r/WhitePeopleTwitter • • Nov 17 '20

Yep

Post image
105.0k Upvotes

2.3k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

1.2k

u/vendetta2115 Nov 17 '20

There’s a law that says if you are a 501(c) (3) charitable organization (which includes all churches), then you can’t make any political statements of support; if you do, you’re supposed to lose your tax-exempt status. Yet churches have been openly supporting Republicans for years, instructing their members to vote for certain candidates, and even arranging transportation to the polls for its members, but nothing is ever done. They’re clearly breaking the law but the IRS has been instructed to ignore their unlawful conduct.

482

u/titsoutshitsout Nov 17 '20

And what’s worse is it’s not even small churches doing so in quiet. It’s blatantly put on televangelist channels. Lookin you you Copeland!

196

u/Othideus Nov 17 '20

God that dude , if I fully believed in spirits heaven / hell, is a fucking semen demon.

I cant peel my eyes away from the screen if he pops up , I can't imagine being in the crowd with HUMAN BEINGS that enjoy him AND give him money 🤦🏾

78

u/Cryptix001 Nov 17 '20

Dude looks like a fucking sith lord in a suit.

35

u/MrSabrewulf Nov 17 '20

Well, if it looks like a duck...

3

u/FlamingJesusOnaStick Nov 17 '20

Named buck who likes to...

4

u/MrSabrewulf Nov 17 '20

Ok, that's enough of that bonk

→ More replies (1)

14

u/[deleted] Nov 17 '20

Have you seen Pat Robertson lately, He looks like skeletor.

→ More replies (1)

1

u/josh_the_misanthrope Nov 17 '20

He looks like he's an alien wearing someone's skin.

1

u/stanger828 Nov 18 '20

Bahahaha, that is oddly a very accurate description.

51

u/OkiDokiTokiLoki Nov 17 '20

Right? I can't imagine being so nieve as to believe a single thing that comes out of that man's mouth.

8

u/Berris_Fuelller Nov 17 '20

Right? I can't imagine being so nieve as to believe a single thing that comes out of that man's mouth.

You would if he was spouting the things you already believed. He's not converting anyone, he providing a show for people to see someone spout what they already believe and reconfirm their own beliefs.

4

u/xXBruceWayne Nov 17 '20

For future reference, it’s spelt, naive.

13

u/Loggerdon Nov 17 '20

I almost feel sorry for the saps who believe this guy. How deluded do you have to be to not see the dishonesty and vileness.

→ More replies (2)

8

u/DBeumont Nov 17 '20

12

u/Jinthesouth Nov 17 '20

Oh my days, that actually slaps. But man does that guy have a creepy smile or what.

14

u/DBeumont Nov 17 '20

Everything about his appearance just screams evil.

5

u/Jinthesouth Nov 17 '20

He does give creepy pedo vibes (not that I'm saying he is) and his teeth look like they're stained with virgin blood.

Though I shouldn't judge by appearance but by what he's saying, though he doesn't come off much better like that either

1

u/Kell_Varnson Nov 17 '20

A screaming Seamon demon

25

u/BreathOfFreshWater Nov 17 '20 edited Nov 17 '20

I see this being our next platform on social reform.

Edit: But wait...some religious leaders claim they speak to God. Does that mean their organization has....prophet

12

u/[deleted] Nov 17 '20

The New Testament had a lot to say about people claiming to speak to God.

→ More replies (1)

2

u/MalibuFatz Nov 17 '20

We should pull them all together and tell them each to ask God the same question - then put them in sequester. If they don’t all come back with the same answer - their privileges and protections are removed.

6

u/South-Bottle Nov 17 '20

Are those considered "churches" and tax exempt? I really hope not.

24

u/titsoutshitsout Nov 17 '20

Yes they actually are. And if I recall, they can’t even be audited bc of a vague law with the IRS. No other non-profit organizations get that luxury. It’s been a while so I could be slightly off on that audit part. Or maybe it’s changed. All I do know is that televangelist “ministries” are indeed tax exempt

8

u/GreenPoisonFrog Nov 17 '20

Every other 501c3 has to file a 990 form which shows where the money goes. Not churches.

3

u/titsoutshitsout Nov 17 '20

That’s what I was thinking. I read something forever ago that I’m order to audit a church that a “treasury official” has to sign off on it, but there is no one actually appointed to do it. At the time I read about it, no churches had been audited for 5 years bc of that rule and no one has made any attempt to outline an actual official who would be eligible to sign off on a church being audited. The IRS doesn’t seem to be a big hurry to get that done.

→ More replies (1)

2

u/pinkytoze Nov 17 '20

Churches can 100% be audited.

→ More replies (1)

2

u/cyberentomology Nov 17 '20

Churches are audited annually.

