Again...there is no free speech issue here. See, above. The limitation of the First Amendment is on the government....not from private individuals. Walk into work today and start spouting off about something. Scream about it. Protest. You'll find your boss has no First Amendment responsibilities that keep him/her from reprimanding or firing you.
they're nonprofits. they're governed by the nonprofit acts from the state. in order to meet nonprofit status they have to meet certain criteria. churches, temples, mosques, the american heart association, etc. don't pay taxes because they don't have income in any traditional sense. they rely on donations. when churches sell bibles...or CD's...or something like that...and if they retain profits without circulating them out for some charitable cause...then it's income and it's taxable.
While not a statuatory ban this seems to be a back door way of banning unpopular speech. Fair enough and I won't belabor the question by adding details to a hypothetical question. As I am co-owner in the company I don't think I will be firing myself, although there aren't plenty of times that I probably should for spending too much time on CF.net. Anyway I don't see that as comparable as the place of work is a private property and as an employee you are there to work and actions that affect the productivity of the workplace is a tangible harm. I don't see how that is comparable to individuals on a public street with no other connection protesting. Again I'm forced to agree with you that this may not be a Constitutional issue but as I said my own feeling is why it doesn't violate the letter of the First Ammendment it violates the spirit. While its been said before I appreciate your well thought out responses and debating what is a very emotional topic calm and reasoned.
As obviously I'm not a lawyer and know very little about tax law I'm curious is 501C3 status threatened only when the pastor speaks out on a political issue at the pulpit? If a pastor not wearing pastoral vestements or any other indication of office were to speak out publically, say at a campaign rally, would that put 501C3 status at threat?
1. No. There's no ban. Say whatever you want. The government isn't restricting your right to say what you want. The government never told him he couldn't say that. There is a distinction between public and private actors. 2. I hear ya. But if an employee walks in today and wants to protest something...and scream across the office. Or even if she wants to do it peacefully....you owe here absolutely zilch in the way of free speech rights. None at all. Because you didn't make the promises under the First Amendment...the government did. You personally owe absolutely no one the right to free speech. 3. I understand you feel it violates the spirit...but please understand the Bill of Rights is a group of promises by the government...things the government won't do. The government wasn't harmed...they're not bringing suit here. Someone claimed injury. Courts hear the facts and determine if someone was, indeed, injured....and if so, what it would take to compensate for that injury. That's it. And that's why this has nothing to do with Constitutional free speech analysis. And it's why the courts hearing this matter won't even be considering it.
pastors can speak at rallies all they want. they're still individual citizens. what they can't do is turn their churches into PAC's. they can't endorse a candidate from the pulpit.
That's what I thought and didn't think that 501C3 status would threaten the free speech right of pastors as individuals. Again thank you for your responses and I think we are at an impasse regarding the main topic but it has been interesting and educational.
My understanding is it has to do with what is done in the church meeting. Or on the church premises. Or as representing the church in official capacity. The 501C3 status is only a validation from the IRS that the charitible organization or religious org. is recongnized as such by the IRS for the purpose of tax deductable donations. The law I've questioned is based on the premise that the organization only exists for the purpose of charity or religion and while issues may be discussed, these issues cannot be discussed concerning a particular politician or candidate with regard to an election. I can say I do not favor abortion, but I cannot say Hillary favors fed funding of abortion. Except I just did. I believe I can go to a public campaign meeting as a citizen and speak concerning a candidate if I am not acting in an official church capacity. This is one of those can of worm things for me. I have read that back in the late 1930's- 40's many religious leaders didn't speak up in Germany concerning the treatment of Jews and they said nothing about actions taken by Hitler and others that bothered them. They were silent often. In other words there are moral and religious issues a minister may feel strongly about but he is currently restricted from discussing those involved. For instance the death penalty. Many people vote without knowing where a candidate stands on this issue. The minister I believe should have the opportunity to tell those attending a church meeting information that would help them understand where a candidate stands on this kind of issue that could very well be a morality choice for the religious. If my religion was very opposed to the death penalty or to wars or armed conflicts; I think free speech should actually protect the minister or rabbi or other religious leader who would inform his own organization concerning a candidates voting record or public statements regarding such. For myself, I don't bring up politics, but I am just stating my opinion in the context of the 1st admendment rights.
Actually it doesn't even have to come close to being a PAC by the letter of the law, you cannot speak against a candidate or endorse a candidate in any way. You cannot say- Joe has supported the death penalty and we don't believe the death penalty should be supported. At least I have been told this at seminars... I really don't know and I find no need myself to discuss candidates in church... we're not about that I don't like the religious right and the politics in church stuff as it is, I don't think it is good though to have a law that restricts a religious leader from speaking about a candidate if they so choose.
I have a simple mind, I get bored easily, I read the GARM early and often but don't post much... I forgot what else.....
