I dropped this note into the collection basket at my Mom's church today:

[begin_within]

"You do not have the right to make political statements during the Mass. A major tenet of the United States Constitution is separation of church and state, and you have crossed that clearly defined boundary of separation. Your tax-exempt status is at risk. The church does not have the right to tell parishoners how to vote, or even what criteria to use when voting. This is not the first time this has happened at (-name of church-) If this continues, you will be facing a lawsuit challenging your tax-exempt status. For now, we have decided to donate all the money we would have donated to (-name of church-) in the next 2 months to the No on 8 campaign, to reflect our support of same-sex marriage. After that, we will permanently donate all money that we would have donated to the Mission to Planned Parenthood instead. (-name of church-) will not get any of our money, ever again.

[az chela]

Wow Good for you,I want to be the first to say THANK YOU

[firedupdem]

1. Very good! Have Mass and shut the hell up! n/t

[SoCalDem]

73. One reason I liked the latin mass

Once they switched to English, it became too "common".. :)

[Prophet 451]

75. I liked it and I'm not even Catholic!

Actually, I'm a Luciferian Satanist but there was somethinbg about the beauty of the language that always appealed.

[Blaze Diem]

106. I grew up saying the Mass in Latin. Had no clue what it meant, but I agree there is

something about it..the chant.
I am 54 now and can still speak much of the Latin mass from memory.
Imbedded in my brain forever.
We went to church a lot.!!

[Tigress DEM]

162. My mom was bummed when they stopped doing the mass in Latin.

I heard it done that way in Mexico, what a trip. We were at a singing competition and sang the Ave Maria - a little known version by Handel.


I get a certain part crossed in my brain or feel like I'm leaving something out at times.

Is this right? When we sang it there were rounds and repetitions so it always looks wrong to me.

Phonetic

Ave Maria, gratzia plena.
Dominus te cum.
Benedicta tu en mulieribus.
En benedictus fructus ventris Cristus.

Sancta Maria, Mater die.
Hora pronobis pecatoribus.
Nunc et en mortis nostrae.

[barbiegeek]

94. Turn them into the IRS

[mduffy31]

143. You can do that

but nothing will happen

[TooRaLoo]

2. K & R !

A note in the collection basket is a great idea. I hope others will follow suit at churches where this happens.

[tblue37]

43. AND then contact the IRS to complain about politicking in church and asking

for an investigation. If enough people from a given church did this, the IRS might actually investigate and pull that tax-exempt status--especially if we win the presidency and larger majorities in both houses of Congress.

[baldguy]

3. .

:applause:

[madmax]

4. Great idea - thanks. n/t

[jkshaw]

5. Wow, Bob,

I hope you typed that note! Sounds excellent no matter, but would hate to see you ostracized if you were traced through your handwriting.

[still_one]

6. Thank you, but do you really think they care?

During the Viet Nam war there were churchs who oppossed the war, and stated so in their sermons

Did they actually say to vote for mccain?

[begin_within]

12. well, I'll tell you this

The one old priest that was making political comments last February right before the presidential primary here in California was back again. I dropped a similar note in the basket last February. Then a few weeks ago he was there again. He prefaced his comments with "Now, I may get in trouble for this, but..." and there were a few scattered giggles. Then he started talking about the recent Saddleback thing where that pastor interviewed McCain and Obama separately. So maybe that "I may get in trouble" comment was a result of someone telling all the priests to not make political remarks, maybe not. I don't know and I have no way of knowing.

[still_one]

14. Interesting, so he did get the message. I wonder if he is aware that

palin doesn't believe Catholics will be saved

[begin_within]

16. I wish the whole Catholic church knew that... it's a BIG church as you know.

[still_one]

19. I am Jewish, and I wish all the American Jews knew the background of palin also /nt

[clear eye]

136. Yeah, she's real comfy with Jews for Jesus n/t

[ShortnFiery]

63. Good luck with that ....

Back in 2000, some of the "dumb bunnies' in my Parish were handing out Bush-Cheney bumper stickers in the parking lot. One gal I talked with was INSISTING that George W. Bush was "a Catholic."

Oh brother, no wonder I have experienced several "crises of faith" ... I love Catholicism, but not what the existing patriarchal system has done to this beautiful faith.

[bertman]

119. "Existing patriarchal system". You are kidding, right? When was the Catholic Church anything but

a patriarchal system?

I really loved the Church when the matriarchal system was burning and slaughtering all those Cathars who wouldn't give allegiance to the Church even though they believed in Jaheezus.

And I especially loved the Church when the matriarchal system was slow-roasting the Knights Templar over coals because they were not TRUE Catholics.

But, what I really miss the most, was when that old, beautiful, matriarchal system was torturing the heretics who dared to believe there are other ways to worship god.

Ah yes, those were beautiful times for the faith.

[Richard Steele]

38. This touches upon their INCOME- you better fucking believe they care.nm

[FloridaJudy]

74. There's a huge difference

Between advocating for a cause and telling people how to vote. Churches can oppose war, but unless they specifically mention a candidate or an amendment, they're still obeying the law. My own church is against every thing John McCain stands for - my guess would be 100% of the congregation is pro-Obama - but we've been specifically told not to promote any candidate on church grounds. We can wear our buttons and T-shirts, but can't collect money, organize rallies or otherwise urge others to vote for him during church functions. We can't even ask people to vote on a certain amendment now on the Florida ballot denying the right to same-sex marriages, while our own church has been marrying same-sex couples for decades.

Likewise Catholic churches can take an Anti-Choice position, but unless they call out specific candidates or ballot amendments, that's their right.

Unfortunately, there's a whole lot more of them than there are of us.

[spag68]

148. Church

Opposed to a war is different then telling someone how to vote. War opposition is one of the few things that I agree with any church on.

[HelenWheels]

168. the thought of the loss of tax-exempt status would rattle their cage

As for being against the war that's different than supporting a candidate unless they go as far as to say "remember this when you vote, only one candidate is on your side"

[Critters2]

7. What, exactly, was said? Churches do have the right to make statements on

non-partisan social issues, yes, like abortion and gay marriage. What churches--or other 501c3s--do not have the right to do is to specifically tell people to vote for or against a party or candidate. But they can legally tell you to how to vote on referenda or what positions to take on social issues. My guess is that the priest knows the lines, and was careful not to cross them.

[still_one]

10. If the church specially asked its members to vote for a particular candidate

that would cross the line

I agree with your point

[Tigress DEM]

21. UM, abortion and gay marriage non-partisan? Not really, but their opinion pre-dates the debate.

Still, I do not believe that telling you HOW to vote on any referendum is in line with the 501c3 status.