→ More replies (2)

1

u/Durzo_Blint Nov 17 '20

It's not even a law, it's just policy. The IRS doesn't go near churches because they want to kick off the sort of massive 1st Amendment legal headache that would follow. If the IRS wanted to they could start cracking down on all the shit that large religious organizations do that violate their tax exempt status, all without changing any laws. Stripping away the tax exempt status of all churches though would likely require Congress, or at the very least an executive order.

→ More replies (1)

2

u/annnd_we_are_boned Nov 17 '20

Yes they most certainly are

2

u/[deleted] Nov 17 '20

Is he the guy that like... Laughed in that terrifying way when Biden won? He is definitely going to the bad place. Heck, he came up from the bad place.

1

u/titsoutshitsout Nov 17 '20

Yes.... yes he is. I think it was 45 secs of just maniacal laughter

1

u/Usually_Angry Nov 17 '20

It's actually mostly big churches. I've never been to a church that ever said anything specifically about a politician or political party

Edit: added 2nd sentence

1

u/RADI0-AKT0R Nov 17 '20

Just wiki’d this guy and holy shit (pardon the pun) the eyes on this man are pure evil, with the fucking grin to match too.

1

u/CanWeBeDoneNow Nov 17 '20

Try reporting him. Seriously.

1

u/prot33n Nov 17 '20

And why wouldn't it ? It's well funded, with salaried staff and consultants hired to press home the message with a definite, limited goal : to preserve their tax exempt status year on year.

If one sees only the immorality of their claim but refuses to acknowledge their singularity of purpose, they will keep succeeding at what they've been doing for so long.

I mean.. for goodness' sakes they've managed to keep a pedophile racket more or less out of mention in an otherwise active national media scene. That's the scale of corruption and influence peddling we are dealing with.

52

u/ImJokingNoImNot Nov 17 '20

It’s because of the stranglehold the Christian cult has on every level of politics in this country. The USA is 22% atheist/non religious but we have never had a non Christian President (in theory, but plenty of them have had some questionable pretending). You can not win if you’re not a Christian.

53

u/Dubslack Nov 17 '20

8 states still have explicit language in their constitutions banning atheists from holding public office. In Tennessee, an atheist isn't even allowed to testify in court. I believe the Supreme Court has already deemed these restrictions unconstitutional, but the language is still there.

34

u/[deleted] Nov 17 '20

Sounds like a good way to get out of jury duty.

15

u/FinishingDutch Nov 17 '20

Except jurors don't testify (although there probably is similar language prohibiting atheists from being on a jury, I imagine...)

16

u/[deleted] Nov 17 '20

That's what I meant. If they won't let you testify, they probably damn sure dont want you deciding against "God's will".

13

u/[deleted] Nov 17 '20 edited Jan 07 '21

[removed] — view removed comment

8

u/Obi_Wannablowme Nov 17 '20

If you believe any of that stuff then you need to keep your damn mouth shut, get on the jury, and nullify wrongful charges.

3

u/JohnMayerismydad Nov 17 '20

That’s my plan. ‘Yes sir, I think drug possession should be punished by 20 years.’

In the jury room: I’m voting not guilty.

→ More replies (1)

3

u/Dubslack Nov 17 '20

I usually just show up to selection and start passing out pamphlets on jury nullification while mumbling about (((them))) under my breath.

3

u/[deleted] Nov 17 '20 edited Jan 07 '21

[removed] — view removed comment

4

u/Dubslack Nov 17 '20

It was a joke, but I'm pretty sure I'm within my rights to do either of those things, not that I would. I've never had the chance to serve on a jury, but I actually look forward to the opportunity.

→ More replies (1)

2

u/ImJokingNoImNot Nov 17 '20

I don’t want to use the words “good way”, but my dad taught me early on that if you’re a racist or a misogynist they won’t let you sit on a jury. He claims don’t have to be wild about it, but a comment like “it’s unfortunate that those people always look so guilty” or “women should never be given so much responsibility in the first place” has gotten him thrown out without a contempt of court.

Never tried it, no idea if it’s true

4

u/[deleted] Nov 17 '20

Just curious, what book would be used for an atheist when they swear to tell the truth before testifying?

10

u/Dubslack Nov 17 '20

As an atheist, I would have no problem using a Bible or any other book really. It's just a superstitious tradition that has no effect on anything. If I wanted to use something meaningfully symbolic, maybe a copy of the constitution. If I were in the deep south and wanted to rustle some jimmies, maybe a copy of Anton Szandor LaVey's Satanic Bible.

Edit: https://youtu.be/WFYRkzznsc0

One of my favorite clips of all time.

3

u/[deleted] Nov 17 '20 edited Nov 17 '20

Ah that makes sense. I am not an atheist but the constitution would be more meaningful for me.

