Not content with the annual billions of $$$ in federal/state/local tax exemptions that houses of worship get, with one of the very few limitations being to stay out of politics, now some want that limitation lifted ~ I'm thinking now is the time to have a national debate on this ~ the Amelia Thompson-Deveaux link I made "live" below leads to an her original article with much more detail ~ Sooz

Maybe churches shouldn't be tax-exempt
As a debate over clergy openly endorsing political candidates heats up, there's a simple solution.
By Jason Notte 4 hours ago

A conservative group wants churches to be able to endorse political candidates. The group's detractors say they have no problem with that -- as long as churches give up their tax-exempt status when doing so.

As Amelia Thompson-Deveaux at The American Prospect points out, the Commission on Accountability and Policy for Religious Organizations wants to change a 1954 law that prevents tax-exempt organizations from endorsing political figures. The group includes Florida megachurch pastor Joel Hunter, but it primarily comprises Christian CPAs and church financial advisers. It has drawn support from Republicans such as Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul and Iowa Rep. Steve King, who want the group to take on the IRS directly.

Roughly two-thirds of Americans agree that churches should not be able to endorse political candidates. Still, since 2008, thousands of ministers who believe the prohibition on their speech is unconstitutional have participated in "Pulpit Freedom Sunday," in which pastors openly endorse candidates from the pulpit and in some cases, transcribe their sermons and send them to the IRS, demanding an audit.

The IRS, however, hasn't audited a church on those grounds since 2009, when a federal judge threw out the IRS’s case against a Minnesota megachurch that had allegedly endorsed Michelle Bachmann. The judge said the IRS needed to clarify its internal regulations, but the IRS has shown little motivation to do so.

The problem is that the Commission on Accountability and Policy for Religious Organizations, the Pulpit Freedom Sunday participants and a group set up by Sen. Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, want the IRS to change its rules to allow political endorsements for all nonprofits – but don't want them to give up their tax-exempt status to do so.

Organizations like Americans United for Separation of Church and State and the Freedom from Religion Foundation don't like the sound of this one bit and have been pushing the IRS to prevent what they call "pulpit electioneering."

Slate's Matt Yglesias offered another approach: Make all houses of worship of all denominations pay taxes. Instead of discriminating against one religion over another or punishing a church for issuing a partisan statement on national policy rather than a nonpartisan one, tax all of them equally and allow all religious leaders to freely and openly endorse the political figures and ideology of their choosing.

Yglesias has some interesting company in this regard. Fox News analyst and former Republican presidential hopeful Mike Huckabee endorsed the same line of thinking earlier this summer.

"It may be time to quit worrying about the tax code and start thinking more about the truth of the living God," Huckabee told a group of Southern Baptist pastors. "We should stand more faithful with what God would have us say, and choose our freedom more than our financial benefit."

http://money.msn.com/now/post--maybe-churches-shouldnt-be-tax-exempt

Churches were originally given tax exemption because the feeling was that they provided a lot of community services themselves--things that maybe the state wouldn't have to pay for. And they do. They provide schooling and foodbanks and a pile of other stuff.

What bothers me though is the way they provide it. They provide healthcare with federal funding, but refuse to provide abortions or birth control because it offends their beliefs. They provide 12 step programs that are incredibly successful, but include faith development as part of the recovery process. There always seems to be these catches....

I would like to see churches taxed, and tax dollars be spent on non denominational service delivery. As a member of the society, i'm not ungrateful to what churches have provided and continue to provide to the less fortunate, but I think federal funding should go only to providing those services that service everyone, even those who don't fit in to religious categories. Its not a good reason to be turned away from charities, and funding should not be given, or tax exemption, to those organizations that cherry pick who they are going to help and why.

They never should have been tax exempt. If a church does fit the guidelines for a charitable organization, then ok. However, as greenie pointed out that is very rare these days.

Agreed. They should not be tax exempt and neither should offerings be tax deductible.

Render unto Ceasar....

monster, putting aside for the moment that virtually all charitable contributions go to non-profits, do you see "offerings" as different from any other charitable contribution?

Sooz

Keep them tax exempt - BUT - keep them OUT OF POLITICS.

If they want in on politics, then they should pay the price through taxation.

That's generally been the idea but gutless politicians etc....

Separation of Church and State must be maintained: no campaigning from the pulpit for particular candidates or political parties and no taxation.

not speaking for monster, but interestingly, an offering to a leader who intersperses religion with political speech does not seem very different from a campaign contribution to a leader who intersperses political speech with religion.

Good point, queenie ~ no difference at all ... except for the tax classifications ~ religious contributions are considered "charitable" but political contributions are not ~

Sooz