They can talk to you about what the church believes and prevail upon you to search your heart, but saying that you have to vote this way or that way to be a good "whatever brand" is still politicizing the pulpit and isn't the same thing as giving a passioned sermon about the issue itself and leaving out the -- you better hit prop 8 hard part.

God Himself doesn't tell us how to vote. That's why he calls it free will. He lets us make up our own mind and live with the consequences.

Been plenty of those.

No party is perfect, so there always will be some part of the whole political turn out that is covered by "give to Caesar what is Cesar's and to God what is God's."

[Critters2]

29. " Still, I do not believe that telling you HOW to vote on any referendum is in line..

with the 501c3."


Well, you're wrong. The ONLY thing churches can't do, according to 501c3, is tell you which party or candidate to vote for. That's why churches put signs in their yards with pro-life or anti-gambling messages. As long as they don't mention a party or candidate, they can tell people how to vote. It isn't about your opinion, or even the Bible. It's about the law. And the law is very clear on this.

[Tigress DEM]

158. Sorry, the law is the law. They can bend it but not break it.

The church can state their position as clearly as they care to, but they can NOT tell people you must vote this way on such and such bill without breaking the law.

Do the do it and get away with it? Yes.

Had they better watch their p's and q's in the current environment where people are sick and tired of being bullied from pulpits of churches they don't even attend? Yes.

The "reich wing" of the 'publican party has created a huge backlash against any kind of faith that forces belief upon it's followers.






http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/501 (c)#Political_activity

All 501(c)(3) organizations are also permitted to educate individuals about issues, or fund research that supports their political position without overtly advocating for a position on a specific bill.



5013c status has nothing to do with people's faith - it's a tax break. If a church wants to cross the line, they can, but they can't be tax exempt too. It's a choice they make.

[Critters2]

185. Yeah. Wikipedia is a better source than the Constitutional lawyer

whose workshops I have to sit through to keep me up-to-date on this law every couple of years.

[Dorian Gray]

49. Exactly

A church shouldn't speak about voting or the political process at all. Of course, they may mention social issues, but my church takes the stance of "let's pray for those who" rather than railing against them in the homily.

I also agree that neither party fits the church's beliefs at all, so it's up to us to vote our conscience. Many Catholics are historically Democrats, and they will continue to be democrats because we believe more of the democratic platform fits the ideals of community.

[Tigress DEM]

159. Well here is where the bend but not break it comes into play.

People of faith struggle with making honest choices in the political process so I wouldn't say the church can't speak about it at all, but I think a lot of really excellent peace and justice churches address it from a standpoint of examining the dynamics of the conflicting positions and how people of faith can search their hearts for the best answers.

THIS is also where the separation of church and state helps people of faith. As long as the government isn't forcing people of faith to violate their own principals, electing a DEM or a REPub doesn't "automatically" mean their faith becomes your law.

People of faith are so against abortion, but at least in the contiguous states of America no woman is FORCED to have an abortion to keep her job.

However, in the US Commonwealth of the Mariana Islands, that wasn't true. Thanks to Abrahmoff and many, many political supporters in the *ush regime that think luring young girls into prostitution with big money going to their family and then making them have abortions if a pregnancy results from it is just fine.

SO think about the "opposite is truth" package of the administration and the choice even for people of deep faith is still clearly Obama, Obama, Obama.





http://www.truthout.org/article/congressman-dedicates-years-reforming-mariana-island-worker-abuse

<snip>

Undeterred by the distance and time, he (Mariana Island Representative to Congress George MILLER) would spend the next 16 years fighting for island labor reforms, spurred by horrific stories of desperately poor people lured into indentured servitude, inhumane working and living conditions, rapes and forced abortions.

Miller introduced bills in six sessions of Congress, wrote letter after letter and made phone call after phone call.

But until Democrats took majority control of Congress in 2006, Miller's crusade amounted to little more than a ripple in the ocean.

[nichomachus]

71. Not exactly

They can say that their members can't have abortions and that their members can't enter same-sex marriage. but they cannot use their tax exempt status to lobby for laws telling non-members how to live.

[Tigress DEM]

160. But that is still about a member chosing an option for themselves, not making it a US law.

I think the best part the church can play is to really stress personal congruence with beliefs without judging others and to bring the community together to work for peace and justice.

[Critters2]

189. Actually, they can. They can't endorse specific parties or candidates.

but they can advocate any law they want. Progressive churches do this, too.

[davidinalameda]

8. churches do have the right to take about propositions

like Prop 8; there are plenty that are on record as opposing it

[begin_within]

13. Yes and they are blatant about Prop. 8, and today they had a full-color flyer (Yes on 4)

[davidinalameda]

22. and it's the right of the church to be blatant about these issues

and if you don't like it, try and change the law

simple as that, and you have every right to let them know that you don't like their positions

of course, I can't understand why anyone who supports choice and gay rights would go to a Catholic Church in the first place

[begin_within]

24. I'm just taking my Mom because she's 89 and can't make it there on my own.

[Tigress DEM]

28. The things we do for our mothers.

Some churches are better than others at being places of spiritual community and steering toward peace and justice issues and away from the things everyone in the world could argue about.

[Patiod]

56. God bless you for that

I'm haven't been a Catholic since college, but sometimes take my elderly mother when my father is too sick to attend. I just tune it all out.

Should note, though, that the pastor may not even get your note, so you may want to send a copy to him. In my patents' church the old men count the collection, and throw away any notes, empty envelopes, etc.

[Tigress DEM]

26. Not all Catholics or Catholic parishes hate gays &Jesus forgave prostitutes when hypocrites would..

Not all Catholics or Catholic parishes hate gays & Jesus forgave prostitutes when hypocrites would.. have stoned them to death. Some parishes advocate teaching through love because they advanced during Vatican II and refuse to go back to being judgmental.

Who has done more harm - our modern day pharisees in the rethuglican house of "GAWD hates everyone but us" or average people with average issues they need to sort out with God?

But true, most Catholics who support choice - even if they themselves believe abortion is terrible and not just a "simple" choice - and believe that gays have a right to love who they love without being called horrible names or being targeted for harassment and murder.... most of the Catholics who believe these things are recovering Catholics in search of a place to belong.

[davidinalameda]

31. i guess I'm old school

Catholics by definition follow the pope's teaching on these subjects; the Pope doesn't support gay rights nor choice

donations to the individual parish find their way to support anti-choice and anti gay rights groups, legislation, etc

[jrockford]

44. and they find their way to Catholic Charities, food shelves,

etc.

I guess the majority of Catholics in my community are "not by definition" as according to dwickham. Good thing dwickham doesn't have a pulpit around here, he could ostracize the numerous Catholics here that have Obama signs in their yards.