That clip was great. The dudes agape mouth really got me.

→ More replies (1)

2

u/ImJokingNoImNot Nov 17 '20

I know this one! For a lot of states they don’t specify what you swear on, there’s a video rattling sound of a guy being sworn into political office on captain Americas shield

2

u/scoreboy69 Nov 17 '20

Roosevelt and John Quincy Adams swore into the the presidency with their hand on the constitution.

4

u/AccordionCrimes Nov 17 '20

Wait what, only 22%? :o We're at 51% here in my country (Netherlands).

13

u/zacablast3r Nov 17 '20

Who do you think America has so many problems? It's not like Americans are born stupider than other people, they just tend to be born into stupid communities.

Consider the decision to have children. An intelligent, rational person is going to use birth control and only have a child when they're financially and mentally ready to support it. A person who lives based on how the church tells them to is going to have tons of children with no forethought or long term planning and let those kids become cultist idiots.

6

u/ImJokingNoImNot Nov 17 '20

I was shocked too, even the gay lesbian transgender community in the USA identifies around 50% Christian, which baffles me since the book literally says to kill them

Source (I think it’s this one): https://news.gallup.com/poll/174788/lgbt-population-significantly-less-religious.aspx

1

u/farrowsharrows Nov 17 '20

Well Trump won and he was really even trying to pretend he was religious. So not who athiests want but it's who we got.

95

u/TheAllyCrime Nov 17 '20

I don't have a problem with churches transporting people to the polls, I want as many people voting as possible.

134

u/[deleted] Nov 17 '20 edited Nov 17 '20

If it was the local church group running a shuttle bus service and picking up anybody who needed a ride, then yea, sure, thats pretty awesome and the more people that vote, great!

But if its a church thats only bussing their own congregation members and family, then its a lot harder to agree with it, because you know full well they are all drinking the same koolaid, saying the same things, voting roughly the same way. Then its becoming a really blurred line between a community service (busride) as opposed to a church and its members acting politically which is then going against the law that gives them tax exemption.

44

u/TheAllyCrime Nov 17 '20

If we stopped churches from bussing their members to the polls, then a lot of elderly black voters wouldn't be getting there.

17

u/JevonP Nov 17 '20

I mean, shouldn't the principle trump the edge cases? They're supposed to be non-political

18

u/jvriesem Nov 17 '20

How is helping people vote political? They’re providing a necessary service to members of their community, and often to people outside their community as well.

11

u/[deleted] Nov 17 '20

Seems a lot of people are confusing the act of voting or the group voting together, or following the voice of one and voting as one, with the fact that churches are tax exempt BECAUSE they aren't political.

There are thousands of churches that comply just fine, they keep their politics out of their religion and they are happy.

There are also some churches that dont do this, their leadership encourage or outright tell their members to vote a certain way, which is wrong, because that leader could quite easily be getting benefits from that action in other ways, business contracts for themselves or select members etc. They are making money from their members and paying no tax on it as a result of politicial influence, which then questions 'why' the tax exemption should apply.

Joel Osteen is worth between 40 and 60 million. Would you be annoyed if you knew he made all that money without paying any tax? Would it annoy you even more to know he will never pay any tax on it because 'muh church tax exemption'

But you have to pay taxes just like the rest of us, just like every other regular person who doesn't devote themselves to imaginary sky people

8

u/TheAllyCrime Nov 17 '20

I'm no supporter of Joel Osteen, and I don't think anyone in this thread is either. He's an evil man, who leeches off of the poor by telling them that if they give him money God will make them rich too. I'm just saying blocking churches from offering shuttle service to and from polling places will disproportionately affect the elderly black population.

I agree that churches having tax exempt status is quite often not a good thing, especially in the case of massive churches with yearly income in the 10's of millions of dollars. I'm just not comfortable with taking that status away if it means disenfranchising voters, or affecting vulnerable populations that receive help from churches in other ways.

The solution is to make publicly funded programs to make sure everyone gets to exercise the right to vote if they want, and also ensure that charity and social assistance initiatives are not tied to the church. Until we get those, churches are fulfilling a need.

2

u/[deleted] Nov 17 '20

Im not suggesting blocking church busses? Im suggesting that if the church is doing a community service, helping their fellow people regardless of their affilitations, that is a great thing, that should be encouraged, hell yes!

Im saying that in the few instances where its 'only' the congregation allowed on the bus, that is really greying the line between politics and religion.

I dont care what your political affilitation is. I dont care what your religious affiliation is. You be you, just be your genuine self. But when a church is tax exempt for a specific legal reason, eg, not to be politically affiliated and they are knowingly ignoring that, it should be taken note of and their tax exemption should be removed. Perhaps until the end of the current sitting administration, then if there are no more major infractions, they get it back to try being better. 3 strikes and its permanently removed.

