HuskyCaucasian Posted May 30, 2008 Share Posted May 30, 2008 (edited) Ok, I need to set a ground rule here... This is NOT to bash any particular candidate. This is not meant for "partisan bickering". It's a general topic on politics and the pulpit. Referances CAN be made to the obvious sources, but no canidate bashing! I have to give my opinion on this. I have grown increasingly angry with the politicization of the pulpit in recent years. Pflegers comments just topped it off. There are obvious cross overs. ABortion and gay marriage are two off the top of my head. However, politician bashing from the pulpit is not in play. A while back there was the preacher going on about Obamas mom and dad being in heat and that is why Barack was conceived. You have all the Rev. Wright crap and now this assclown Pfleger. In my church, we go out of our way to not preach politics from the pulpit. In fact, a few months ago my pastor used Obama's slogan "Change we can Believe in" to illistrate a point during his sermon and he prefaced it by saying "I just want to make clear that I am not endorsing any particular candidate". It sickens me and the IRS needs to look into making these church's examples and revoking their tax exempt status. Edited May 30, 2008 by Athomeboy_2000 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigSqwert Posted May 30, 2008 Share Posted May 30, 2008 As an agnostic I could care less what any of these people have to say. Their opinion is no more important than my mailman's. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StrangeSox Posted May 30, 2008 Share Posted May 30, 2008 (edited) If you politicize the pulpit (like Pfleger, Robertson, etc.), you should lose your tax-exempt status. As an agnostic I could care less what any of these people have to say. Their opinion is no more important than my mailman's. If you turn your church into a political organization, should you still be tax-exempt? Edited May 30, 2008 by StrangeSox Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mreye Posted May 30, 2008 Share Posted May 30, 2008 Not to split hairs, but I think abortion is more of a religious issue than a political one. At least originally. Gay marriage I couldn't care less about. I can see the point on both sides. My priest has gotten pretty close to the line, but it is very infrequent. If it was more rampant I'd be finding another church, because he leans a little toward even distribution of income, IMO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mplssoxfan Posted May 30, 2008 Share Posted May 30, 2008 On a tangent... Why is the gay marriage issue not covered honestly in any form of media? The term "marriage" has two distinct meanings. One is a holy sacrament in the church; the other is a legal contract granted by the government. I don't think anyone is saying that churches should be forced to marry any couple that they do not want to marry. What they are saying is that the government should not discriminate against people when they grant contracts of marriage. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigSqwert Posted May 30, 2008 Share Posted May 30, 2008 QUOTE (StrangeSox @ May 30, 2008 -> 10:19 AM) If you turn your church into a political organization, should you still be tax-exempt? No Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HuskyCaucasian Posted May 30, 2008 Author Share Posted May 30, 2008 QUOTE (Mplssoxfan @ May 30, 2008 -> 12:48 PM) On a tangent... Why is the gay marriage issue not covered honestly in any form of media? The term "marriage" has two distinct meanings. One is a holy sacrament in the church; the other is a legal contract granted by the government. I don't think anyone is saying that churches should be forced to marry any couple that they do not want to marry. What they are saying is that the government should not discriminate against people when they grant contracts of marriage. this needs it's own thread IMO Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mplssoxfan Posted May 30, 2008 Share Posted May 30, 2008 QUOTE (Athomeboy_2000 @ May 30, 2008 -> 01:02 PM) this needs it's own thread IMO You're right. Sorry. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mreye Posted May 30, 2008 Share Posted May 30, 2008 What is the law exactly? I believe they can talk about any political issue, but have to stop short of pointing out which candidate agrees / disagrees with the church's beliefs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HuskyCaucasian Posted May 30, 2008 Author Share Posted May 30, 2008 QUOTE (mreye @ May 30, 2008 -> 01:43 PM) What is the law exactly? I believe they can talk about any political issue, but have to stop short of pointing out which candidate agrees / disagrees with the church's beliefs. I think you may be right. However, i think it also includes a church publically endorsing a candidate. The PERSON can when not on official church business (like in your free time), but he can not use the church to work with a candidate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Texsox Posted May 30, 2008 Share Posted May 30, 2008 I am an American. I work a job, I volunteer in my community, and I damn well will not give up my rights to make an impact in my community, nation, and world, because I attend Church. My opinion and vote is just as valid as an atheist. People can gather any damn place they want to discuss how to make their community and nation better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted May 30, 2008 Share Posted May 30, 2008 QUOTE (Texsox @ May 30, 2008 -> 01:06 PM) I am an American. I work a job, I volunteer in my community, and I damn well will not give up my rights to make an impact in my community, nation, and world, because I attend Church. My opinion and vote is just as valid as an atheist. People can gather any damn place they want to discuss how to make their community and nation better. No one's asking you to do any of those things. The whole reason this is a question is not because there's some logical reason why it's a bad thing for religious people to have an influence on politics, or because they shouldn't be able to talk about some things...it's because of the gigantic tax advantages given to religious institutions. If you want to be a tax advantaged charity, then at some level, you do need to be below the fray. Otherewise, you're in the classic situation of one party getting in power and giving bigger tax advantages to charities that do the work supporting that party. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Texsox Posted May 30, 2008 Share Posted May 30, 2008 Then why not mention of tremendous amount of community service that is given by those same Churches? AMERICANS allowed that tax advantage. They also offer tax free advantages to purely partisan groups as well. Why not start there? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted May 30, 2008 Share Posted May 30, 2008 QUOTE (Texsox @ May 30, 2008 -> 01:13 PM) Then why not mention of tremendous amount of community service that is given by those same Churches? AMERICANS allowed that tax advantage. They also offer tax free advantages to purely partisan groups as well. Why not start there? Please, name some. When I contribute to a 527, or to a candidate, it is not a tax deductible contribution. When I give to the NRA, it's tax deductible, but that money is at some level required to be used for work other than political work. If you're going to be working for one side, then the money you raise can't be tax-deductible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Texsox Posted May 30, 2008 Share Posted May 30, 2008 QUOTE (Balta1701 @ May 30, 2008 -> 03:10 PM) No one's asking you to do any of those things. The whole reason this is a question is not because there's some logical reason why it's a bad thing for religious people to have an influence on politics, or because they shouldn't be able to talk about some things...it's because of the gigantic tax advantages given to religious institutions. If you want to be a tax advantaged charity, then at some level, you do need to be below the fray. Otherewise, you're in the classic situation of one party getting in power and giving bigger tax advantages to charities that do the work supporting that party. Once you clean up groups like the NRA, AARP, NAACP, then start talking about Churches. What party do Churches belong to? Two of the biggest Bible thumpers around here are PA (who is noticeably absent lately) and myself. So which party has the advantage? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Texsox Posted May 30, 2008 Share Posted May 30, 2008 QUOTE (Balta1701 @ May 30, 2008 -> 03:17 PM) Please, name some. When I contribute to a 527, or to a candidate, it is not a tax deductible contribution. When I give to the NRA, it's tax deductible, but that money is at some level required to be used for work other than political work. If you're going to be working for one side, then the money you raise can't be tax-deductible. The NRA directly donates to candidates. They publish voters guides to the candidates most gun friendly. Are you seriously advocating the government establishing what Churches can discuss in their buildings? How would you enforce it? Could Pastors send in sermons to a government agency for pre-approval so they do not run afoul of the new laws? Apathy is rampant in our society, why stop Americans from getting involved? And why stop at Churches? How about the Lions, Elk Club, Rotary Int'l, DAR, should they too be forbidden to discuss politics or have their tax exempt status revoked? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted May 31, 2008 Share Posted May 31, 2008 QUOTE (Texsox @ May 30, 2008 -> 02:39 PM) The NRA directly donates to candidates. They publish voters guides to the candidates most gun friendly. Are you seriously advocating the government establishing what Churches can discuss in their buildings? How would you enforce it? Could Pastors send in sermons to a government agency for pre-approval so they do not run afoul of the new laws? Apathy is rampant in our society, why stop Americans from getting involved? And why stop at Churches? How about the Lions, Elk Club, Rotary Int'l, DAR, should they too be forbidden to discuss politics or have their tax exempt status revoked? Or unions? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted May 31, 2008 Share Posted May 31, 2008 You know, if we just could get a public campaign financing system set up and working...we might not have to worry about any of this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Texsox Posted May 31, 2008 Share Posted May 31, 2008 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ May 30, 2008 -> 09:27 PM) Or unions? Exactly, and when the government starts restricting speech about itself, we're in trouble. I assume they would allow positive messages and cheering. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts