Pres. Trump Frees Churches to Go Political
"Leaders of the U.S. religious left, a rising force of opposition to Trump's hard-line stance on immigration and healthcare, said they were poised to benefit from the move, which lifts the risk of religious groups losing their tax-exempt status if they advocate for particular candidates.
"This is going to backfire on Trump," said the Rev. Jennifer Butler, chief executive of progressive policy group Faith in Public Life. "We are morally outraged at what is going on and we are appalled at the weaponisation of religion."
The group is planning to back congressional candidates who would oppose Trump in the 2018 midterm elections, and will now have more liberty to do so without jeopardizing the tax-exempt status of the churches its members represent.
"We're going to be mobilizing millions of voters to turn out at the polls and vote their values," Butler said." --
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa...
As I read the order it does nothing.
"... the Secretary of the Treasury shall ensure, to the extent permitted by law, that the Department of the Treasury does not take any adverse action against any individual, house of worship, or other religious organization on the basis that such individual or organization speaks or has spoken about moral or political issues from a religious perspective, where speech of similar character has, consistent with law, not ordinarily been treated as participation or intervention in a political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) a candidate for public office by the Department of the Treasury."
... where speech of similar character has ... not ordinarily been treated as participation or intervention in a political campaign ... "
Well, OK, what if such speech has been ordinarily treated as political intervention?
And what is a "religion" as the US DoD has recognized secular humanism as a religion?
Read the White House release.
https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-...
"This is going to backfire on Trump," said the Rev. Jennifer Butler, chief executive of progressive policy group Faith in Public Life. "We are morally outraged at what is going on and we are appalled at the weaponisation of religion."
The group is planning to back congressional candidates who would oppose Trump in the 2018 midterm elections, and will now have more liberty to do so without jeopardizing the tax-exempt status of the churches its members represent.
"We're going to be mobilizing millions of voters to turn out at the polls and vote their values," Butler said." --
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa...
As I read the order it does nothing.
"... the Secretary of the Treasury shall ensure, to the extent permitted by law, that the Department of the Treasury does not take any adverse action against any individual, house of worship, or other religious organization on the basis that such individual or organization speaks or has spoken about moral or political issues from a religious perspective, where speech of similar character has, consistent with law, not ordinarily been treated as participation or intervention in a political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) a candidate for public office by the Department of the Treasury."
... where speech of similar character has ... not ordinarily been treated as participation or intervention in a political campaign ... "
Well, OK, what if such speech has been ordinarily treated as political intervention?
And what is a "religion" as the US DoD has recognized secular humanism as a religion?
Read the White House release.
https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-...
Previous comments... You are currently on page 2.
1. They were designed to help large enslavement organizations (Rockefeller, Rothschild, Carnegie, Morgan...you know the players) squirrel away untold amounts of un-taxed dollars to co-opt the educational system of the US by buying up chairs at all the major universities.
2. Before 1913, any organization that was directly helping the poor, providing hospitals for indigents, taking care of orphans etc were either taxed at a much reduced rate or not at all. Then when we created "holy" businesses who somehow have a video store that is "more socially responsible" because ???? so they get a non-taxable status (American Red Cross, American Cancer Society, Mercy Corp who props up the "homeless industry" here in Portland).
3. Non-taxables also get a LOT MORE benefits than we do. They can use a lot of the city and state's locations, equipment and services of the bureaucracy whereas I can't (eg. I can't get on the Central Library Calendar even though I've booked the room for an event because I'm NOT a non-taxable.
4. The smart non-taxables (those on the OTHER side of politics - not ours), work together, fund each other, promote each other's events and use each other's people and connections. They have entire networks of inter-support amongst themselves and even share grant writers and templates...lots of stuff to disadvantage REAL businesses.
5. It allows state sanctioned businesses (non-taxables), some even OPERATED by the CITY, to be in direct competition with productive sector businesses - (bicycle shop ON the river in competition to a real business across the street - the libraries are now filled with popular, short term interest material they turn and flip every few months - in direct competition to every video, music and book store in town...oh, and see if you can find a copy of the Constitution in your branch library by the way,
6. The most important thing....more and more people are forming non-taxables and they don't mind taxing the "taxable businesses" to make up for it. Just think for a minute, if ALL businesses had to pay taxes, NOBODY would be eager for anyone to pay taxes and we'd be asking a lot more questions about what they do with our money...no more expensive "edible forests for children to walk through....once a year".
If you'd like some evidence...I'll send you a READABLE copy of the Reese Report from 1963. I found it in a very famous gentleman's library when I was helping to catalogue some of it.
Renee@Flourish.us
But, to tackle some of those difficulties... Churches are not taxed on their income; they do not pay property taxes. While clergy do offer "moral guidance" at election time, they are not supposed to stump for specific candidates or specific ballot issues. Generally, the compromise has been honored, though churches get away with occasional exceptions, though civic authorities do not just occasionally tax a church once in a while.
See Forbes here, "Why Churches are the Gold Standard in Tax Excempt Organizations":
https://www.forbes.com/sites/robertwo...
"The power to tax is the power to destroy." (Webster for the defense in McCulloch v. Maryland, 1819.) So, we do not tax churches. The state bows to the power of the pulpit.