1. Attention: We have put together a thread with tips and a tutorial video to help with using the new software. Please take a moment to check out the thread here: Trapshooters.com Tutorial & Help Video.
    Dismiss Notice

Editorial letters in the Denver Post

Discussion in 'Politics, Elections & Legislation' started by Rick Barker, Nov 10, 2012.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Rick Barker

    Rick Barker Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 25, 2009
    Messages:
    14,383
    Couple of Lefty loons livid over the Denver Post allowing churches to buy full page ads against Obama.

    Seems it was wrong for the Post to pursue their greed to make money and the Churches to exercise their freedom of speech in pointing out the possible violation of religious freedoms.

    All three principles in the 1st Amendments.


    Oh, the Irony!!!

    Don't forget, Dems don't practice exclusion. Right? Right??
     
  2. NMULTRARUNNER55

    NMULTRARUNNER55 Member

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2011
    Messages:
    425
    Churches cannot keep a tax exempt status if they engage in partisan political activities. That's been the law for many years but for the last 3 years it has not been enforced. Imagine that! A coincidence? I don't think so.

    Steve Nunley
    Albq., NM
     
  3. timberfaller

    timberfaller Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2007
    Messages:
    7,961
    Location:
    Eastern Washington
    Check again Steve, your splitting hairs.

    I think you'll find, if "preached" behind the pulpit and endorsing a party candidate.

    and that comes from the "separation of church and state" phrase/myth, that is in neither the Constitution nor the Declaration of Independence.

    It would be an interesting Constitutional court case but not with today's spineless leaders.
     
  4. Rick Barker

    Rick Barker Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 25, 2009
    Messages:
    14,383
    True enough, their 501(c) status prohibits them from endorsing or opposing any one candiate, but the ads in question were carefully crafted to avoid that and told the readers to the future of the country and thei belief systems they wanted depended on their vote.

    They never the less helped any clear thinking person understand Obama was not the choice.

    Just as the 2nd Amendment has been misunderstood for decades, so has the first;

    "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion. or prohibiting the free exercise thereof, or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

    No exempt status for any church has been revoked,. My guess is the government does not want to open up a can of worms that would be ruled against them by the SCOTUS. The IRS cannot issue policy contrary to the Constitution.
     
  5. NMULTRARUNNER55

    NMULTRARUNNER55 Member

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2011
    Messages:
    425
    True, the Constitution guarantees free speech but not tax exempt status!
    But I'm not a lawyer and I didn't read the ads.

    Steve
     
  6. Francis Marion

    Francis Marion Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 6, 2009
    Messages:
    1,737
    I'm not sure of their tax exempt ststus, case by case, but it was well documented(and not at all hidden) that preachers in the black churches were singing the praises of the African born commie. But this is not surprising.Had any so called news person gotten wind of it, it would have garnered about as much press as Benghazi.
     
  7. Rick Barker

    Rick Barker Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 25, 2009
    Messages:
    14,383
    So what, the worse that could happen to a church? They get there status suspended and it is given back. It has happened before and this stuff needs to be challenged and brought before the courts.

    The IRS has no lawful right to suspend the rights of anyone or any entity based on conditions they set in 1954. You have to remember the Constitution is a document that defines the rights of the people and the limits it places on the government, not the other way around.
     
  8. Rick Barker

    Rick Barker Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 25, 2009
    Messages:
    14,383
    From the website of the ACLJ here is the loophole:

    ---------------------------------------------------------------------

    "While some provisions within the Internal Revenue Code prohibit a church from engaging in certain political conduct, it also provides “an alternate means by which [a church could] communicate its sentiments about candidates for political office." Branch Ministries v. Rossotti, 211 F.3d 137, 143 (D.C. Cir. 2000).

    In Rossotti, the court explained that a church that wishes to be more politically active can form a political action committee (“PAC”) within a church-created 501(c)(4) organization. Id. However, a church that wishes to do this must proceed carefully.

    The related 501(c)(4) organization must be separately incorporated from the church and it "is also subject to the ban on intervening in political campaigns." Id. However, to legally circumvent this ban, the church-created 501(c)(4) organization may form a PAC which “would be free to participate in political campaigns." Id.; see also 26 C.F.R. § 1.527-6(f), (g) (1999).

    It is the PAC formed within the 501(c)(4) organization that may engage in political activities, not the 501(c)(4) organization. Id. As long as churches follow this procedure, churches can indirectly support or oppose political campaigns or legislation."
     
  9. CharlieAMA

    CharlieAMA TS Supporters TS Supporters

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    12,588
    Location:
    God's Country
    Good post Rick. Charlie
     
  10. Rick Barker

    Rick Barker Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 25, 2009
    Messages:
    14,383
    Thank you CharlieAMA

    Here is another point.

    Are not unions also tax exempt???

    I suppose they never get involved in the support of a particular candidate and publicly announce their support do they?
     
  11. halfmile

    halfmile Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    15,642
    Location:
    Green Bay Wisconsin
    The Constitution says:

    "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

    All the claptrap since then including the Sedition Act, The Smith Act, and a host of other Opinions by the Supreme court and various legal entities is the result of people trying to make something happen that is not there. In some cases they are successful.

    One filmmaker was sentenced to ten years imprisonment because his portrayal of British soldiers in a movie about the American Revolution impugned the good faith of an American ally, the United Kingdom.[22] The Sedition Act of 1918 went even further, criminalizing "disloyal," "scurrilous" or "abusive" language against the government.

    To sum up:

    If you say the word "lawyer" very quickly ten times in succesion you will hear the real truth.

    HM
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.