Over half of Americans believe churches that publicly endorse candidates for public office should lose their tax exemption, a recent study shows.
-
(Photo: AP Images / Nick Ut, File)In this Aug. 15, 2008 file photo, scores of people attend a workshop at the Saddleback Church in Lake Forest, Calif. Polls have yet to measure the Palin Effect on younger evangelical voters, whose shifting political allegiances put the demographic in play for both major-party presidential campaigns. But a portrait emerges through interviews with over a dozen pastors, authors and others who either belong to that generation or track it: Conservatives are energized much like their elders are, progressives are unimpressed and many undecideds are gravitating toward McCain-Palin.
According to LifeWay Research, the research arm of LifeWay Christian Resources of the Southern Baptist Convention, 38 percent of all surveyed Americans said they strongly agree with that statement and 14 percent said they somewhat agree. Meanwhile, 25 percent strongly disagree with churches losing their tax-exempt status and 17 percent somewhat disagree.
Results from the survey, conducted in June 2008 on more than 1,200 adults, were released days before pastors across the country are scheduled to preach from their pulpits this coming Sunday about the moral qualifications of candidates seeking political office.
"Pulpit Freedom Sunday" on Sept. 28 is part of the Alliance Defense Fund's Pulpit Initiative. The purpose of the initiative is not to get politics into the pulpit, the ADF insists, but to "get the government out of the pulpit."
"Churches can decide for themselves that they either do or don’t want their pastors to speak about electoral candidates," the ADF, a legal alliance of Christian attorneys, said in a statement. "The point of the Pulpit Initiative is very simple: the IRS should not be the one making the decision by threatening to revoke a church’s tax-exempt status."
Congress made it illegal in 1954 for tax-exempt groups to intervene in a political campaign. The ADF opposes the restriction, claiming that "pastors are muzzled for fear of investigation by the IRS" and are forced to choose between participating in political campaigns and accepting tax-deductible donations.
Dozens of clergy, however, are against ADF's efforts and some participated in their own initiative last Sunday, preaching on the value of the separation of church and state.
While Americans have overwhelmingly expressed their dislike of politics in the pulpit, according to LifeWay Research, a significant minority did not express a firm support for the government stripping churches of their tax exemption in the case of a political endorsement.
"Americans don’t want churches in politics but they are not as certain they want the government in the churches," said Ed Stetzer, director of LifeWay Research.
Those who are older, not from the South, or married are more likely to agree with churches losing their tax-exempt status if they endorse candidates.
Meanwhile, born-again, evangelical or fundamentalist Protestants (26 percent) are less likely than other Protestants (39 percent) to agree. The born-again believers (62 percent) are also less likely to disagree with churches campaigning for candidates for public office compared to Protestants who do not consider themselves born-again (74 percent).
Overall, most Americans (85 percent) do not believe it is appropriate for churches to use their resources to campaign for candidates for public office and 87 percent disagree with pastors publicly endorsing candidates for office during a church service.
Even when it comes to pastors endorsing candidates outside their church role, 44 percent of Americans disagree with that practice. Personal endorsements by pastors are okay for 54 percent of Americans.
RSS
I went to mass this Sunday before election day at a Church in Bishop Joseph Galanti's jurisdiction in southern New Jersey and the whole fifteen minute homely (sermon) was theological babble for "if you vote for the man who voted to leave babies resulting from an abortion to die on the operating table (Barack Obama) you will go to hell". Thankfully, Bishop Galanti's "horror video" was not shown. I am sure that I was not sitting in the only Catholic Church that presented this political announcement as a homily.
Like many political announcements, the homily contained lies and scare tactics. It presented political party rhetoric and not the message of Christ. Barack Obama's position on abortion was misrepresented and there was no mention of starting unnecessary pre-emptive wars based on lies, torturing prisoners, tax policy that encourages greed and sends American jobs overseas, calling programs that help seniors and poor people to survive socialism, and the other excesses of the current administation and it's heirs.