[davidinalameda]

64. you're attacking me for telling the truth?

wow; sad

and let's not forget that Catholic Charities of Boston quit providing adoption rather than follow state law that outlawed discrimination against same-sex couples

http://www.boston.com/news/local/articles/2006/03/11/catholic_charities_stuns_state_ends_adoptions/

[jrockford]

109. No, what's sad is you condemn an entire group

that helps more people than you do or ever will, I'm quite sure. It's rare to agree with everything on any organisation.

I'm not in south Boston anymore, but I can say that the CC here has no issue with same-sex couples adopting. Further, I remember it was CC that put up tolerance billboards and flyers all over the place the day after 9-11 in response to the mad hysteria.

:eyes: :eyes:

[davidinalameda]

139. the CC THERE has no issue with same sex adoptions

but that's one part of the whole; the CC in SF quit doing it as well

the Catholic Church is a homophobic organization by definition; the Pope, who is the HEAD of the church, who according to church doctrine is infallible, calls gays evil

http://www.google.com/search?client=safari&rls=en&q=pope+gays+evil&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8

if you don't follow church teachings, how can you call yourself a Catholic? There's no real wiggle room; you either believe it all or you don't

that's the Catholic way

whatever the Pope says the people are expected to believe in order to be good Catholics

[Tigress DEM]

163. Look, it depends on which parish, which pope etc.. wiggle room post Vatican II '62-'65

Pope John Paul II was head of the Church from 1978-2005.

As part of Vatican II but still very conservative on many fronts I think his greatest contribution from a DEM standpoint was that he really reached out and attempted to understand and learn to work with leaders and people of other faiths which created the wiggle room for interdemoninational cooperation on issues like Peace and Justice.(1)

Between '62 and somewhere in the mid '80's the Church was dropping the "We will be alone in Heaven, because we are the only true Church" but by the late '80's that was being taught again to novice priests in seminary. I remember the day a seminarian friend told me that. It's the day I left the church. Or "as I perceived it" the day the church turned it's back on the teachings of Christ where Christians should not argue, but find common ground.


I think Pope John Paul's greatest contribution for those who have felt harmed by the long standing wounds the Church has afflicted would be the over 100 Apologies. (2)


I respected him, but even within the Catholic church I always thought God allowed us each our piece of the truth and our responsibility to it.




http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pope_John_Paul_II

(1)
<snip>
Relations with other religions and denominations

Pope John Paul II traveled extensively and came into contact with believers from many divergent faiths. He constantly attempted to find common ground, both doctrinal and dogmatic. At the World Day of Prayer for Peace, held in Assisi on October 27, 1986, more than 120 representatives of different religions and Christian denominations spent a day together with fasting and praying.


<snip>
Apologies

Over the later parts of his reign, John Paul II made several apologies to various peoples who had been wronged by the Catholic Church through the years. Even before he became the Pope, he was a prominent editor and supporter of initiatives like the Letter of Reconciliation of the Polish Bishops to the German Bishops from 1965. During his reign as a Pope, he publicly made apologies for over 100 of these wrongdoings, including:

The conquest of Mesoamerica by Spain in the name of the Church

The legal process on the Italian scientist and philosopher Galileo Galilei, himself a devout Catholic, around 1633 (31 October 1992).

Catholics' involvement with the African slave trade (9 August 1993).

The Church Hierarchy's role in burnings at the stake and the religious wars that followed the Protestant Reformation (May 1995, in the Czech Republic).

The injustices committed against women, the violation of women's rights and for the historical denigration of women (10 July 1995, in a letter to "every woman").

The inactivity and silence of many Catholics during the Holocaust (see the article Religion in Nazi Germany) (16 March 1998)

For the execution of Jan Hus in 1415 (18 December 1999 in Prague). When John Paul II visited Prague in 1990s, he requested experts in this matter "to define with greater clarity the position held by Jan Hus among the Church's reformers, and acknowledged that "independently of the theological convictions he defended, Hus cannot be denied integrity in his personal life and commitment to the nation's moral education." It was another step in building a bridge between Catholics and Protestants.

For the sins of Catholics throughout the ages for violating "the rights of ethnic groups and peoples, and contempt for their cultures and religious traditions". (12 March 2000, during a public Mass of Pardons).

For the sins of the Crusader attack on Constantinople in 1204. (4 May 2001, to the Patriarch of Constantinople).

[hedgehog]

85. "Catholics by definition follow the pope's teaching on these subjects"

Whose definition is that!

For example:

"A large majority of Roman Catholics in the United States, Europe and developing nations largely ignore the church's teaching banning the use of artificial birth control,".......
In addition, Italy -- which is 97% Catholic -- has the lowest birth rate in all of Europe, and that rate has declined since 1978, when John Paul II became pope, according to the Sun (Baltimore Sun, 4/10).

http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/22678.php



Two groups make this mistake: the hierarchy and some non-Catholics. The truth is that there are many Catholics who are in vigorous disagreement about who has the right to determine Church teachings. Just because the Pope and bishops claim sole authority doesn't make it so!

[Goblinmonger]

90. It would be the Catholic church's definition.

How hard is it to understand, for god's sake. The catholic church has a pretty clear doctrine. If you do not follow it, there are punishments--also very clear in the dogma. Just because you ignore the teaching of the church on birth control doesn't mean that it isn't a sin in the Catholic church to use it. Technically, according to the dogma of the Catholic Church (i.e. if they are "right"), if you use birth control and don't confess the sin and do your best to not sin that sin again, you will end up in hell.

I am amazed at the number of people that stay a part of a church (and give there money to it) when they don't agree with the dogma.

[Beregond2]

99. There is more to a church than it's current dogma.

There is community, the form of worship, tradition. You might as well ask why people remain American when they don't believe in the policies of the current administration. Dogma evolves. Do you realize that the Catholic church doesn't even teach the doctrine of purgatory anymore? And that was a central pillar of the church for centuries, and one of the main reasons for the Protestant Reformation.

[Goblinmonger]

101. OK, so dogma changes

that dogma doesn't change until the pope says it does. Unless you have heard something I haven't, birth control is still a sin (which would include pulling out, by the way, as much as that can be called birth control). I think the power of the pope and the selling of indulgences was higher on the list than purgatory.

[Beregond2]

177. Indulgences only existed because of the doctrine of

purgatory. That's what they were for; you paid to reduce a loved one's time in purgatory. The famous slogan was: "When a coin in the coffer rings, a soul from purgatory springs!"

The doctrine of papal infallability itself didn't come into existence until the 19th century. So yes, dogma evolves, and it evolves because of pressure from the laity. For example, marriage was not a sacrament for hundreds of years; it was a purely secular matter. But when the Roman Empire fell apart, and the only authority left was the church, the people needed the church to take over that function, so they did. Not allowing priests to marry was also something that only came about due to popular pressure in the middle ages. Marriage was primarily a way of assuring the orderly transfer of property. As priests were not supposed to own anything, nor be overly involved in secular matters, the public frowned on them being married, so eventually it was banned as a way of reducing corruption.