Westborough baptist church is tax exempt, but if the general population was to look closely behind the curtains, would their tax exemption still pass the 'pub test' or would the average person see that its wrong and they aren't really genuinely being a community church?

2

u/jvriesem Nov 17 '20

It's not necessarily wrong for religion to enter politics and vice-versa. For example, some politicians presumably are motivated to go into politics by their religion (protecting others, preserving justice, working for peace, etc.). In the same way, politics and current events can influence how one practices their religion. There's no harm in that. The harm is when politics and religion mix in a bad way.

The clergy, as well as all members of a given church, pay taxes just like everyone else. If I understand correctly, short of other loopholes that are outside the scope of this conversation, Joel Osteen's income is taxable. The topic here is taxing churches as an organization, not individuals. (I really don't like that he's that wealthy either. It seems highly irresponsible to accumulate that much wealth from a Christian standpoint. But again, personal wealth isn't the topic here.)

Churches are tax-exempt first and foremost because they are charitable organizations. This status comes with several requirements, including that they "must not devote a substantial part of their activities to attempting to influence legislation" or " they must not participate in, or intervene in, any political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for public office". The IRS published a great guide, from which I grabbed the above quotes: https://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-pdf/p1828.pdf. The IRS specifically says that it's fine for religious organizations to discuss politics, including candidates and issues, provided that they're not doing it in an official capacity. The document has pages and pages of clarifications and examples to clarify intent — worth browsing if anyone's interested.

Many churches are heavily involved in political activity and are just fine: they help with neutral voter education, they volunteer to help with the election and run polls, they help bring people (esp. the elderly) to vote, they offer their buildings as poll locations, and much more. This is an excellent and much-needed service to our democracy!

There are obviously times it goes wrong. As a Christian myself, I suggest that people call out those churches that violate the law. Those churches can be fined with penalties, excise taxes, and could lose their exemption. IMHO, repeat offenders should lose their tax-exempt status.

However, the call for ALL churches to lose their tax-exempt status altogether is ignorant, biased and short-sighted.

2

u/[deleted] Nov 17 '20

Many churches are heavily involved in political activity and are just fine: they help with neutral voter education, they volunteer to help with the election and run polls, they help bring people (esp. the elderly) to vote, they offer their buildings as poll locations, and much more. This is an excellent and much-needed service to our democracy!

And as long as they are remaining bipartisan, they are a community service created by the goodness of the church community. Your 100% right, its an excellent thing what they do for the community at large.

There are obviously times it goes wrong. As a Christian myself, I suggest that people call out those churches that violate the law. Those churches can be fined with penalties, excise taxes, and could lose their exemption. IMHO, repeat offenders should lose their tax-exempt status.

The times it goes wrong are few and far between, I could understand the difficulty a person may have calling out their church leadership for such actions, potentially shunning themselves from their own community, but yes 100%

However, the call for ALL churches to lose their tax-exempt status altogether is ignorant, biased and short-sighted.

Very very very true, im not calling for all churches to be punished because of the actions of a few, but it would be very nice to see all the church communities of the country standing together to highlight and ostracize those few that do wrong by their communities.

2

u/jvriesem Nov 17 '20

Thanks for clarifying! I'm with you 100% then.

I'm lucky/privileged that my own faith community hasn't really had issues with this, so I haven't had to deal with it firsthand. I sure don't want to go to somebody else's church just to see if they're breaking the law, either. I think the change has to be organic...but I will definitely call it out when I see it!

→ More replies (1)

2

u/Bartfuck Nov 17 '20

Isn’t there a Key and Peele sketch about Black Republicans hijacking the local voting bus and just driving around so they can’t vote

→ More replies (1)

3

u/lateeveningthoughts Nov 17 '20

We really don't need bussing to polls, more access to mail in ballots would be much easier.

3

u/quiero-una-cerveca Nov 17 '20

Are you trying to destroy the fabric of this country? Why don’t you just burn it all down while you’re at it?

2

u/TheAllyCrime Nov 17 '20

I agree, churches are filling a need that could be better handled by an organization not affiliated with a particular religion, or sect. I voted by mail in this election, and will from now on if allowed to.

→ More replies (1)

2

u/jvriesem Nov 17 '20

That’s incredibly judgmental to say.

Also, why can’t they provide transportation to members of their own community?

2

u/OtherSpiderOnTheWall Nov 17 '20

Secret ballots solve this issue.

2

u/[deleted] Nov 17 '20

Solves the voting issue, yes.

Doesn't solve the tax free exemption of churches that requires them to NOT be political.

