July 5th, 2009
 

365 Gay: News

Anti-gay pastors in civil disobedience protest


(West Bend, Wisconsin) Pastor Luke Emrich prepared his sermon this week knowing his remarks could invite an investigation by the Internal Revenue Service. But that was the whole point, so Emrich forged ahead with his message: Thou shalt vote according to the Scriptures.

“I’m telling you straight up, I would choose life,” Emrich told about 100 worshippers Sunday at New Life Church, a nondenominational evangelical congregation about 40 miles from Milwaukee.

“I would cast a vote for John McCain and Sarah Palin,” he said. “But friends, it’s your choice to make, it’s not my choice. I won’t be in the voting booth with you.”

All told, 33 pastors in 22 states were to make pointed recommendations about political candidates Sunday, an effort orchestrated by the Arizona-based Alliance Defense Fund.

The conservative legal group plans to send copies of the pastors’ sermons to the IRS with hope of setting off a legal fight and abolishing restrictions on church involvement in politics. Critics call it unnecessary, divisive and unlikely to succeed.

Congress amended the tax code in 1954 to state that certain nonprofit groups, including secular charities and places of worship, can lose their tax-exempt status for intervening in a campaign involving candidates.

Erik Stanley, senior legal counsel for the Alliance Defense Fund, said hundreds of churches volunteered to take part in “Pulpit Freedom Sunday.” Thirty-three were chosen, in part for “strategic criteria related to litigation” Stanley wouldn’t discuss.

Pastor Jody Hice of Bethlehem Baptist Church in Bethlehem, Ga., said in an interview Sunday that his sermon compared Democrat Barack Obama and Republican John McCain on abortion and gay marriage and concluded that McCain “holds more to a biblical world view.”

He said he urged the Southern Baptist congregation to vote for McCain.

“The basic thrust was this was not a matter of endorsing, it’s a First Amendment issue,” Hice said. “To say the church can’t deal with moral and societal issues if it enters into the political arena is just wrong, it’s unconstitutional.”

At the independent Fairview Baptist Church in Edmond, Okla., pastor Paul Blair said he told his congregation, “As a Christian and as an American citizen, I will be voting for John McCain.”

“It’s absolutely vital to proclaim the truth and not be afraid to proclaim the truth from our pulpits,” Blair said in an interview.

Because the pastors were speaking in their official capacity as clergy, the sermons are clear violations of IRS rules, said Robert Tuttle, a professor of law and religion at George Washington University. But even if the IRS rises to the bait and a legal fight ensues, Tuttle said there’s “virtually no chance” courts will strike down the prohibition.

“The government is allowed, as long as it has a reasonable basis for doing it, to treat political and nonpolitical speech differently, and that’s essentially what it’s done here,” Tuttle said.

Not all the sermons came off as planned. Bishop Robert Smith Sr. of Word of Outreach Center in Little Rock said he had to postpone until next week because of a missed flight. Smith, a delegate to this month’s Republican National Convention, declined to say whom he would endorse.

Promotional materials for the initiative said each pastor would prepare the sermon with “legal assistance of the ADF to ensure maximum effectiveness in challenging the IRS.”

Stanley said the pastors alone wrote the sermons, with the framework that they be “a biblical evaluation of the candidates for office with a specific recommendation.” That could be a flat-out endorsement or opposition to one or both candidates, he said.

The legal group declined to release a list of participants in advance, citing concerns about potential disruptions at services. A list and excerpts from sermons will be made public early this week, with the delay necessary for lawyers to review the material, the group said.

Under the IRS code, places of worship can distribute voter guides, run nonpartisan voter registration drives and hold forums on issues, among other things. However, they cannot endorse a candidate, and their political activity cannot be biased for or against a candidate, directly or indirectly - a sometimes murky line.

The IRS said in a statement it is aware of Sunday’s initiative and “will monitor the situation and take action as appropriate.”

The agency has stepped up oversight of political activity in churches in recent years after receiving a flurry of complaints from the 2004 campaign. The IRS reported issuing written advisories against 42 churches for improper politically activity in 2004.

The ban on churches intervening in candidate campaigns survived a court challenge when a U.S. appellate court upheld the revocation of tax-exempt status of a New York church that took out a newspaper ad urging Christians to vote against Bill Clinton in the 1992 presidential election.

Opposition to Sunday’s sermon initiative was widespread. A United Church of Christ minister in Ohio rallied other religious leaders to file a complaint with the IRS. Roman Catholic Archbishop John Favalora of Miami wrote that the archdiocese abides by IRS rules in part because “we can do a lot for our communities with the money we save by being tax-exempt.”

Three former IRS officials also asked the agency to investigate the initiative, questioning the ethics of lawyers asking ministers to break the law.

Two-thirds of adults oppose political endorsements from churches and other places of worship and 52 percent want them out of politics altogether, according to a survey last month from the Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life.

“It is good public policy that in exchange for the valuable privilege of a tax exemption, you cannot turn your church or charity into a political action committee,” said Barry Lynn, executive director of Americans United for Church and State, which intends to report the participating churches to the IRS, along with any other churches acting independently.