Yes, the Catholic Church is an authoritarin institution. But it has never been entirely unresponsive to the laity, nor as monolithic in it's stances as people imagine.

[hedgehog]

112. First off, very few things in the Catholic Church are "dogma",.

the teachings on birth control are not one of them. Second, the notion that there are clear punishments is a new one on me. In theory, you can be excommunicated for certain actions, but even that is subject to local interpretation. The notion that the Church teaches that if you use birth control you'll go to hell is ludicrous. Again, only a mortal sin would send you to Hell, and practicing birth control is not a mortal sin.


Again, the understanding of what Church is has changed considerably in the last 50 years.

[Goblinmonger]

116. So birth control isn't a mortal sin

got anything to back you up on that, because it is. I don't mean some "well in this case when the mother is X and the father is Y and Z will happen." I mean in general. The use of birth control is a mortal sin in the RCC because it is the possible prevention of a life which god may have wanted.

Sure, Vatican II changed a lot, but not this. It has only been 25 years since I was in the Seminary, so I fall within your magical number of 50!

[hedgehog]

124. I don't know what seminary you attended, but if the use

of birth control is a mortal sin, then most Catholics will end up in Hell!

[Goblinmonger]

125. Yep

And I don't know that it matters what seminary I attended. It's a sin.

The Church clearly teaches that the use of artificial birth control/contraception for the purpose of preventing pregnancy, whether within or outside Marriage, is always wrong. This is because the unitive and procreative aspects of the marital act cannot be separated, as the marital act is simultaneously an expression of both essential goods of Marriage: the unity and holiness of the spouses, and the procreation and education of children. This is grave matter since it deals with the Sacrament of Marriage and generation of new life. So, to do so with understanding and willingly is a mortal sin. Unless one goes to confession, having a mortal sin on one's conscience is a barrier to authentic communion with Christ and so one may not receive the Eucharist.
http://www.catholicforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=26835

Not the greatest of sources, but it is spot on as to the holding of the church. It was just the first to come up for my search and I don't feel like reading through a lot of discussion of Catholic dogma.

And if it is mortal sin, and you die with it on your soul, you be in hell. And just confessing it with no intent to change the action doesn't wipe the sin.

Of course, I think it is all bullocks, but those that are Catholic live under that "ruling."

[hedgehog]

127. So, if I'm a Catholic practicing birth control, then I go to Hell,

but if I leave the Church, then I'm OK?


Trust me, there are a great many Catholics who have long ago sifted the wheat from the chaff, so to speak.


BTW - maybe they didn't mention this at seminary, but the group of moral theologians tasked by Paul IV to research the matter found no reason to label the use of contraception a sin. It was declared off-limits because Vatican bureaucrats convinced Paul that if the bishops changed the rules, they would lose authority over the faithful.

[Goblinmonger]

131. If the Catholics are right

then those using birth control without confessing and trying to change will go to hell.

"a great many Catholics" don't get to sift the wheat from the chaff. The pope does. I know of nothing which would say that knowing doing something to prevent a pregnancy from happening through artifical means is not a mortal sin. It is.

I think it's all bullshit. But that comes with being an atheist, I guess.

[hedgehog]

133. As I noted above, the two groups that pay attention to the Pope are right wing Catholics

and people who don't like the Church and find it easier to dislike Catholicism if they can identify Catholicism with the hierarchy.

[Goblinmonger]

145. I would argue that definitionally

if you aren't following the Pope, you aren't Catholic. Why not just be Episcopalian? No Pope to worry about--all the same ceremony and god. Catholicism IS the hierarchy. It is not a church based on grassroots control. There are other churches that do that, but not the RCC.

[Dorian Gray]

169. A lot of Catholics

ignore a lot of teachings of the church. It doesn't mean that it's not a sin.

(And it's unusal that Goblinmonger and I fall on the same side in an argument, but he's right. But, you are also right that many many many many Catholics ignore this teaching, including many nuns and priests who do service work with at risk teens or in third world countries where HIV is a danger.)

[Goblinmonger]

172. And I, personally, am very pleased

that there are priests and nuns that ignore this idiot doctrine so that they can do the right thing for people that are at risk of HIV and/or other dangers.

Have a good one.

[Dorian Gray]

175. I am too.

I actually wish that they would change their stance on condom usage for this reason (especially in regard to married couples). If one who is married has a disease or pregnancy is a danger to the female, I think condoms could be a life saver. (I know that the church would never change their stance on unmarried sex.) But it would be a step in the right direction.

[davidinalameda]

154. the CHURCH tradition teaches that the Pope has sole authority

if these Catholics who oppose the church's policies would stop donating; maybe the policies would change

[Tigress DEM]

164. Well, here again is the wiggle room... "The Rhythm Method"

The ONLY method of birth control that Catholics are officially allowed, and that is married Catholics for the purposes of family planning.

STILL, compared to NOT allowed at all, it was a milestone and may be SOME part of the declining birth rate among Catholics.


AND although John Paul II had rigorous beliefs, he was also very much about forgiveness, so a lot of "cafeteria Catholics" are still floating around.

[Goblinmonger]

173. The Rhythm Method a.k.a.

why you were born, sweetie.

[iamthebandfanman]

120. probably because they see it as different issues?

who the F are you to tell someone in what church they belong or dont belong based on one issue?

seriously
thats what makes us dems a lil different, we can seperate faith from politics/governmental issues.

they can go to whatever church they feel like and continue to believe anything they want personally.

[Tigress DEM]

23. From an educational stand point and with limited financial support.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/501(c)#Political_activity

All 501(c)(3) organizations are also permitted to educate individuals about issues, or fund research that supports their political position without overtly advocating for a position on a specific bill.



5013c status has nothing to do with people's faith - it's a tax break. If a church wants to cross the line, they can, but they can't be tax exempt too. It's a choice they make.

[JerseygirlCT]

46. They do indeed. They cannot endorse political candidates

they can absolutely address political issues.

[Tigress DEM]

161. AND they can NOT tell you how to VOTE either.

It is the WAY the issue is addressed. Certainly the church can state it's own beliefs, but from the pulpit you can not use that position of authority to tell people how they MUST vote on an issue either --- IF ---- IF the church wants to be in compliance with the 501(c) (3) status.

The TAX Exempt status covers all kinds of organizations and REQUIRES they do NOT ABUSE their authority to exert influence against an American's right to freely choose how the wish to vote in an election or on an issue.