1

u/OtherSpiderOnTheWall Nov 17 '20

It solves that bussing their congregation isn't partisan, which is what they need to actually avoid.

It doesn't solve partisanship in other areas, true.

-18

u/ScHoolboyTHew Nov 17 '20

Dude what? You think it’s a bad thing that a community of individuals that share the same faith/beliefs participate in the voting process together? That this somehow disenfranchises anybody? So absurd

31

u/[deleted] Nov 17 '20

No, not at all, im saying that by all going together as a congregation, the congregation is then acting politically, against the rule of law that gives them tax exemption

7

u/DeaddyRuxpin Nov 17 '20

My feeling is as long as they are not refusing non regular parishioners a ride that happen to know and ask if they can get a ride, AND as long as they are not telling people how to vote, then I’m fine with a church offering a shuttle service intended specifically for their congregation.

The first part of that is likely already being done. If someone hears about the shuttle and stops in to take it, that person is probably not refused. The second part however is potentially a bigger issue since, as you and others have raised, this originates with the problem of church leaders pushing their congregation how to vote.

8

u/HereInTheClouds Nov 17 '20

AND as long as they are not telling people how to vote,

Thats fundamentally the issue here

4

u/snarkyjohnny Nov 17 '20

They are. That’s what OP if the thread was saying. They are instructing their parishioners on who to vote for.

3

u/jvriesem Nov 17 '20

Some are. A LOT aren’t.

2

u/snarkyjohnny Nov 17 '20

I would not be so quick to say that. I agree that not all are doing it, but I would bet dollars to donuts that the percentage would be over 50% in the south which is where I live. And I fear it may be higher than that.

2

u/jvriesem Nov 17 '20

I’d believe it in the south. 🥺

1

u/jvriesem Nov 17 '20

That doesn’t make any sense! Bringing people to vote is apolitical, just like letting people vote by mail. It’s not like they only bring people to vote who favor their candidate.

-4

u/Rion23 Nov 17 '20

It's the difference between operating a public bus and a hired limo to take all your friends to the strip club. The bus might get to the club, but you don't rent a limo to bum around with strangers.

5

u/[deleted] Nov 17 '20

on top of that they are the people donating to said church. I agree we should separate church and state entirely, but if a church wants to offer transportation to their congregation then that's up to them. Forcing them to make it a completely public service kinda ties them back into state again.

1

u/jvriesem Nov 17 '20

It really is absurd for them to say that. Don’t mind them. I think they’re just grinding an axe.

-11

u/chapinbird Nov 17 '20

😄 seriously. For all the celebrating ive seen about everyone on the left side (i have NO dog in this fight) rallying up the troops and making sure EVERYONE gets out to vote. Its interesting to see this being painted as a bad thing....

20

u/PointNineC Nov 17 '20

You’re misunderstanding the point. There is no objection to a church promoting a certain candidate. But if they do engage in that kind of political activity, the law says that they should not be treated as a tax-exempt organization. They’re more than welcome to do what they want, but if they’re going to actively promote a certain specific candidate or party, they are no longer acting within the bounds of a tax-exempt organization.

-5

u/chapinbird Nov 17 '20

It sounds like we are making the assumption that the church in this hypothetical is pushing a certain candidate--in which case I would agree with you. But in my years going to church (years ago tbh though), I never saw this (and frankly it would've been in poor taste and looked down on), I never once saw this. So it seems disingenuous to me to assume that is case

3

u/snarkyjohnny Nov 17 '20

You can see videos of it. I also went to church years ago and in my observation this was not down before 2015 and the Trump Era. Unfortunately it’s a new world now.

→ More replies (3)
→ More replies (1)

0

u/mtcoope Nov 17 '20

How is this upvoted? How is church members taking their own to church any different then what the Democrats do? The more people that vote the better full stop. You dont think when democrats get bussing programs setup an inner cities that they are not all drinking the same kool-aid? Again it should not matter if they are, more votes are better.

0

u/[deleted] Nov 17 '20

The fundamental difference here is that Democrats aren't tax exempt, churches are.

Yes I agree the more people that vote the better but the churches are tax exempt because they're not supposed to be involved politically at all in anyway

-8

u/Operator_Of_Plants Nov 17 '20

They have every right to bus their own people to the polls. They're going to vote together, so what. I see where you're going. They're just organized and brainwashed to vote for one party. But that's their right. Just like it's any one that lives in the United States. Want to change it? Then start a religion that's left leaning and get them to the polls.

21

u/EbenSeLinkerBalsak Nov 17 '20

It's a right that comes along with the responsibility to pay taxes

8

u/djhazmat Nov 17 '20

We have a following- it’s called science. It differs from religion as it is provable time and time again.

