| Evangelical ministers plan to violate the Johnson Amendment Sep 17th 2012, 22:00 http://www.speakupmovement.org/churc...e/Details/3771 My elderly mother is upset that her pastor has joined the movement described in the link. He plans to tell his congregation who he thinks they should vote for in the presidential election and why. He has already said that he supports Romney. I'm guessing this has something to do with gay people and reproductive freedom. Well that, and Obama being a black, socialist Muslim of course. Quote:
The First Amendment declares in part that “Congress shall make no law . . . abridging the freedom of speech.”19 This is referred to as the Free Speech Clause, and limits the government’s ability to interfere with a ministry’s speech no matter how unpopular, controversial, or disagreeable the ideas may be to others.20 This protection extends beyond mere words to embrace a wide array of expressive activities. In addition to church services, protected speech includes leafleting, street preaching, picketing, concerts, and motion pictures.21
The Free Speech Clause provides such expansive protection that the courts have noted only a few narrowly drawn categories of speech not protected. These include “fighting words” (i.e., close-quarter communications that would immediately provoke a fight), “obscenity” (i.e., depictions of hard-core sexual acts), child pornography, and words that create a “clear and present danger” to public safety (e.g., falsely shouting “Fire!” in a crowded theater).22 All other speech – and especially religious speech – is protected.
A. Protecting the right of churches and pastors to freely speak to their congregations and freely act – from a scriptural basis – on political matters without improper regulation by the government.
Almost all churches are exempt from federal income taxes. As a tax-exempt organization, a church:
(1) is exempt from paying corporate income taxes, and donations to the church are tax-deductible on individuals’ federal tax returns;
(2) may expend funds for religious, charitable, and educational purposes, as well as an insubstantial amount on lobbying to promote or oppose legislation.
But under section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code, religious organizations may not “participate in, or intervene in (including the publishing or distributing of statements) any political campaign on behalf of any candidate for public office.” Thus, as long as a church does not endorse or oppose a specific candidate who is running for public office, it should have broad freedom to praise or criticize officials for their actions without coming in conflict with the Code.
1. Pulpit Initiative: Challenging IRS restrictions on pastors speaking about political candidates via litigation against the IRS. The prohibition against participation in political campaigns came about in 1954, when Congress amended (without debate or analysis) Internal Revenue Code § 501(c)(3) to restrict the speech of non-profit tax-exempt entities, including churches. Before the amendment was passed, there were no restrictions on what churches could or couldn’t do with regard to speech about government and voting, excepting only a 1934 law preventing non-profits from using a substantial part of their resources to lobby for legislation.
Since the amendment passed, the IRS has steadfastly maintained that any speech by churches about candidates for office, including sermons from the pulpit, can result in loss of tax exemption. The amendment dramatically impacted churches’ exercise of First Amendment rights. Historically, churches have frequently and fervently spoken for and against candidates for office. Such sermons date from the founding of America, including sermons against Thomas Jefferson for being a deist; sermons opposing William Howard Taft as a Unitarian; and sermons opposing Al Smith in the 1928 presidential election. Churches have also been at the forefront of most of the significant societal and governmental changes in our history, including ending segregation and child labor and advancing civil rights.
| It's not enough that churches have generous tax exemptions. Now some of them want to be able to back political candidates as well. Other non profit organizations must also abide by this rule. I didn't realize that this rule was adopted in 1954, and was known as the Johnson Amendment, named after Lyndon Johnson who was running for reelection to the Senate. I wonder why this group doesn't just try and petition the courts if they are convinced that the law is unconstitutional instead of flagrantly violating the law. I think this all started during the 08 election. Hmmmm, I wonder why that is? Will it backfire on them? Is my mother the rare evangelical who thinks for herself and considers this attempt both illegal and distasteful? As she told me earlier today, "I don't want to hear about politics when I go to church, and I certainly don't want my pastor telling me how I should vote." | |
