Trump Promises to Force Taxpayers to Underwrite Political Activities of Churches

The First Amendment of the United States Constitution bars the establishment of and religious denomination, the original intent being that no citizen should be forced to provide financial support to a church to which they did not belong or believe in.  Over the intervening years, however, American taxpayers have been forced to indirectly support churches through the tax-exempt status afforded under Section 501(c) of the Internal Revenue Code under the ruse that churches are charitable institutions that do charitable works benefiting the general public.  One of the trade offs for such forced indirect taxpayer support has been that churches cannot engage in political activity or endorse candidates.  The sad reality is that studies have shown that most churches spend tiny fractions of their revenues on true charitable works.  Likewise, despite the ban on political activity, many churches and clergy engage in blatant partisanship activities and/or endorse candidates. As bad as all this is, Donald Trump has promised those gathered at the hate fest known as the "Value Voters Summit" that he would remove all restrictions on political activities by religious organizations.  Thus, taxpayers would be further forced to subsidize churches actively working against their interests and, in the case of LGBT citizens, their very civil rights.  Here are highlights from the Wall Street Journal on Trump's promises to the Christofascists:  

Donald Trump on Friday pledged to a raucous room of social conservatives that, if elected, the nation’s Christian heritage “will be cherished, protected, defended like you have never seen before.”

Appearing on Friday afternoon at the Values Voters Summit, Mr. Trump offered a menu of policy proposals aimed at winning over social conservatives who would otherwise seem an ill fit in the thrice-married New York gambling magnate’s coalition.

The Republican presidential nominee vowed to repeal a 62-year-old measure in the tax code known as the Johnson Amendment, which prohibits tax-exempt entities including Churches from making political endorsements. He said he would direct federal education aid to religious schools, condemned the persecution of Christians in the Middle East, praised the “unbreakable faith and spirit” of the black church, and said politicians had “abandoned” Christians.
 “The Johnson Amendment has blocked our pastors and ministers and others from speaking their minds from their own pulpits,” he said. “If they want to talk about Christianity, if they want to preach, if they want to talk about politics, they’re unable to do so… If they want to, they take a tremendous risk: that they lose their tax-exempt status. If I become president, we’re going to knock out the Johnson amendment.”

The Family Research Council, the event’s organizer, said Mr. Trump’s speech and his running mate Mike Pence’s appearance on Saturday mark the first time a GOP presidential ticket has addressed the conference in its 11-year history.

Mr. Trump is the first GOP nominee to make the Johnson Amendment a major campaign issue. Many pastors already flout the tax law, all-but-endorsing both Republican and Democratic candidates from their pulpits by inviting them to their churches and singing their praises. They do so largely with impunity.

Mr. Trump used much of the rest of his speech to connect campaign promises to Christian priorities. Referencing a policy proposal to strengthen “school choice” that he unveiled the day before, Mr. Trump said he wanted to empower religious families to educate their children in their faith. He sought to blame Mrs. Clinton for the flourishing of ISIS, a group which, he pointed out, has massacred Christians in the region.

Many of the conference’s attendees expressed enthusiasm at Mr. Trump’s appearance, conveying little of the hesitation to embrace him seen during the Republican primary campaign, when many evangelical voters chose Ben Carson and Texas Sen. Ted Cruz.

“I’m a gun-toting, Bible-thumping Christian. I know he’s not,” said Roy Wagers, an accountant from Novi, Mich., who supported Mr. Carson in the primary. “But I think he hasn’t been bought out like the rest of Washington.”

What Trump proposes is the direct opposite of what is needed.  The tax-exempt status of churches needs to be fully revoked.  To the extent a church or religious organization actually engages in true charitable work of feeding the hungry, clothing the naked and providing shelter to the homeless and similar activities, those specific operations should be tax-exempt.  Other than that, church property and revenues need to be taxed just like every other business.  Yes, without forced public support via tax-exempt status, many churches would be forced to shut down or consolidate with other churches - just like any other business that peddles a product for which there is lack of a public demand.  For those who want the "fellowship" they find at church, join a club or fraternal organization.  It would likely cost them less and give them the same social opportunities.  I for one am sick and tired of being forced to indirectly support parasitical institutions .