Comments (38)
  • beargulch Said: September 29th, 2008 at 9:32 am
    • Of course these churches won’t get it; they’d prefer to live in a theocracy anyway, and we’ve been edging close to it during the past 10 years. They are free to say anything they want: just start paying taxes. Churches shouldn’t be tax exempt anyway, since nearly all of their speech and actions are politcal.

  • Mark K Said: September 29th, 2008 at 9:34 am
    • Then tax the shit out of them!!!

  • Lincoln Said: September 29th, 2008 at 9:46 am
    • This is a collective effort to break the law that frankly, is on their side. The last 8 years has blured the line of seperation of church and state and these churches will get away with this effort.
      The IRS would jump on any other non-profit that did this. I say TAX THE CHURCHES.

  • Ingo from Germany Said: September 29th, 2008 at 10:09 am
    • Remember John Lennon’s “Imagine?” AND NO RELIGION TOO!
      Yes, a better world without it!

  • Jeff Said: September 29th, 2008 at 10:23 am
    • Thirty-three were chosen, in part for “strategic criteria related to litigation” — If there were any attorneys or public officials involved in the “strategic” planning of this movement, they should lose their license/office for participating in the planning of an initiative designed to break the law.

  • Censoredagain Said: September 29th, 2008 at 10:38 am
    • I wonder if the attorneys at the Alliance Defense Fund read case law? The Supreme Court ruled against colleges receiving federal money from prohibiting military recruiters from their campus. It said they are free to prohibit the recruiters so long as they do not accept federal money. It seems the argument would be true for churches as well. Receiving tax exempt status is form of receiving federal money.

  • David Said: September 29th, 2008 at 10:45 am
    • I think it’s their choice to endorse whoever they want to endorse, but they have to pay the consequences of being a religious influence here in America. So I do believe they should have their tax exemptions taken away because we live in a pluralistic society, and if you want to change that you should not get support from the government while trying to change it.

  • Censoredagain Said: September 29th, 2008 at 10:49 am
    • This whole thing is organized I wonder if there is a Rico violation?

  • Ira Said: September 29th, 2008 at 11:05 am
    • Imagine they put forth such great effort to prevent hunger, provide shelter, and do NICE things instead of all this effort to bully other people?!

  • Justin Said: September 29th, 2008 at 11:08 am
    • The line that is continually being blurred, in hopes ‘we the little people’ won’t notice, is exposed in their own words… Stanley said the pastors alone wrote the sermons, with the framework that they be “a biblical evaluation of the candidates for office with a specific recommendation.” … in a Theocracy, the ‘Church’ IS the State, the rule of law is the Bible, the citizenry play no role other than surfs. The power of ‘we the people’ being non-existant against which ever God/Church is in power at any given century. An invisible ‘God’ stands as our Judge, the Biblical doctrine is ‘the’ law, but only a certain handful of ‘chosen ?”MEN’in robes are allowed to interpret the written word, and enforce it with things like public stoning, torture machines that would make the worst dictators in the world cringe, as well as public displays or sinners being drawn and quarter alive, like some animal, etc., etc., etc…. History is filled with examples that should clearly explain ‘why’ such a large ‘majority’ of Americans support the ’separation of church and state’, as well as why we want Church’s to have NO legal participation in politics what-so-ever.
      In a Democracy, ‘we the people’ ARE the government… so next time you hear the media, or a church, or a corporation, or a politician of any party affiliation, etc… tell you and I that ‘the government’ is BAD, too big, too powerful, too controling, too much regulation, blah, blah, blah, know that what is being said is that these accusations are being levied against ‘we the people’, and OUR government. The Constitution, Bill of Rights, Declaration of Independance, etc. are the ONLY documents that stand above ALL others as the foundation for a citizenry in a democracy. NO ONE swears on the Constitution to uphold the Bible, because the Constitution stands above all else… it is OUR voice that is to define our government and it’s laws as a representative democracy… period. When ‘we the people’ vote, the candidate/s are ALWAYS to uphold the Constitution and the will of the people… NOT THE WORD OF GOD AS INTERPRETED BY ANY CHURCH OR REPRESENTATIVE OF THAT CHURCH !

  • Rachel Said: September 29th, 2008 at 11:09 am
    • This is no great surprise. In a continuing show of the Republican Party’s contempt for the constitution these churches have been encouraged to violate US tax law and become political organizations. Of course, the executive branch (Bush) will do nothing to punish them. The Democrats will not raise a fuss because they’re afraid of being labeled as “anti-Christian”. It’s sickening.

  • Ryan H Said: September 29th, 2008 at 11:15 am
    • I hope they all lose their tax exempt status for this little stunt.

  • Batina Said: September 29th, 2008 at 11:26 am
    • Shouldn’t the religious jerks be praying for something more productive such as a cure for cancer? With all the real problems in the world they are still focused on gay marriage. How utterly pathetic and twisted. I say tax the heck out of them. It always warms my heart whenever I see a former church converted into something more useful like housing.

  • dbzeag Said: September 29th, 2008 at 11:37 am
    • To Ryan H

      Yes, and accrue back charges with interest.

  • Robert Said: September 29th, 2008 at 12:07 pm
    • Government should grow a pair and pull their tax-exempt status immediately they start to meddle in affairs of state and elections. Religion has absolutely no place in the public arena. Unlike sexual orienation, religion is a choice and should be treated like any other commodity, tax the bastards and free-loading parasites that they are.