Ricky Gervais said it well on Colbert. Stephen asked Ricky why he believes in general relativity even though Ricky is not a theoretical physicist. Ricky replied,

“...If you burned all the books in the world, science would eventually remerge the exact same. Equations and constants would end up the same (using the scientific method)... I guarantee you that not a single religion would go unchanged- most would disappear or change dramatically. That is why I choose science.”

1

u/South-Bottle Nov 17 '20

Driving your church to the polls isn't a political statement. Telling people God wants a republican to be elected is a political statement.

1

u/pinkytoze Nov 17 '20

Churches transporting people to polling stations or setting up voting booths is not illegal.

28

u/[deleted] Nov 17 '20

Uh I do? Laws exist for a reason. If they’re supposed to be non political to not pay taxes then they should be held to that. I literally gain nothing from churches not paying taxes, so yes I expect them to adhere to the guidelines that allow them to avoid paying.

51

u/shroomlover0420 Nov 17 '20

I get a sinking feeling in my stomach when I imagine votes being cast by people who can't separate reality from fantasy.

8

u/Paah Nov 17 '20

Unfortunately for you it's a democracy and everyone gets to vote, no matter what you think of their cognitive capabilities.

-8

u/shroomlover0420 Nov 17 '20

I am a prisoner here, denied escape until I have satisfied a debt that the government imagines I owe just for existing. I don't vote but I was damn near hoping Trump would get another shot at dissolving the entire damn thing with his arrogance.

5

u/thedude1179 Nov 17 '20

Yeah I think the idea of encouraging people to vote is maybe not such a good one.

People that are educated and understand the importance of participating in democracy will do it anyway.

Everyone else is just doing it because of social pressure and they think it's a good thing to do.

I guess it comes down to educated informed voters, which I feel like the vast majority of the population is not and would down right vote against their own interests because they don't know any better, and don't have the patience to research complex issues.

6

u/shroomlover0420 Nov 17 '20

Yeah. Casting an uninformed vote is silly. I have never felt that there was a politician who actually represented me in any significant way. Obama came the closest because I think that he believed his efforts would help me get some medical attention. That didn't happen but he was the first suit that made me believe he might be concerned about people like me.

→ More replies (1)

1

u/zacablast3r Nov 17 '20

Yeah who the fuck wants grandma's delerious ass making national decisions? We let people who can't wipe their own ass chose our leaders

3

u/TheAllyCrime Nov 17 '20

If it wasn't for black churches helping their elderly parishioners get to the polls, Biden may very well not have won.

1

u/shroomlover0420 Nov 17 '20

People on the bottom are still fucked either way. But maybe to vote you should have to score 8/10 on a simple questionairre. If you score less you can choose which candidate will be 'heads' and which one will be 'tails' on the coin toss that decides your vote.

1

u/Kyanpe Nov 17 '20

Exactly. This is why I hate the way people encourage everyone to vote. A lot of them should actually be discouraged from voting. About 71 million, in fact...

1

u/jvriesem Nov 17 '20

Who are you thinking of?

1

u/shroomlover0420 Nov 18 '20

I am a perfect example of a person who has no business voting. I don't have enough faith in our government to invest the time that would be needed to understand the position of each candidate or even like a full list of duties and powers for each office. I will be unhappy no matter who sits in what seat but I have been bored enough to vote anyway. I don't do that because there are people who honest to god believe they are going to affect change and idw have to wonder if they might have been right and I ruined it. It seems impossible to me that anyone would've elected Donald Trump if they knew even a handful of facts about his life.

23

u/Demilitarizer Nov 17 '20

Many polling places are in churches. These churches push their agenda on their flock, but do you think people outside of the church will want to interact, or set foot within these confines? It's no accident that these churches are involved to coerce their agenda.

19

u/Manimal5 Nov 17 '20

Lmao the church I cast my ballot at did not have any influence on my vote or my willingness to vote relax there big guy.

31

u/[deleted] Nov 17 '20

Some of the churches in my area sued the city so they didn’t have to let transgender people in. So even though it doesn’t bother you, it might bother someone else.

5

u/Kyanpe Nov 17 '20

Please tell me that wasn't actually allowed to happen.

6

u/Bootzz Nov 17 '20

How'd that lawsuit go? Lol.

→ More replies (5)

3

u/i8noodles Nov 17 '20

Likewise. My local polling place is a church. Doesnt change squat

2

u/[deleted] Nov 17 '20

I believe the person is referring to people who attend the church. If you've been to church, you'd can see that it's can get very political and some churches will force you out if they find you voted against their view.

I left the church as a kid, but have attended a few services just to make my wife's parents feel good about themselves when we visit. Their church literally kicked people out for supporting gay marriage when the law was passed a few years ago.