As for the sponsor of the confab of haters Trump addressed, the main organizer is Family Research Council, a certified hate group with strong white supremacists overtones and ties.  That Trump and Pence spoke there shows the lengths to which they will prostitute themselves to gain power.  But then again, during his rise to power, Hitler co-opted many of Germany's churches, so perhaps we should not be surprised.

IRS Asked to Investigate Illegal Activities of Catholic Bishops

Norfolk priest who is crossing the line on allowed activities of 501(c)(3) charities

In a move that is long overdue given the huge amounts of money being spent by the Roman Catholic Church to influence legislation and advocate against Democrats - all of which is forbidden conduct for supposed charities enjoying tax exempt status under Section 501(c)(3) the Internal Revenue Code -  Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington wants the federal Internal Revenue Service to investigate the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops for allegedly engaging in prohibited political activity in violation of its protected tax status.  If you want to hurt the bishops where it really counts other than jailing them for obstruction of justice in the cover ups of sexual abuse by priest, hit them in the pocket book.  Money is, after all, the true god.  The Wisconsin Gazette looks at this welcomed action.  Here are article highlights:

The complaint filed recently notes press reports indicating a number of bishops are using their positions to advocate against the re-election of President Barack Obama and sermons this weekend likely will involve other political activity.

CREW says that in Illinois, Bishop Daniel Jenky, who has compared Obama to Josef Stalin and Adolf Hitler, is requiring priests in his diocese to read a statement accusing the Obama administration of an "assault upon our religious freedom simply without precedent in the American political and legal system." Jenky says that Catholic voters who fail to heed his warning have no hope of salvation.

Said CREW executive director Melanie Sloan in a news release, "This weekend, the Catholic bishops plan to use every tool in their arsenal, including warning parishioners that they may go to hell, to promote the candidacy of Gov. Mitt Romney. While the bishops are free to hold their own opinions, tax law is clear that this sort of political activity is prohibited."

The group, in its complaint, also raised concerns about the political activity of Nicholas Di Marzio in New York, David Ricken in Wisconsin, Edward J. Burns in Alaska and Paul Loverde in Virginia.

To qualify for tax exemption under IRC 501(c)(3), an organization must not participate or intervene in any political campaign on behalf of or in opposition to any candidate for public office. The publication or distribution of written or printed statements on behalf of or in opposition to a candidate is also prohibited. The U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, as a 501(c)(3) group, and, according to CREW, "is clearly prohibited from opposing a candidate as it is clearly doing with its presidential election." 

Sloan continued, "In completely unqualified terms, the IRS should immediately tell the Conference of Catholic Bishops that the conduct of its members is beyond the pale. If the Catholic bishops would like to continue receiving the tremendous tax benefits on which they rely, they should follow U.S. law and stay out of American politics."

I would hope complaints will also be filled against individual parishes with priests who see themselves as above law such as Holy Trinity in Norfolk.  Sadly, the actions of these bishops (and priests) is yet another example of how the Catholic clergy and the Catholic Church hierarchy as a whole arrogantly think them selves above the law be it through abetting and covering up for child rapists or blatantly violating the tax laws.  All deference and special rights need to cease and violations need to be criminally prosecuted where applicable

Churches Seeking Special Rights

The Christofascists are always claiming that LGBT Americans are seeking "special rights."  Truth be told, it's the not the gays that want special rights.  No, its the Christofascists who want to be free to ignore the IRS restrictions against political activities by charities as conservative churches and some denominations become de facto arms of the Republican Party.  The justification for restrictions that apply to all other charities?  The increasingly used and disingenuous ruse that such restrictions impinge on "religious freedom" and "free speech."  The real story is that these churches and Christofascists want special rights and they want all taxpayers to indirectly underwrite their political activities.  Even when those political activities attack and demonize those being forced to underwrite them via the tax-exemption for 501(c)(3) charities.  It's complete hypocrisy, but then what's more synonymous these days than with hypocrisy than conservative Christianity?  An piece in The New Republic looks at the effort by these churches to defy the law through “Pulpit Freedom Sunday” and then demolishes their lies and false defense of their illegal actions.  Here are highlights:

