[lit-ideas] Follow-up to NC situation
- From: Eternitytime1@xxxxxxx
- To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Fri, 13 May 2005 00:26:28 EDT
Hi,
Here is a follow-up to Stan's piece on the church in NC.
It is an issue of concern...It is definitely happens here in Missouri.
Different is dead, for sure.
Longing for tolerance,
Marlena in Missouri
Lawmaker Hopes to Open Churches to Political Speech
Thursday, May 12, 2005
By Kelley Beaucar Vlahos
WASHINGTON â?? As one pastor resigned this week amid a
firestorm over the role of politics in his Baptist church, a U.S.
congressman continues to try to make it easier for religious
leaders and their congregations to engage in partisan political
activity on the church's time and dime.
Rev. Chan Chandler (search) resigned his post as pastor of the
Waynesville Baptist Church (search) in North Carolina on
Tuesday after nine members accused him of leading other
members to push them out because they didn't agree with his
pro-Republican views.
Chandler has denied claims that the nine were voted out because
of their political views, but his detractors said they were tired of
his politically-flavored sermons and claimed that he was intent
on politicizing the church, even calling on members who
supported Democrat John Kerry in the 2004 presidential election
to "repent or resign."
While the North Carolina case may appear extreme, it touches on
a long-standing debate over whether religious leaders and
members of a church can use houses of worship and church
resources to engage in partisan activity.
Current law dictating tax-exempt organizations, including
churches, says they may not. However, a Republican lawmaker
says proposed changes to that law are gaining momentum on
Capitol Hill.
"Each year we get more and more sponsors and I think there is
more interest in this issue than has ever been," said Rep. Walter
Jones (search) of North Carolina, who for the fourth time has
introduced a bill relaxing restrictions on political speech in
churches.
The six-term representative said the political climate has become
more amenable to changes because of concern over gay marriage
and other hot-button political issues that have mobilized
Christian conservatives across the country.
"My whole contention is that I believe â?? and I am very strong in
my faith â?? that if we do not allow freedom of speech to be
expressed in our houses of worship, you will have people in the
state legislatures and Congress who have no respect for the Bible
or the Torah" or other religious beliefs, Jones told
FOXNews.com.
Jones' bill, the "Houses of Worship Free Speech Restoration Act
of 2005," introduced in January, is now before the House Ways
and Means Committee. It would amend the Internal Revenue
Code (search) to allow religious organizations and houses of
worship to engage in "religious free exercise and free speech
activities" without violating their tax-exempt status as nonprofit
groups. They would still be bound by campaign finance laws that
restrict tax-exempt groups, however.
Currently, tax-exempt organizations cannot engage in partisan
activity, including direct endorsements or opposition to
particular candidates. This has been interpreted by the Internal
Revenue Service to prohibit such speech from the pulpit, in
mailings and other literature paid for by the church and
representing the church, and other activities clearly signaling a
preference by the church for one candidate over the other.
Jones and the bill's supporters, which include a host of
conservative and Evangelical Christian churches and
organizations, say religious leaders had the right to express
political preferences and engage in direct endorsement of
candidates from the pulpit before 1954, when the current law
went into effect.
"Let's take a look at our Constitution â?? it says Ë?freedom of
speech,'" said William Murray, president of the Washington
D.C.-based Religious Freedom Coalition. "It doesn't say
Ë?freedom of speech unless you are in church on Sunday.'
(Opponents) want to pass laws that say when we have freedom
of speech and what we can say and society doesn't have a
problem with that?"
Despite the push for a change, a September Pew Forum on
Religion and Public Life poll found Americans sharply divided
over whether they wanted their religious leaders to get directly
involved in politics.
Critics of the bill, who have been largely successful in foiling
Jones' previous efforts, said giving tax breaks to churches who
endorse or denounce specific candidates violates the doctrine of
separation of church and state and is unfair to other nonprofits
that are bound by the same restrictions.
"If a church wants to be a political organization, let them pay
taxes," said Caroline McKnight, spokeswoman for the
MAINstream Coalition, a Kansas-based nonprofit dedicated to
"preserving constitutional freedoms which are threatened by
political extremists."
McKnight said her group began monitoring congressional efforts
to change the law after a local Baptist church was questioned for
distributing voter guides endorsing specific candidates last year.
"It's part of a concerted effort to use churchgoers for politics,"
she said of Jones' bill.
"Either you believe that a church should be inviolate from these
kinds of political activities or you prefer, that in the four weeks
leading up to the primaries or the general election, not to hear a
sermon, but to hear how to vote. Is that what you want?" she
asked.
Tax-exempt status revocations are rare, but do happen. In 1995,
the Church at Pierce Creek (search) in upstate New York had
its status revoked after sponsoring a newspaper ad calling for the
defeat of presidential candidate Bill Clinton in 1992.
Complaints and investigations are more commonplace and often
target churches on both sides of the ideological spectrum. In,
February the IRS announced it is investigating the Friendship
Missionary Baptist Church (search) in Florida, based on a
complaint by Americans for the Separation of Church and State.
The group said the church was in violation of IRS law when it
allowed Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry and Rev.
Al Sharpton to make their pitch for Kerry to the predominantly
black congregants during an August service. The pastor had
introduced Kerry as "the next president of the United States."
In May, Americans for the Separation of Church of State filed a
complaint alleging that Bishop Michael Sheridan of the
Colorado Springs Roman Catholic Diocese (search) violated
the law when he sent parishioners a letter setting forth a litmus
test for politicians seeking the Catholic vote. The complaint
charged the letter pressured parishioners to vote Republican.
"I think we are overreaching when we say that the church cannot
speak its moral conscience," said Bishop Harold Calvin Ray of
the Redemptive Life Fellowship Church (search) in Florida.
He said he opposes IRS guidelines that constitute "code words"
like "abortion" and "pro-life" as political speech.
He added, however, that he doesn't agree that pastors ought to be
endorsing specific candidates. "I don't believe that unfettered
political commentary would be in the best interest of the
church."
But supporters of Jones' bill are growing, an aide in his office
said. Sens. Sam Brownback, R-Kan., and Lindsay Graham, R-
S.C., have also expressed interest in supporting similar measures
in the Senate.
"For too long, we have slowly allowed our voices to be silenced
on imperative issues that directly harm our individual well-being
and that of society," Brownback told FOXNews.com.
Opponents add that the bill would give churches and
organizations a back-door for political fund-raising, though
Jones said he has included language underscoring that the new
law would not free entities from campaign finance laws that
limit contributions to candidates.
On the other hand, Murray said his group doesn't like the
campaign finance language because it could serve to stifle
speech even more. He said his group will hold off support for
Jones' bill until it is modified.
Sources from the House Ways and Means Committee said no
schedule is set to take up Jones' bill. The most recent House vote
on Jones' proposal came in 2002, at which time it was defeated
239 to 178, with 46 Republicans voting against it. Jones said he
hopes to have better luck this time.
"This is one of those issues where it is hard for me to say it's
going to happen, but it's also hard to say it's not going to
happen," he said.
____________________________________________________
_
Marlena Boggs mboggs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Adults Services Specialist 816-836-5200
Mid-Continent Public Library http://www.mcpl.lib.mo.us
------------------------------------------------------------------
To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off,
digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html
Other related posts:
- » [lit-ideas] Follow-up to NC situation