Remember, our forefathers ran away from the Churches that had gone power mad. The Catholic Inquisition. The Crusades. King Henry VIII and his way around divorce.




http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/501 (c)#Political_activity

All 501(c)(3) organizations are also permitted to educate individuals about issues, or fund research that supports their political position without overtly advocating for a position on a specific bill.

[nichomachus]

72. Do you have a cite for that "right?"

[spoony]

76. Some little shitrag called the Constitution

In the beginning somewhere, as I recall.

[nichomachus]

78. Snark is uncalled for

As tax exempt organizations, they are restricted in what they can advocate. I'd like to see some cite that says they can't support candidates, but that they can support ballot initiatives

[spoony]

80. Here

http://www.irs.gov/charities/churches/index.html

Click on the first link, the tax guide. It's a PDA doc.

It says that a tax exempt church may not "devote a substantial part of their activities to attempting to influence legislation." This is not a total exclusion of discussion, or even attempts to "influence" such initiatives or legislation.

The more restrictive rule is that they "must not participate in, or intervene in, any political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for public office". Note this one doesn't give the qualifier of "substantial...activities" it just says it flat out must not do it.

So there you go. But if people are going to hold a no tolerance stance on this, a lot of liberal-leaning churches, particularly in minority communities, are going to be the unintended casualties. Me, I think the First's preclusion of government interference in houses of worship is more important than any of this, including tax exemption. I'd rather see that gone than the spirit of the amendment.

[nichomachus]

82. Thank you -- that's all I wanted

[Tigress DEM]

165. The Constitution AND 501(c) (3) decry ABUSING the Power of the pulpit

The CHURCH can believe and preach whatever it chooses to, however, it can not use it's "moral authority" to make the laws of the land conform to the laws of the church by forcing it's followers to submit themselves wholly unto the church in the privacy of the voting booth.

This is NOT limited to candidates. It is in regards to issues up for voter consideration.

I admit that the influence of the church even without, and probably MORE without demanding conformity, will cause most members to vote their conscience in agreement with their church's stated position, but it still must be their choice in America.

[Critters2]

190. Can you quote the Constitution, you know, the part where it DECRIES

the power of the pulpit? Just a simple citation would be helpful.

[FreeState]

9. I love you! n/t

[NanceGreggs]

11. K ...

... and R, and the whole damned shootin' match.

Well said, well done.

:patriot:

[Tigress DEM]

15. What did they say?

Clearly telling people how to vote is a violation of separation of church and state, but there are things the church has had opinions on well before America came into being.

As a citizen, though you have done a great job of showing them how offensive whatever it was they said was.

You stood up for what is important to you without allowing them to badger you about it.

Did you tell your Mom?

[skepticscott]

113. Well, not really

Churches telling people who to vote for is a violation of their tax-exempt status, but not of the Constitution. Only Congress can violate the separation of church and state as a constitutional matter.

[Tigress DEM]

166. In present day circumstances, the Churches don't have that kind of power, BUT..

We are at the beginning of the slippery slope.

The POWER of organizations as large as Churches can be a threat to national sovereignty if they were working hard enough on it like was done say in the era of the Medici Popes.(1)

Think about this. What if all the "Christian Churches" - including Protestant, Catholic and Non-Denominational, decided that abortion and birth control was a done issue and put ALL their effort into eradicating all legal means to obtain them? It wouldn't be right and would probably require insanely corrupt individuals at the head of ALL these religions. It is also very doubtful that the will to cooperate at that level for the time it would take exists, but the potential power is there to be a threat to our Constitutional way of life.

In the same way that Corporate America has usurped the power of the people and defamed the Constitution by getting our leaders to sell us out, there is the potential for abuse of power by Churches.




(1)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medici
<snip>
The Medici remained masters of Italy through their two famous 16th century popes, Leo X and Clement VII, who were de facto rulers of both Rome and Florence. They were both patrons of the arts, but in the religious field they proved unable to stem the advance of Martin Luther's ideas. Another Medici became Pope: Alessandro Ottaviano de' Medici (Leo XI).

[BrklynLiberal]

17. Wow! That is sooo cool....

:applause: :applause: :applause: :applause: :applause: :applause: :applause: :applause: :applause: :applause: :applause:

[flvegan]

18. Good work, and honestly, this is why I don't go to "church" anymore.

I'm sorry in advance for any offense, but since I was a child I watched the praising of God become more of a commercial enterprise and I refuse to support any political leanings of what is supposed to be a non-political entity.

I regret my opinion in thinking that the religious right have become the largest legitimate hate group in this country.

[mwb970]

48. I last went to a church service in 1967.

You know what? I don't miss it a bit.

[AtomicKitten]

20. Bravo, sir! Excellent work.

:applause:

[Critters2]

25. delete, dupe. nt

[johnaries]

27. They won't read it. File the lawsuit.

Better yet, go once more and video-tape it. Then you'll have prima facia proof.

[Critters2]

30. They read it, and it handed them a good laugh.

And there's not a lawyer in the land who would even hold the conversation, let alone file the lawsuit. Churches have the right to take a stand--yes, even from the pulpit--on political and social issues. They can tell people how to vote on abortion, gay rights, gambling, even school referenda. The only restrictions are that they can't endorse a party or a specific candidate.

But at least one priest has had a good belly-laugh over this. Why not let a lawyer in on the joke!

[johnaries]

41. There are lots of reputation-hungry lawyers that would do this pro-bono.

Or, report them to the ACLU.

We CANNOT let this kind of crap continue!

[Critters2]

42. Happily, the ACLU knows the law. Freedom of speech extends even into the pulpit.

501c3 orgs, churches and others, can speak for or against social and political issues. What they cannot do is to endorse a party or candidate specifically. The fact that you're pissed off doesn't make something illegal. And I like my right to speak in favor of gay marriage and choice from my pulpit. To do that, I have to allow others the right to do the opposite. Civil liberties are a bitch that way.

[JVS]

126. I don't think people quite understand that if you make "political" issues off limits....

the natural tendency of an oppressive government would just be to expand the number of issues that it regards as political. You don't want to live in a country where churches can no longer talk about helping the poor because the poor have become "politics"

[Critters2]

192. This is precisely why I belong to the ACLU. And support people's rights to say

things I disagree with. I like my right to say things they disagree with!

[JerseygirlCT]

47. There's no suit there - they church is allowed to address issues

so long as they don't endorse candidates.

[spoony]

77. Don't forget to sue all the churches that teach the social gospel

or liberation theology or invite Dems to speak etc. :eyes:

[The_Casual_Observer]

32. They forced out a priest from our parish because of his outspoken

opposition of "Wars of choice". He left the priesthood & joined the Catholic Worker. After that & their support of bush based on his abortion cheap talk I left & never went back.

[Critters2]

36. Yep. That priest had a legal right to take a stand against the war,

and others have the right to take a stand in favor of wars. Limiting the rights of others usually means limiting our own as well.

[patomime]

33. I applaud your bravery....

Even the very scripture that Christians are supposed to be standing up for says "you cannot serve God and Man."

Clearly, Jesus in his wisdom did not partake in the politics of his day. If Christians were about doing the "real" work they are supposed to be doing, then they would be serving the poor, the broken hearted and lonely.

I left "church" a long time ago, basically when I saw the collection plate going around one Sunday and more than half of the church was struggling to pay bills. Not the minister. He lived in high style!

Sorry-I'm rambling, just a variation on your main theme.

[begin_within]

35. Not that brave, since they don't know who it was that wrote it.

[October]

108. It's a step...

I guess he the O.P. could insult a fellow DU'er instead next time, though - huh?

[patomime]

156. Some people....

may choose to do things differently than you do. That doesn't make it wrong. It's just the way they do it. The church needs to realize they are in a tax exempt status, and be held to account. There should be no political views discussed, only the Work of God. If a political conversation is held outside of regular church services, then fine.

[Critters2]

39. This made me laugh out loud:

"Clearly, Jesus in his wisdom did not partake in the politics of his day. If Christians were about doing the "real" work they are supposed to be doing, then they would be serving the poor, the broken hearted and lonely."

Jesus was about politics from beginning to end. Caring for the poor, reforming society to be more just, bringing about social change--these are political tasks. Jesus knew this. So did the political leaders of his day. That's why Herod and Pilate handed him over for execution--for political reasons.

[patomime]

141. I guess my point was....

there should be a clear separation between church and state. The posting reminded me that people can't always do things in the same way. This person was clearly going in the right direction toward letting people know there should be this separation. IMHO, I probably would have done it the same way, maybe you wouldn't have.

I hope that clarifies, wasn't trying to offend the people who believe in going to church.

[Critters2]

178. It's offensive to people who know the law and value free speech.

Free speech includes language and ideas you find offensive. It scares me that dems don't get this.

[Dorian Gray]

51. Some of us

believe that we continue to serve the poor, the broken hearted and lonely by participating in the democratic party, though.

I'm very involved in charities. It's my occupation. I happen to be an active democrat and an active Catholic.

I don't find a problem with that, and I'm happy that never once in a church have I felt a conflict.

[patomime]

155. Not once did I say...

that there aren't sincere Christians, like yourself. It's just in my experience, I have seen too much hypocrisy in order to stay. I think the Bible talks a lot about that too. I am glad you have never felt conflict in a church, a lot of people wish they hadn't.

[Dorian Gray]

171. Sadly

the hypocrisy and evil does exist within the church. It has driven many people away. I'm very lucky in that I've been a part of wonderful communities, but I did spend years (in my teens and my twenties) being irreligious. So I understand the inclination to leave.

[gratuitous]

129. Bravery?

An anonymous typed note from someone who isn't even a member, making an empty threat over an unspecified transgression.

There's a descriptive term for that type of action, but "brave" isn't the first one that comes to my mind. But then, I attend a church that believes in facing down guns with love, so what I do I know?

[patomime]

142. You made my point....

I guess it's the hypocrite feature I was talking about. These are just my choices, doesn't mean everybody will agree with them.

[ColbertWatcher]

34. Brilliant!

I made this image for use as a post card.



Perhaps you can make yours into a postcard and if someone has a Cafepress account, everyone can get one.

[Quantess]

37. Why did you bother going to that church anyway?

You must have had something better to do on a Sunday.
No one has asked you that yet.

Edit: Okay, I just read post #24. However, if it were me, I'd drop mom off and pick her up after the sermon.

[L0oniX]

40. It's too bad and speaks volumes that money is what makes a difference in a church.

I won't go to a church because money is all they care about. Quit paying your tithes and you will be kicked out eventually.

[bean fidhleir]

45. Well done! Let's hope the priest comes to his senses (although that's unlikely)

Very well done.

[yellerpup]

50. Yours is a message that will not be ignored.

Congratulations! Way to get through... K&R! :kick:

[Vinca]

52. That note should go in a whole lot of collection plates. nt

[The Backlash Cometh]

53. Hmm...sounds like you could start a trend.

What do all the Catholics out there think about the traveling Irish priests who set back the churches fifty years with their sermons? I actually stopped going to our church because of them. One stayed on a bit too long.

[jrockford]

107. Yeah, damn Irish diaspora...

:eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes:


Yeah some were bad, others were good. Just like people.

[The Backlash Cometh]

117. I'm making up for reverse stereotyping for forty years.

I use to think they were all Father Flanagans.

[D23MIURG23]

54. nice.

[jhain]

55. EXCELLENT. About time they got hit where it hurts n/t

[pleah]

57. K&R

:kick:

[gratuitous]

58. Fuck YEAH!

I am so sick and tired of churchy folks telling me to have regard for the poor, and pointing me to those tiresome old verses in Jeremiah and Amos and Micah and the gospels (damn, there seem to be a LOT of them) to care for the widowed and the orphaned. I say they should go back to Orphanland or wherever they came from and not leech off of MY tax dollars! And anyone who says different is just trying to guilt-trip me, and it has no place in a church, goddammit!

So I'm putting my dollar back in my pocket and dropping a note in the offering plate instead, too! They'll sing a different tune when they notice that twelve dollars missing from their budget this year.

Jesus, I get tired of the groundless, ignorant religion bashing around here.

[Puglover]

59. What a great idea!

:thumbsup:

[lady raven]

60. My denomination would welcome you should you choose to switch churches

http://www.accsd.org/ChristianChurchDOC.html

[begin_within]

67. Thanks for the offer, but I don't believe in any religion. In fact I belive that God hates religion.

I only take my 89-year-old Mom to church because she can't get there otherwise.

[SavageDem]

118. Hey, denominational partner!

You beat me to the punch. I was going to suggest my denomination!

[Critters2]

180. I'm UCC, too. And I believe clergy should have freedom of the pulpit. nt

[Critters2]

179. I doubt it. The DOC values freedom of the pulpit.

The OP does not.

[aikoaiko]

61. For precision see pages 7 - 15 of Publication 1828

http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-pdf/p1828.pdf


eta: Its fair. Conservatives do it liberal or Democrat leaning churches.

[NoSheep]

62. Great job! Thanks for sharing this.

[Mad_Dem_X]

65. Terrific!

Good for you! No politics at the pulpit!

[electron_blue]

66. Good! I'm sure you've figured out, however, that the church may be getting

other notes cheering them on, saying they'll give more money for saying this. I think notes get their attention, but since they are undoubtedly getting supporting notes as well, the only action that will change anything is to actually act to revoke their tax-free status.

