hardly likely to inspire such cooperation.

[ComerPerro]

18. True, but that's why they are getting away with it

Really, I wouldn't say that churches should be taxed. But, I think Churches that operate as political organizations should be treated as such.

Also, the severe offenders like Pat Robertson, Paul Crouch and all the slime at TBN should be hit hard and investigated for tax fraud.

[Wizard777]

22. We cannot fail to defend the Constitution!

Simply because of what they say about us. We are defined by our actions. Not their criticisms of them. If we do they will say we betrayed the Constitution with our complacency and they will be right. It is better to defend and lose than to not defend at all.

I support the revocation of the tax exempt status of ANY Church that does not remain separate from our state. To not do that is true political suicide. It gives them an unfair advantage both politically and financially. We have agents of the RCC threatening our politicians with the Horror of Horrors if they do not ignore the will We The People to enact the will of the Church. They interject themselves into the elective processes of our state and will not even allow is to witness the elective process of their church. Do unto others. If they continue to interject themselves into our State to declare our policies. Then we must interject ourselves into their church and declare their policy to preserve the balance of power in our Democracy. It is a Government of the people, by the people, and for the people. We cannot allow the conservative to betray the Constitution and make it a Government of the Church, by the Church, for the Church, and let the people be sent to prison and damned to Hell if they don't do as the Church decrees. The only way we can truly keep bin Ladens jihad from turning into a true Holy War. Is for We The People to retain control of our Secular Government.

[Zhade]

24. It's not "nonsense" to enforce the separation of church and state.

Sorry, I think most will rightly laugh at your suggestion.

[Atman]

29. It is if it means dems are simply further shut out of the entire process

Which is exactly what will happen.

Still, I fear you're not reading me right. Re-read my original post. Perhaps I simply need to clarify my point...it is of the utmost importance to defend the separation of church and state, but it is political suicide to take on tax-revokation as a "democrat" issue. Doing so will only ensure that we are further removed from the legislative process, and therefore it will have a negative net effect on the very people we claim to be representing.

Go after Bill Frist, but keep it entirely separate from a broader issue of "tax status for the church."

Go after big corporate churches and cloaked political fund-raising/lobbying efforts, but keep it entirely separate from a broader issue of "tax status for the church."

If we as a party appear, in any way, to want to "tax God," the right wing will have a field day with it. They'll kick our asses with it, and drag us right down the center aisle to be put on display.

And then where are we?

[Zhade]

30. Atman, with all due respect, you're missing something.

Taxes that violate the law MUST be held accountable. I think we can agree on that.

Here's what you're not recognizing: even one instance of a church having its tax-exempt status revoked - even in a bipartisan manner - will be blamed on the Dems. Don't believe me? Go back and read what was said about Dems when the government forced Robertson and the Christian Coalition to separate.

Dems will get blamed no matter what. The law must be upheld, regardless of PR problems it may cause.

[Atman]

31. I'm sorry, I'm missing nothing. It is not "a PR problem"...

...not to be in office, or in any position to help anybody. I don't know how to make myself any clearer. This is akin to a nuclear option on ourselves. I applaud your principled stand. I just don't how to make you see that your principles will help you and only you if the entire party is shut out of the process as a result. But if you're willing to see the forest for the trees, and play this with the utmost finesse and skill, it can work out so that we eventually are able to go after such offenders.

We have to be in office to bring about this kind of change, Zhade.

[Zhade]

35. The PR problem I referred to has to do with Republican spinning.

No matter WHAT Dems do, the rightwing will spin it and attack with that spin.

So worrying about how to finesse the issue so that Dems will not be attacked is pointless, because Dems will ALWAYS be attacked. Republicans live for that.

Sorry if I was unclear.