On Sunday, October 7, pastors around the country will try to bait the federal government into investigating them by preaching explicitly partisan sermons. As part of a conservative movement organizers call “Pulpit Freedom Sunday,” some religious leaders will endorse Mitt Romney from the pulpit. Others may refrain from an endorsement but vigorously criticize President Obama. And some will tell their congregations that a good Christian can only vote for a candidate who opposes gay marriage and abortion. Then they’ll send tapes of their sermons to the Internal Revenue Service in the hopes of being audited.

Supporters of Pulpit Freedom Sunday argue that current law violates religious liberty and free speech by placing restrictions on what religious leaders can say.

Let’s consider this claim. In order to believe that churches are being censored by the government, you have to accept that religious organizations have not only the right to engage in partisan speech and activities but also the right to be exempt from federal taxes and the right to accept donations that are tax-deductible. There simply is no constitutional right that covers the latter. The tax-exempt status for churches is a monetary benefit given to them by the government, as is the rule allowing individuals to deduct their contributions to religious organizations.

It’s quite simple. If a church wants to endorse a candidate and engage in campaign activities, there are absolutely no restrictions preventing it from doing so. But it must pay federal taxes, and its donors cannot deduct their contributions. Additionally, a pastor can preach about same-sex marriage or immigration reform or abortion or economic justice. But he cannot tell parishioners that they must support a particular candidate because of their views on one of those issues. The churches involved in Pulpit Sunday want to have it both ways. They want to use tax-deductible donations to participate in campaigns, and no doubt there are plenty of political donors who would prefer to deduct their political contributions by sending them through religious organizations.

Religious leaders have long been active in political movements—and partisan campaigns—but Americans are growing less tolerant of that intermingling of the religious and the political. The Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life has found that more Americans now oppose church involvement in politics than support it, a shift from 15 years ago.  

The willingness—and indeed eagerness—of many conservative pastors and priests to flout the law by endorsing Romney may not swing the election in the Republican’s favor. And a court challenge of the law under a potential second Obama term might just devolve into yet another culture war charge that Democratic administrations and activist judges are restricting the rights of religious Americans. But there must be some alternative to the status quo, in which select religious organizations enthusiastically engage in government-subsidized campaigning while happily claiming their tax exemption.

Yes, these Christofascists are liars and hypocrites.  As I've noted before, they believe that their rights trump the rights of all others and that they are indeed above the law.  I think it is far beyond time that all politically active churches lose their tax exempt status.  They are free to say whatever they want, but the rest of us should not be forced to help underwrite their hate and venom.  The concept of a "charity" includes the expectation that the entities activities promote the general well being of all citizens and society as a whole.  Most conservative churches ceased performing this function decades ago, if they ever did it at all.

Washington State Diocese to Take Up Special Collection to Fund Anti-Gay Legislation

Once again I find myself on the verge of pulling my hair our and screaming out "WTF is the IRS doing about this?"  Section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code very clearly states that non-profit charitable organizations with tax exempt status CANNOT back political candidates or specific legislation. This clear wording is clearly lost on the Diocese of Yakima which will be shaking down parishioners in the pews for money donations to support the ballot initiative to overturn Washington State's marriage equality law.  Here are highlights from what's what the Diocese is saying on its website:

Dear Pastor,  

Labor Day Weekend marks the beginning of Preserve Marriage Month, the official start to our educational program to inform parishioners about Catholic teaching on marriage and Referendum 74 (R‐74), which would redefine marriage. R‐74 will appear on the ballot in November.

