Who Hijacked Our Country

Thursday, December 22, 2011

Tax-Exempt Status for Churches Engaging in Political Activity

Let’s hope this twisted sickfuck bill goes down in flames.  Rep. Walter B. Jones (R—Taliban) has introduced a bill that would allow churches to endorse or oppose political candidates and still keep their tax-exempt status.

HR 3600, if passed, would repeal the Johnson Amendment to the Internal Revenue Code.  This amendment, named after then-Senator Lyndon Johnson, goes back to 1954.  It prohibits churches from campaigning for or against any political candidate.

This is at least the third time this same Biblehump has introduced this same bill in the House.  In 2002 Jones’ bill got defeated.  In 2007 it never made it out of the House Ways and Means Committee.  Let’s hope the third time WON’T be the charm.

Emily Krueger of Americans United for the Separation of Church and State said:

“Religious politicking is a flat-out bad idea for a number of reasons.  Making this change would dramatically impact our campaign finance system.  Houses of worship are tax exempt because they are supposed to be charitable, not political. For this reason, contributions made to them are tax deductible while political donations are not…The bill has failed time and time again as it surely will this time around, and yet Rep. Jones refuses to quit.”

How does that old expression go again, something about doing the same thing over and over and over and expecting a different result.

Labels: , , , , , ,


Anonymous Anonymous said...

This guy is a idiot! Well put Tom!

December 22, 2011 at 1:28 PM  
Anonymous S.W. Anderson said...

This is the Walter B. Jones Sucks Up to the Religious Right Act, the better to keep 'em donating to and voting for Walter B. Jones.

December 22, 2011 at 4:46 PM  
Blogger Lisa said...

I assume that includes "all" churches

December 22, 2011 at 7:06 PM  
Blogger Snave said...

Good grief... what does Jeremiah Wright specifically have to do with this bill?

I don't want my tax dollars going toward the promotion of religion, period. Doesn't matter to me whether the church is one Obama went to or if it's one run by Pat Robertson. You don't like your money going to anything much that is related to "big government"? Well, I don't like mine going to the promotion of fundamentalist religion (which I view as one of the greatest threats to our country).

This bill would just make it so that most churches could openly do what they already do on the sly, which is endorse Republican candidates.

December 22, 2011 at 7:30 PM  
Blogger Lisa said...

you don't Jeremiah Wright gets tax exempt status? I am sure he isn't endorsing Republicans.

December 22, 2011 at 7:42 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

In Fact during the Bush Jr Administration a lot of black Churches and Non Profits were targeted by the IRS. I think they are afraid that a Democratic Administration can/will turn it around on the Big Right Wing Mega churches


December 22, 2011 at 10:56 PM  
Blogger Tom Harper said...

Paul and Kerry: Thanks.

SW: Sucking up to the Religious Right seems to be an incredibly lucrative gig.

Snave: You summed it up. Tax dollars and religion -- any religion -- are two totally unconnected things.

Erik: I don't remember that. But I do remember all those "mysterious" fires at black churches during that period. And Ralph Reed getting so many photo ops from his crocodile tears about the fires.

December 23, 2011 at 1:55 AM  
Blogger Lisa said...

In Fact during the Bush Jr Administration a lot of black Churches and Non Profits were targeted by the IRS

Well if they spread hate and anti-semism like the Trinity Church I can see why. Maybe there was question on how many of those Ministers like Wright,Sharpton and Jesse Jackson became so rich.
Ironic that Sharpton owes about a million dollars in back taxes.
Not paying taxes seems to come home to roost in the Democrat party.

December 23, 2011 at 7:19 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

No one spreads more antisemitism then Donald Wildeman and Pat Robertson and Pat Robertson is the richest of them all.


December 23, 2011 at 10:17 AM  
Blogger Jack Jodell said...

Churches who step across the line by actually telling their followers specifically who to vote for should definitely be taxed.

December 23, 2011 at 1:44 PM  
Blogger Snave said...

Lisa, you like pick on "black churches"? Fine, go ahead and do that all you want. I'm an equal opportunity kind of guy, so I pick on all of them, regardless.

The problem for me isn't one of what color the churchgoers are or of where they fall on the political spectrum. The problem is that so many churches are getting tax exempt status even when they are overtly political. Do you not get that giving them tax exempt status is unconstitutional in that it presents a pretty clear case of government "respecting an establishment of religion"?

I'd like to see some numbers or estimates on how much tax revenue our country is missing out on simply by not taxing the churches.

December 23, 2011 at 11:24 PM  
Anonymous S.W. Anderson said...

Tom wrote: "The problem for me isn't one of what color the churchgoers are or of where they fall on the political spectrum."

No, those would obviously be the problems of Lisa.

December 24, 2011 at 12:34 AM  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home