One doesn't have to do with the other. It is not their place and violates their tax exempt status. It isn't about killing the church off, it's about the churches following the tax laws.
thats fine but good luck getting them to do that. Politicians came to my church to speak all the time. Our family complained but no one cared. If you really want to get something done you have to act not just say thats against the rules.
I don't go to church so me not going to their church isn't going to make a bit of difference. The politicians that go to these churches to get money and votes sure as hell aren't going to do anything about it since in certain areas of the country, they are a large percentage of their voter base. It is wrong and it should be enforced.
Churches can have political views, they just can't use official church functions (e.g. sermons by Priests) to encourage folks to vote for or against various platforms or candidates. There is nothing wrong (tax-wise) for a Priest to devote an entire sermon to the issues of abortion or gay marriage or illegal immigration. It steps over the line (tax-wise) if he says, do not vote for Candidate X because he/she will make it easier for women to get abortions or make it easier for gay marriage or enact laws to deport all illegal immigrants.
many things that are against the law should be enforced, illegal immigration comes to mind, in my opinion if the person moved on to another church she would be voting with her dollars.
I don't think so. They're Catholic, so they attend their local church. They don't jump around as much as Protestants. But, I'm with Space Ghost. The government can't bully a church into giving people communion by threatening their tax exemption. Too intrusive, especially since the election is over.
in all honesty....hope this doesn't offend too much....how dare any man deny communion to another man with the one true God. that makes me sick. that's RELIGION.
Although I'm the one who started this thread I agree and while I find the church's position dissapointing it is theirs to do so. It seems to me that if the Church doesn't want to give someone communion for whatever reason that is their perogative not the government's.
Perhaps it might be that since I don't subcribe to the belief I see it somewhat differently. The way I read it is that the Catholic Church has the right to refuse service whatever the reason and the separation of church and state protects them from the state intrusion. While this seems biased and discrimanatory it seems like it is their right to determine how their own religious services are conducted just as a Hindu temple could kick me out if I brought a big mac to the temple. I posted this thread more to spark discussion rather than condemn the priest or Catholicism. While I don't agree with what they are doing I think they have a right to do it.
That was my bad and what I get for reading too quickly. My apologies for making a misleading thread title and it was unintentional.
Just to clarify the tax exemption the tax exemption comes from the state, at least in Texas the IRS grants a 501c 3 which gives IRS recognition to a non profit/ church so that contributions are deductable for income tax purposes the IRS pulls the 501c 3 status if a church endorses a candidate publically
Agree. Where do you draw the line on what constitutes endorsing a candidate/party? Churches welcome government intrusion by accepting subsidies.
That would intrude on separation of church and state. The government could hypothetically tax on things that effect the practice of one religion more than another. The state needs to stay out of the business of the church but the church needs to stay out of the business of the state.
except that churches don't seek profit. to the extent there is a part of a church seeking profit, it is taxable. selling a book, for example...and retaining the profits from it...that's taxable no matter who does it. but my tiny little church that pays another church to use their sanctuary on sunday nights...that takes donations from the congregation to pay only for that and then turns the rest out to the community (little league registration fees for kids who can't pay; equipment for those kids; covering vaccines for families that can't pay; sending kids to summer camp)....where would we be taxed? at the point i make a donation to the church...you would tax our church everytime someone makes them a donation?
wait...i'm not saying they can't create their own rules...i'm not approaching this issue with my lawyer hat on. i'm not talking about government getting involved and saying they can't. i'm talking solely as someone who is trying to follow jesus...and has a very difficult time from the notion of withholding communion with god from someone for any reason. the people the church would deny communion to are the very same people that jesus spent time with preaching to...all while the religious leaders of his day condemned him for it.
How far does this go? Do they have the right to refuse service by race, for example? Or what about sexual orientation? Or height? I guess my question is how far does the separation of Church and State go.
I'm pro-choice and atheist, but I don't have much of a problem with this. He did it after the election, so it could be argued that he's not technically endorsing a candidate. Also, the "penalty" that he levies for Obama voters is both private and fairly surmountable. And, honestly, there are times when religious involvement in political issues based on pretty straightforward moral convictions has actually helped: things like the abolitionist and civil rights movements come to mind.