[Naturyl]

68. Awesome, although they will just mentally categorize you as evil (n/t)

[Arugula Latte]

69. Good for you!

You're a good son to take your mother to mass and sit through that religious nonsense. Oy vey. I don't think I could do it, but luckily for me my mom despises organized religion. :)

[babylonsister]

70. Rec'd! Great job, bob_weaver. They'll never know unless you tell them! nt

[begin_within]

81. I just hope it gets all the way to the bishop, because Bishop Robert Brom is a hard right-wing

extremist. A good friend of mine decided not to become a priest because of Brom.

[pacalo]

79. Bravo!

[alfredo]

83. New proposition:

Should all citizens of the State (or commonwealth) of ........... be granted equal rights regardless of race, gender, or sexual orientation?

[foxfeet]

84. Very well done! Good on ya! n/t

[DangerDave921]

86. I must point out something

You say that a major tenet of the US constitution is separation of church and state. Where exactly does that appear in the Constitution? I've never come across that language in my copy of it.

But I agree - churches should not be in the business of telling people how to vote. Although I've been in some unitarian churches that blatantly talk about Bush spreading violence throughout the world. Same should go for them too.

[skepticscott]

114. The Constitution doesn't contain

the words "fair trial" either. Are you saying that the Constitution doesn't guarantee a fair trial?

[DangerDave921]

167. a fair trial is guaranteed

based on the language contained, e.g., an impartial jury, notice of charges, the right to confront witnesses, a public trial, right to counsel, etc. So yes, I would agree that a fair trial is implicated by all of those express rights.

Separation of church and state is different. That has become such an amorphous phrase, and the courts over the years have made such a mish-mash of it, to the point where we're counting the number of candy canes in a christmas display to see if it's non-religious enough. Silliness.

A church is not the state. It is not part of government. Its tax-exempt status is another matter entirely.

[clear eye]

137. First amendment

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of ..."

BTW, how do suggest Unitarians should have talked about war and peace during these past 8 years w/o mentioning the actions of the Bush administration?

[Maraya1969]

87. AMEN!!!!!!

[shrike]

88. The priest at my church has the opposite problem

For eight years now, he's made anti-war statements, anti-Bush statements, all carefully parsed. He did a remarkable sermon a few weeks ago. The jist of it was, if fellow Christians aren't following the words of Christ, it's up to us to call them out. All non-Christians leave alone, he said, it's not our job to judge them.
He made some rather simple examples of friends and relatives who aren't going to church; I started to nod off right about then. But then he said, right after the end of the sermon, "These days, it's considered unpatriotic to say certain things about certain people. But we have to say them; it's our duty." Ah, I thought, so that's what he's talking about.

[hisownpetard]

89. Fantastic!!!!

:thumbsup: :hi: :thumbsup:

[barbtries]

91. way to go

i hope your mother either is behind your action or your anonymity is assured. also hope that you have a way to live up to the threat of a lawsuit, and that you bring it.

[orleans]

92. fuck it. report them anyway. they've done it before, they'll do it again. call

the irs.

[barbiegeek]

93. Turn them into the IRS

You don't have to sue, you just have to turn them into the IRS. They'll send an agent to listen into a sermon. If they say how to vote with an agent in mass then they will cite the church and tax them.

[spoony]

96. This is what we want? Government agents screening sermons?

What fucking country is this?

[fudge stripe cookays]

135. When the....

motherfuckers feel like they have a right to destroy the country we once knew under the pretext of it being a "Christian nation", you bet your sweet bippy I do.

The government has infiltrated all the liberal groups. Let's have some tit for tat here. I'm not talking about Unitarians. I'm talking about the fire and brimstone, anti-gay, anti-choice whackjobs. If they want to be political organizations, they need to start paying for the privilege instead of being above the law and calling themselves "churches" when the only thing they're preaching is hate and divisiveness.

[spoony]

174. "tit for tat" in shredding rights. What an insufferably stupid notion.

And you know this will backfire on liberal churches don't you?

[fudge stripe cookays]

191. Most liberal churches...

know that they speak to like minds. They don't have to ram their beliefs down people's throats.

It's about time we started giving these fuckers something back. I'm not stupid. I'm highly pissed off at those calling themselves "Christians." Thanks for the vote of confidence. :thumbsup:

[Just-plain-Kathy]

95. Speaking as a person who learned about abortions when I was about six years old...

because at mass, my church turned down the lights to show a "pro-life" film (showing ripped apart babies and all)... Talk about sex education "inappropriate for children".

I personally feel that churches should be taxed on ALL income, unless the money is used to help the needy.

[PatSeg]

111. That is awful

I view that as child abuse.

I agree. Churches should just be taxed. Too many of them have just become big businesses anyway, making many ministers mega-wealthy.

[cui bono]

97. Fantastic!

[TooBigaTent]

98. Put a McCain sign on the front lawn of the church, take a photo, and send it to the media and the

IRS.

That "evidence" added to enough complaints could have an effect. Probably not in time for this election, but for the future.

[donco6]

152. That would be lying. Not cool. n/t

[scytherius]

100. Awesome!

I'm in Cali too. We need to get out the vote BIG TIME on this one but the recent poll does show that "no" on Prop 8 has a 17% edge. Still . . . uya never know.

[quoddy woman]

102. Good on you!

Seems that it's the only way to get their attention. I just love being "fallen away."

[Divine Discontent]

103. ha! excellent, and maturely written with wisdom

hope they read it all the way instead of just part, May God bless you for saying it.

www.cafepress.com/votenoon8

[DeSwiss]

104. Next time, add one of these as well....

- K&R!!!
==============================================================================
DeSwiss


http://www.atheisttoolbox.com/">The Atheist Toolbox



"Prayer is just a way of telling god that his divine plan for
you is flawed -- and shockingly stingy" ~ Betty Bowers

[Wednesdays]

105. Uh-oh...

Don't go near small aircraft, or bare-chested, black-hooded men. (When was the last time they burned heretics at the stake?) :scared:

[Aeval]

110. You are my hero!

[avaistheone1]

115. Good. Hope that shakes up the folks up at the church.

[Canuckistanian]

121. Why don't you make a list and nail it to the church door?

I'd join with you in a new reformation.

[jwirr]

122. Good for you.

[graywarrior]

123. Fantastic!

[The Wizard]

128. Any time the Church

pays no taxes there is no wall between Church and State.

[sarcasmo]

130. Good for you, kick and Nom.

[bobbolink]

132. Actually, they DO have a right, and a DUTY to talk about the criteria...

And if ALL churches were using Matthew 25 as the criteria, this country wouldn't have so many poor people suffering and dying.