I am asking you to announce a special parishioner financial appeal at each Mass on the weekend of August 25/26 or September 1/2 – whichever one you choose – to promote the September 8/9 in‐pew collection for the Preserve Marriage Washington campaign. This important appeal will benefit the campaign to reject R‐74.
 

1.  Next week you will receive from Catholic Printery, whether they publish your bulletin or not, special envelopes and informational flyers for inclusion in your bulletin on the weekend you choose.
2.  A security envelope addressed to Preserve Marriage Washington will also be included with the mailing. Please use it to return your donation envelopes.

In addition to informing ourselves and others about R‐74, we can contribute to the campaign by using the envelope in this week’s bulletin to make a generous donation to Preserve Marriage Washington.

These donations are not tax deductible.

Each individual donor must provide the requested information on the envelope, including your name, and address. You may drop the envelope into the regular collection today or September 8/9, or mail it to Preserve Marriage Washington as indicated on the envelope.

Fraternally in Christ,
Most Reverend Joseph J. Tyson
Bishop of Yakima

Given the nation's budget deficit, what better way to address it than taking away the tax exempt status of partisan organizations like the Roman Catholic Church.  Non-Catholics, atheists and certainly LGBT Americas should not be forced to indirectly underwrite the Church's bigotry and efforts to interfere with the civil laws. Oh, and did I mention underwriting the Church hierarchy's world wide conspiracy to protect child rapists?

Randy Forbes Again Prostitutes Himself to the Christian Rught

As I've noted on this blog before, local Virginia Congressman Randy Forbes (pictured at left) was a law school classmate of mine.  Back in law school, Forbes seemed normal and certainly did not come across as a religious extremist or someone seething with anti-gay hatred.  Yet since his election to first to the Virginia General Assembly and later to Congress, his behavior suggest that either (1) The Family Foundation worked some sort of "Stepford Wife" transformation on him,  (2) he perhaps suffered some sort of head trauma that has caused a nasty personality transformation, or (3) his a lying, pandering whore to the Christofascists.  In that latter regard, nowadays, Forbes' nose is so far up the Christianists' butt cheeks, it is literally a wonder that the man doesn't suffocate. Not to mention that he more and more acts as if he were one of the closeted self-loathing closet cases of the type noted in the University of Rochester study earlier this year on homophobes.  In keeping with his virulent religious extremism, contempt for the religious freedoms all citizens and self-prostitution to the ugliest Christianist groups, Forbes came out foaming at the mouth over the participation of uniformed service members in the San Diego Pride parade over this past weekend.   Here are highlights from the Virginian Pilot:

Congressional Republicans challenged Defense Secretary Leon Panetta on Tuesday to explain why the Defense Department allowed active-duty troops to wear their uniforms while marching in San Diego’s gay pride parade last weekend.

Rep. J. Randy Forbes, a member of the House Armed Services Committee, issued a statement condemning the waiver. Forbes represents parts of Virginia, including Chesapeake.

“I am calling on the Defense Department to halt these dangerous exceptions to policy for political purposes,” Forbes said. “This decision was an outrageous and blatantly political determination issued solely to advance this administration’s social agenda.” 

Inhofe, who serves on the Armed Services Committee, also pointed out that administrative action has been taken against service members who have violated the rule.

“If the Navy can punish a chaplain for participating in a pro-life event or a Marine participating in a political rally, it stands to reason that the Defense Department should maintain the same standard and preclude service members in uniform from marching in a gay pride parade,” Inhofe wrote.

If Forbes and Inhofe bothered to do their homework - admittedly a novel concept for Republicans -  rather than merely repeating the script given to them by certified anti-gay hate groups, they'd know that most Pride organizations are 501(c)(3) charitable organizations that do not engage in political events (I'm on the board of directors of HR Pride which is such a charitable organization).  Apparently, to the Neanderthals in the GOP and their Christianist puppet masters, any time a gay citizen participates in a community event in uniform, it somehow becomes political.  As for Inhofe's lame comparison of non-profit pride organizations which do ZERO lobbying for legislative action to abortion rights organizations and political events, the man shows that he's either a bigot or and idiot - or more likely both.  Ditto for Randy Forbes.