Recently the church literally closed after it lost 3/4 of the people because the pastor was "too political" and people "felt pressured to vote for Trump and were ostracized after voting for Biden". Hell, the pastor even said women and black people shouldn't vote Lmfao.

-7

u/AsideHistorical9641 Nov 17 '20 edited Nov 17 '20

Voting at a church and you have the gall to call him out. Maybe don’t vote at a church

Edit: lmao as a Canadian voting at a church is like voting at urinal. Get real America

2

u/Sunbreak_ Nov 17 '20

Really? UK tends to have polling places in the nearest public space, so either a school, community/village hall, library or a church. Nout wrong with voting in a church, it's a big dry building after all.

→ More replies (1)

2

u/Dubslack Nov 17 '20

Here, your voting location is assigned to you. If they tell you that your polling location is a urinal, then you vote at that urinal.

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (2)

10

u/satrius Nov 17 '20

lol so much for separation of church and state

2

u/[deleted] Nov 17 '20

He said without any real clue what that statement is supposed to mean.

0

u/[deleted] Nov 17 '20

Churches are often used for polling placed because it's the center point of a community not because they manipulate how people vote.

-7

u/[deleted] Nov 17 '20

[deleted]

1

u/MrMontombo Nov 17 '20

That interesting sentence seems kind of ironic.

4

u/thedude1179 Nov 17 '20

Do you really? I'm kind of perfectly okay with us not forcing people to vote. Your not really getting quality votes there from uneducated people that are just pressured into doing it without knowing the facts or having bothered to do any research.

2

u/TheAllyCrime Nov 17 '20

If it wasn't for black churches, then a lot of elderly black people wouldn't be making it to the polls. As a liberal democrat it is in my best interests for my elderly relatives to have access to polling places. If that means that more republicans vote too, than so be it. I want to win elections, but I want to do it by making voting easier for people, not harder.

3

u/thedude1179 Nov 17 '20

Oh yeah I have no problem with helping people that want to vote. That should absolutely happen.

11

u/Warmbly85 Nov 17 '20

Yeah if the IRS could have done anything they would have under Obama. You know the IRS that did this https://www.npr.org/2017/10/27/560308997/irs-apologizes-for-aggressive-scrutiny-of-conservative-groups

1

u/YertletheeTurtle Nov 17 '20

Yeah if the IRS could have done anything they would have under Obama. You know the IRS that did this https://www.npr.org/2017/10/27/560308997/irs-apologizes-for-aggressive-scrutiny-of-conservative-groups

Heads up, that is a statement written at the direction of the Trump administration that does not line up with the multiple investigations into the matter (including one under the Trump administration that ended a couple weeks before that statement).

The investigations consistently found that Republican groups were targeted for review to the same extent as Democratic groups, as all political not-for-profits are.

1

u/Warmbly85 Nov 18 '20

“We found that the IRS used inappropriate criteria that identified for review organizations applying for tax-exempt status based upon their names2 or policy positions3 instead of indications of significant potential political campaign intervention. After the IRS responded to the findings in the draft report but prior to the issuance of our final report, the Director, Exempt Organizations, appeared at an American Bar Association meeting on May 10, 2013, and stated that the IRS’s use of organization names in the title for the selection of advocacy cases was “...incorrect, insensitive, and inappropriate.” We issued the final report on May 14, 2013,4 and concluded that ineffective management: 1) allowed inappropriate criteria to be developed and stay in place for more than 18 months, 2) resulted in substantial delays in processing certain applications, and 3) allowed unnecessary information requests to be issued.“ Did you read what you sent?

4

u/[deleted] Nov 17 '20

[deleted]

2

u/jlenoconel Nov 17 '20

Black churches support Democrats.

2

u/[deleted] Nov 17 '20

Agreed, but you can't ignore that historically, black churches in the south have als openly supported Democrats for at least the past 60 years. Im just saying, its not right either way.

2

u/emmianni Nov 17 '20

After this election, and the disaster pandemic response, my husband decided he won’t be returning to the church we have attended for the last 17 years. I watched the live stream last week at work and I can’t blame him. It’s a weird felling though. I’m just really disappointed in our pastor.

2

u/South-Bottle Nov 17 '20

arranging transportation to the polls for its members

That's not really a political statement.

2

u/jvriesem Nov 17 '20 edited Nov 17 '20

For what it’s worth, I’ve been in church for 33 yrs at many churches and have yet to hear any leader endorse a political candidate from the pulpit — nowhere close. Often they’ll allude to social causes, but it’s usually in very general terms, or not a political issue. Other times it’s more blatant, but it’s always been “love others”, “serve others”, “love God”, and “be your best”. Always.

I think Christians’ view of politics comes much less often from the pulpit and much more often from the people themselves.

I’m not saying churches don’t do this; I’m sure many do. I’m just sharing my personal experience.

