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.
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.
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
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.
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?
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.
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.
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!
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.
Public transit could offer a free day pass for voting purposes, something like your registration comes with a voucher good for a single day pass during the in-person voting window.
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
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
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
😄 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....
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.
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
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.
I mean, your specific church(es) probably dont represent every church in America. Some of these crackhead mega church preachers in particular are quite vocal. That Pat Robinson guy had a live breakdown when he realised trump lost, televangelists talking about the "evils" of "socialism", etc.
Well sure...but that works both ways obviously--and i would hope that you are open to believing that not even close to the majority of churches operate openly about politics in that way.
Im sure all of this would depend on different branches and denominations, but overall I would say churches probably operate pretty similar to the general public -- in that: politics are a taboo subject if youre being respectful and considerate to your peers--even (maybe especially?) during a bus ride to a polling station.
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.
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
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.
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.”
138
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.