Brain Dead Sara Palin Tells Canada to Dismantle its Public Health-Care System to Allow Private Enterprise to take over.

Nothing is more dangerous that a self absorbed, egotistical cretin who does not recognize their own mental and talent limitations. Today this dangerous phenomenon is best embodied by Sarah "Bible Spice" Palin who at times seems to be lucky if she has an IQ of someone who is trainable mental retarded. The women has no frigging clue of which end is up yet loves to hear the sound of her own voice which to me sounds like a cat with its tail caught in a meat grinder. Her latest case of verbal diahareaha, Palin denounces Canada's health insurance program that covers all citizens. But that is only the biginning. Not only is Ms. Palin an idiot, but apparrently so are her staff members - remeber when the Canadian radio DJ called her pretending to be the president of France? Now, the Canadians have struck again and this time Bible Spice spouts off to Canadian comedienne and news personality Mary Walsh,who interviewed Palin as part of her comedy show This Hour Has 22 Minutes, which is a parody of the nightly news. With over 45 million Americans without health insurance coverage, one cannot help but wonder what Palin has been smoking if she thinks private enterprise can provide a better safety net that Canada's health program. Here is some video footage of Bible Spice showing her stupidity:

Equally troubling is the fact that as Palin travels the country selling her book tellin a fictionalized version of reality she is doing so on a private aircraft apparently owned by a 501(c)(3) non-profit organization run by a son of Billy Graham. Daily Kos has these details:

*
Franklin [Graham] runs an organization called "The Samaritan's Purse." Purse claims on their website to be an "International Christian relief and evangelism organization that provides spiritual and physical aid to victims of war, poverty, natural disaster, and disease." Right. Of course, an "international christian relief organization" can't function without a fleet of corporate airplanes.

*
And that brings us to Sarah Palin. In her book tour, Palin claims that she's just like the rest of us, riding her tour bus from town to town. BULLSHIT. Samaritan's Purse is flying Sarah around in one of its aircraft. She lands near her next book rally, gets on the bus, and rides into town on the bus. Palin is flying around in a Beechcraft/King Air 300tail number N262SP (multi-engine, 11 passengers). The SP does not stand for Sarah Palin -- the plane is owned by Samaritans Purse.
*
This means that donations to SP are being used to haul Palin's carcass around. Wonder what the donors think of that? Hmmm. Does this violate Samaritan's Purses 501c(3) status? And -- get this -- I tried to check the flight activity for this airplane (N262SP) at Flightaware.com. The flight activity for this plane is blocked by the owner. Guess he doesn't want anyone to know where he is flying. This is deceit and lies on so many levels it makes my head hurt to think about it. But, then, you expected something different from a gang of biblethumpers??

Did Mormon Church and Catholic Diocese Break IRS Rules?

In the last post I referenced a new web site that seeks to pressure the IRS to consider a revocation of the Mormon Church's tax-exempt status - talk about hitting them where it hurts. The theory behind this effort is that Sec. 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code provides that tax-exempt churches cannot cross the line and officially attempt to influence legislation. In this case, letters and messages from the LDS leadership in their official capacity did just this Here's the IRS limitation:

*

In general, no organization, including a church, may qualify for IRC section 501(c)(3) status if a substantial part of its activities is attempting to influence legislation (commonly known as lobbying).

*

Another institution - or at least certain dioceses - that needs to be examined is the Catholic Church. Certain bishops in their official capacity directed church members that they'd go to Hell if they voted for Obama. This is an express no-no under the rules of Sec. 501(c)(3). which provides that non-profits cannot:

*

participate in, or intervene in (including the publishing or distribution of statements), any political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for public office.

*

Perhaps all of us need to contact our Congressmen/women and U.S. Senators and flood them with demands that the IRS move to act against the Mormon church and the offending Catholic dioceses.