[happygoluckytoyou]

134. Organized Religon ? Sorry---- I give directly to the poor... 100% PAYOFF!!!

[Plucketeer]

138. Cameras are SO discreet and concealble now.

Get some clips of the spew from the pulpit and leave THAT on a SD card in the collection plate!

[HughMoran]

140. Good for you!! I caught St. PAULS CHURCH in BEDFORD MASS tucking away a MCCAIN SIGN at a fair!!!!!

Scumbags - how dare they put up a McCain banner and then stealthfully put it away after the fair was over.

You did good, I witnessed a church begging to lose their status too!

This. Must. Stop. NOW!

[Silentechoes]

144. Freedom of Religion Explained

Hey Bob,

People go to church for a variety of reasons but the most prevalent, I've found, is because they have something in common with either the congregation or the beliefs that that particular church upholds. If some people in your church didn't like the style of preaching or the particular message contained in the sermons, I'm sure they would find somewhere else to go on Sundays. You and your family certainly did, and that's fine- our country was founded on principles of religious freedom and it is our prerogative to worship or socialize wherever we please. However, your reaction to your church's political rants was unfair. The church in question isn't doing anything illegal.

It is true that a major tenet of the United States Constitution is separation of church and state. For this reason, we seldom see politicians making policy decisions founded on their personal beliefs as Christians, or whatever they happen to be. What I feel you're missing is the key role the church plays in society, and especially in politics. For many people, church is more than a Sunday activity. Church represents a community of like minded individuals who usually share similar beliefs, whether they be political or spiritual. Many people in your church's congregation probably appreciate political sermons that reinforce their own political beliefs. Even if your particular congregation feels the same way you do, there are hundreds of church's whose congregations appreciate political sermons. Ever been down south?

Besides, Barack Obama's early political career depended on the various churches in Chicago to help him get started. In 2000, George W. Bush told press that God wanted him to run for President, and later that God told him to invade Iraq. Senator John McCain has made several statements that moralistically divided the world in terms of "good" and "evil". Politics and religion are almost inseparable in a society that's overwhelmingly religious in some way or the other.

For you to threaten the church's income, and rudely at that, reflects a great deal of intolerance on your part. No sensible lawyer is going to take up a case that's suing a church for attempting to politically persuade its congregation. Most people have the sense to leave if they don't like something. Churches rely on donations for sustainability, by threatening to take away their tax exemption its almost as if you're snubbing this particular church for freedom of speech, which is another major tenet of the United States Constitution.

Believe it or not, you have the right to your own opinion. I'm sure the presiding priest at your church has encountered people who support same-sex marriage before. Please don't criticize him for his opinions, because he probably could care less about yours. We live in a diverse world, Bob, full of different opinions and beliefs. The beauty of this country, the beauty of this democracy, is that you have the freedom to believe and do whatever you want within reason, without anyone chastising you or dropping rude letters in your collection basket on Sunday.

[mackerel]

146. I dropped this note into the collection basket at my Mom's church today:

Good on ya!

[donco6]

151. Churchgoers pay his salary.

Therefore, they have the right to criticize his opinions.

[coronavir7]

147. not cool

That doesn't seem very appropriate. Why don't you just go to a different church? Don't Americans have a choice where to worship if they worship at all? That's what makes this country great!

[donco6]

150. Americans can also work to change the institutions

that have gone off their tracks. I think that makes America greater.

[HCE SuiGeneris]

153. You should post more. I'm intrigued by your perspective...

however, I caution you to avoid the pizza here, it's deathly.

[Quantess]

157. Of course we can choose where & how to worship! Sarah Palin chooses Pastor Muthee's church.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L1Mo9N67R0k

[Critters2]

182. Thank you! And welcome to DU! nt

[fudge stripe cookays]

198. He said he took his aged mother.

If you'd been paying attention instead of pointing fingers, you would have noticed that. Enjoy your stay. Something tells me it won't be long.

[codjh9]

149. I love it! I wish I had the text of the note I wrote to a Baptist church where I used to live

after getting REALLY pissed off - I mean LIVID - when they actually sent a BUSLOAD of proselytizers into my neighborhood on a week-night! I felt like it was the f-ing Invasion of the Body Snatchers! I absolutely f-ing NUKED them in my letter! :^)

[cboy4]

170. Excellent.

:thumbsup:

[geek_sabre]

176. it doesn't sound like they're doing anything illegal

the church has every right to discuss with parishoners how to weigh their decisions based on their faith. Your understanding of the separation of church and state is flawed. The Catholic church has been issuing voting guides for years, and it is completely legal. What goes on in the Catholic church is mild compared to what I heard growing up in AME church, and what goes on in Trinity United (where Obama attended)

Now, if he says "Anyone who votes for person X is no longer welcome here," that is a different issue. But it is completely within the rights of the church to inform parishioners of how they can use faith to guide their votes.

Next time bring a good book and earplugs.

[Taverner]

181. But if thats the case, then they are no longer a church and are now a PAC

And PAC's pay taxes, churches don't.

[Critters2]

183. Nonsense. They have every right to enter into political discourse

as a church. They don't have a right to endorse a party or candidate--neither do other non-profits. But up to that, anything is allowable.

[Taverner]

184. Well I would go for that, as long as we can drop tax exemption for churches

I never quite understood how tax exempt status for churches was a good idea...

[Critters2]

186. Churches are 501c3s, along with a good many other non-profits.

There's no special provision for churches. They fit into the same category as any other org you give to as tax-exempt. And they play by the same rules, including not endorsing candidates or parties. Tog et rid of churches' non-profit status would remove a lot of others, too. And close a lot of charities.

[Taverner]

187. Keep the charities, drop the churches

Since they don't actually do any good.

At least the non-profits do something worthwhile.

[Critters2]

188. Many church-related charities, including children's homes, nursing homes,

soup kitchens, etc are established under the church's 501c3. Besides, the law isn't written in such a way to do what you want. You'd have to do away with the whole 501c3 clause of the tax code.

All because you hate religious people. That's progressive.

[Taverner]

193. Not because I hate religious people

But because I think tax exemption should be based on results - if a church feeds the homeless they should receive the tax exemption based on that- not just because they are a church.

There is a difference.

[Critters2]

194. When churches apply for 501c3 (yes, they have to apply), they must list

their purpose, a mission statement. Not results, a purpose. If it meets the criteria, they're granted an exemption. Same as any other corporation.

[Taverner]

195. Purposes can be vague

I could say "alleviate suffering" and it could be anything.

Results cannot be disputed.

[Critters2]

196. Write your congress critter if you want the law changed.

Good luck with that!

[JVS]

197. That's not the rule though. You can have a non-profit book club for all the government cares.