Hopefully the people who were in the pews next to me do not have the mentality of 17th century peasants; and I hope that they will not vote the conscious and judgment of the leaders of the Catholic Church who brought us the child abuse cover up scandal rather than voting their own conscious, but one can never be sure.
If the Catholic Church paid property and income taxes like other "political parties" some of the tax problems of older people who are losing their homes because of an unfair tax burden would be solved. The churches and the other properties that the Catholilc church would have to forfeit could be used to provide housing for people who have lost their homes in the credit crisis. This would be more in keeping with Christ's teaching.
Did Obama support the murder of Christians in Kenya? Aparently he raised $1 million dollars to his uncle who did.
Does this mean that corporations that donate to campaigns should lose any tax deals that they have with local, state, or the national government? They are influencing elections and they are often granted lowered taxes through negotiations with various governmental bodies. Yet no one complains about their level of influence, nor do they threaten them with full taxation. Perhaps it is because they play along with the system rather than offer a moral voice to governmental leadership.
farout "Red Cross, or the Salvation Army they too would be at danger too. "
they do not publicly endorse candidates for public office, if they did, they would lose their tax exempt status, just as any church should lose theirs if they got into that business.
farout "If Churches were forced to give up their tax exempt status then God will supply the needs, but most likely less will go the feed the poor, help the single moms, and the elderly"
There would be more money for the poor if the good church goers spent less on the construction and up keep of palatial mega churches equipped with all the trappings of the affluent .
If it were just Churches that were tax exempt that would be one thing, but many other organizations are tax excempt as well.
Many think wrongly that the the state is to be free of the church, not so! The church is to be free from the dictates of the state! For too long pansey wishy washy ignorant Christians have bowed down to the anti-christians false claims and demands. Unless Christians take some bold stands the governmant will soon have the right to appoint pastors who go along with the standards the government sets.
If Churches were forced to give up their tax exempt status then God will supply the needs, but most likely less will go the feed the poor, help the single moms, and the elderly. Remember if the church gives up the tax exempt ststus so must other organizations. Is this what we really want? How about the Red Cross, or the Salvation Army they too would be at danger too.
Think about it before you make such a statement as those who are anti-christian want us to accept.
farour63
They should not be tax free in the first place! Instead of a place a worship, churches have become monolithic places of glass, gold, rich wood, and electronics. I am honestly torn about the way the Catholic church burgeons its icons, display, and dress. I went to a Methodist church one weekend and I was stunned at all the amenities and expensive looking things. What has happened to using money in a more just and rightful way.
Just as a PS, Planned parenthood gets tax payer money, yrt they are quite vocal in politics.( don't know if they are tax exempt though.)
Tax exemptiom was meant to be a good thing for the church in the beginning.
Now our Gonvernment wants to use it to silence the church, and on more than just political issues.
The church must speak out on issues that effect the people of this Nation, and the world.
God does not forbid the church from doing so. But if speaking out on political issues that can effect life, liberty and religious freedom in this country and world, then keep the tax exemption, and turn the Church loose to do Gods work.
Martin Luther King endorsed Eisenhower for Prez,No doubt thats why democrats (LBJ)passed the law to take away tax exempt status of churchs that dare speak out.
Being a Christian means believing and acting in accordance with the teachings of Christ, if this means losing a tax exempt status then so be it. Which is more important, God or one's tax status?
Christian missions are noble and help the poor in many countries. Maybe organisations like the Vishwa Hindu Parishad America who support terror organisations like the Bajrang Dal, who are commiting Genocide in India should lose tax exempt status. www.vhp-america.org
I believe that organizations who receive a tax exemption do need to keep politics out of their organization. If they are compelled to enter into the realm of politics, then stand up and don't take an exepmtion (ie dollars away from tax payers). Basically - you should not be able to have your cake and eat it too. And it opens the floodgate for a plethora of other organizations who face (and comply) with the rules as they are intended to be followed.