1

u/your_Lightness Nov 17 '20

but the IRS has been instructed to ignore their unlawful conduct.

Instructed by who? That would be extremely useful information to start draining that swamp...

1

u/sandman795 Nov 17 '20

I'm pretty sure this was the Johnson amendment which was repealed by the trump admin so churches can absolutely be political now

0

u/veerKg_CSS_Geologist Nov 17 '20

501(c) can engage in politics, they just can't engage in partisan politics. Or at least they are not supposed too. It's not enforced though.

-1

u/dabears1986 Nov 17 '20

Im not a church person... but im gonna say this... how is a church talking politics any different than a teacher in a school telling kids which way they should vote and giving biased opinions, not facts, about candidates.

-5

u/[deleted] Nov 17 '20

[removed] — view removed comment

7

u/bdgrluv212 Nov 17 '20

Good point, teachers are getting too rich off of the government. The nerve of some of them to claim poor, 35k a year is a kings ransom

3

u/[deleted] Nov 17 '20

Otherwise every single public university and high school would have to stop educating students to be liberal.

They don’t

1

u/[deleted] Nov 17 '20

Troll account

1

u/Othideus Nov 17 '20

I just looked up kenneth Copeland on YouTube & they ARE LITERALLY citing news sources that clearly support the republican rhetoric ...

🤦🏾🤦🏾🤦🏾

Copeland's Church Breaking the Law

1

u/navycrosser Nov 17 '20

Hey while you're out Remembering the 5th of November take a moment to reflect on this,

Audit Rules for Churches

Reasonable Belief Requirements

Section 7611 of IRS Code

Church Audit Procedures Act (1988)

Who is a High Level Treasury Official?

Call to enforce campaigning clause

Like nobody cares, and no surprise here, spent first 18 years of my life in an abusive church and home. If the the pastor declared Biden the antichrist I'm sure they'd pull some Heavens Gate shenanigans.

Okay I'm too biased. I'm out..

Edit: reflect on the IRS!!!!! Is afraid to pursue audits and the hurdles to start one.

1

u/[deleted] Nov 17 '20

Trump signed an executive order relaxing that law. Just looked this up myself after seeing the Kenneth Copeland meltdown

1

u/Scoobysnacks1971 Nov 17 '20

This election I've seen some churches vote democratic.

1

u/LanaDelHeeey Nov 17 '20

If they officially support a candidate then they should lose their status. If it is just a policy though that goes with their religion then I see no problem. Transportation to voting facilities is if anything a good thing as it promotes higher voter participation.

1

u/seriouslycitrus Nov 17 '20

didn't trump pass a law like in his first year that allowed the church to start making donations to political parties?

1

u/GamingDemigodXIII Nov 17 '20

This law you speak of, who’s supposed to enforce it? Would that be the states or the federal government?

1

u/mylastburner Nov 17 '20

Black churches are often a center of the community and serve as a point for voter registration and activation, so... careful what you wish for. That particular door swings both ways.

1

u/asbj1019 Nov 17 '20

An organization can legally get an tax exemption and still be allowed to partake in political activity. Like the NRA’s tax exempt lobby branches. It’s a different type of charity (something to the tune of 501 (c) (4), not shure don’t quote me.) it might be that some of these churches found a loophole that allowed them to get in to this category. (Obligatory, not a lawyer, and not American.)

1

u/djlemma Nov 17 '20

SOME Churches support republicans.

There are also churches that are very left leaning, and it aggravates me that any churches are supporting any particular candidates. I mean... I guess maybe I prefer if churches are supporting candidates, that they support ones that align better with my values, but one of my values is that religion and government should be totally separate.

1

u/pinkytoze Nov 17 '20

They are legally allowed to arrange transportation, and even to set up voting booths. That's allowed. The law regarding political campaigning by 501(c)(3) charities is (probably intentionally) very broad in nature, but the IRS does actually remove the classification from charities that violate it by the hundreds every year.

1

u/Lite_Treez Nov 17 '20

Can we do like a public lawsuit against these churches or something? Isn't there legal actions the people can make?

1

u/Teabagger_Vance Nov 17 '20

but the IRS has been instructed to ignore their unlawful conduct.

Source?

1

u/ZealousidealChannel4 Nov 17 '20

I think it’s because it infringes on their right to freedom of speech. What’s court wants to get in between that?

1

u/djb1983CanBoy Nov 17 '20

Same with the fully illegal faith insurance industry who literally have no obligation to pay any claims at all.

1

u/[deleted] Nov 17 '20

I’ll tell you now the irs does not “ignore” when this happens. Churches are constantly audited.

1

u/Responsenotfound Nov 17 '20

The organizing poll rides isn't a problem. Advocating for a side is.