Government to Use IRS to Gag Churches
Posted on October 17, 2014 by Frank Camp —


There are ways the tax code can be used to gag churches despite the First Amendment.

“I sit on a man’s back, choking him and making him carry me, and yet assure myself and others that I am very sorry for him and wish to ease his lot by all possible means – except by getting off his back.” – Leo Tolstoy

It’s been said that the path to hell is paved with good intentions. Well, those allegedly good intentions are rarely that. Most of the time, the stones on the path to hell are markers drenched in the blood of others. The good intentions? Only good insofar as they allow for the forward momentum of liars, thieves, and crooks.

Several days ago, the wall of church and state was breached, and the content of sermons was questioned. According to Fox:

“The city of Houston has issued subpoenas demanding a group of pastors turn over any sermons dealing with homosexuality, g****r identity or Annise Parker, the city’s first openly lesbian mayor. And those ministers who fail to comply could be held in contempt of court.“

Within hours of this story breaking, the pressure was mounting on Houston, and its mayor to step back, and rescind the subpoenas. Texas Republican Gubernatorial candidate Greg Abbott weighed in, as did Texas Senator Ted Cruz, each condemning the actions of Parker; Cruz even calling the incident a “grotesque abuse of power.” However, Parker held on by her claws, sending out Tweets indicating she wasn’t going to let go:

“If the 5 pastors used pulpits for politics, their sermons are fair game. Were instructions given on filling out anti-HERO petition?”

Suddenly, several days after the issuance of the subpoenas, and the posturing, Parker backed off, telling reporters on Wednesday that the subpoenas were “too broad.”

“It’s not about what did you preach on last Sunday…It should have been clarified, it will be clarified.”

Obviously, Mayor Parker never expected the national media to pick up the story of her gross abuse of power. She thought she could do wh**ever she wanted within Houston, and walk away scot free. Thankfully, she was wrong. But her actions represent a very chilling trend in the way the government is beginning to oppress religion by circumventing the first amendment.

Because churches are 501(c)(3) organizations, and are tax exempt, they are prohibited from making specific endorsement in political races. According toIRS.gov: “Currently, the law prohibits political campaign activity by charities and churches by defining a 501(c)(3) organization as one ‘which does not participate in, or intervene in (including the publishing or distributing of statements), any political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for public office.‘”

That being said, churches can still discuss any religious issues that may also happen be political in nature. Many issues that are considered political are also moral issues that are studied in churches on a regular basis. A******n, homosexuality, etc, are topics which have obvious relevance in politics, but are deeply rooted in theology as well, and as such, are sometimes examined in churches. In those examinations, a******n, and homosexuality are often condemned as going against the law of nature, as written by God.

The subpoenas allegedly targeted “sermons dealing with homosexuality, [and] g****r identity.” Now, homosexuality, and g****r identity are relevant moral topics which do not fall into the category of “political endorsements,” yet they were targeted under the subpoenas. And that is exactly how the government is going to use 501(c)(3) status to oppress religious liberty.

Because churches fall under the 501(c)(3) tax exempt category, the government has a certain authority over them; they can tighten restrictions, as has been done multiple times since the laws were written. Now that gay marriage has become a front-and-center national issue, left leaning politicians in positions of power will do everything they can to manipulate the rules of the 501(c)(3) status in order to silence all opposition. The same applies to a******n. They will do this all under the guise of good intentions, and with a manufactured sense of fairness. They will say that churches shouldn’t be allowed to preach against homosexual conduct because it is so closely tied to gay marriage. They will say that because gay marriage is clearly a political issue, any preaching against it, or against anything related to it constitutes specific endorsements of candidates who do not support it. They will call preaching against gay marriage an “intervention” into the foray of campaigns, designed specifically to sway congregants away from liberal candidates who support it. And because you cannot prove a negative, no church will be able to say that their preaching against gay marriage was not on behalf of a particular candidate. Once again, the same applies to a******n. There will be accusations of indirect interventions, which it will be argued are as bad as direct interventions.

These restrictions will become tighter, and more intrusive, until churches are essentially gagged. The only option I see is for churches to give up their 501(c)(3) status. In time, that is what will have to happen, because the government—by which I mean liberals—will never stop taking inches where they can get them. They will never stop trying to silence those who oppose their agenda


*

Welsummer



rule break it is a breed of chicken

rooster

one-horned

But can we REALLY know God in all His intensity, understand all the power of His love, and truly fathom His greatness as we stand in awe of him, or are we just scratching the surface of His magnitude?

Finally got it to work. God will judge all of us eventually. In the meantime we owe it to Him to treat each other at least civilly,, and as fellow human beings.
The comment on the heterosexual man looking at a woman's legs admiringly and that being considered lust bothered me though. As I understand it, lust is a powerful wanting, imagining having sex with that woman, running over pornographic like images in one's mind, not just admiring a good looking person as it sounded from the comment. The same concept exists between wishing you owned the beautiful new car your neighbor has, or coveting it thinking of ways to steal it, or being livid with jealousy because he has it, and you do not. It is a matter of intensity of thought.

people-eater

Rock,
What are you doing with that bird and his teacup. Interrupting his tea time I suppose. Don't you know that is in endangered species the next step in the evolution of a species?. somebody is going to come along and get you for giving him tea rather than a beer. Shame on you!!

Praise be to God who has given you the strength, understanding and love to accomplish this. We will keep praying for you both
NPP and SWMBO

octopus's

Apparently you intentionally missed my point Heterosexual predators would take advantage of the law that allows those with g****r dysphoria to use the bathroom for the opposite sex. homosexual predators would be loitering about in the men's room or in mall arcades, or picking up young teenage hitch hikers , not in women's bathrooms.

On your statement above, if I am not misinterpreting you, you are saying that the commandment that intercourse is for married couples only, other wise it is a sin, is no longer valid. And that the injunction that men should not have sex with men is really a rule that God made a mistake in making. On an earlier post I asked you if because of your believing that heterosexual, homosexual, and t***s sexual are all equally valid expressions of sexual behavior you believe that "thou shalt not commit adultery" should be removed from the commandments. As I interpret your comments the answer to those questions is "yes". If I am wrong please explain how you can incorporate the two concepts. Thank you.

Here is an updated story

Todd Starnes

By Todd Starnes
Published October 17, 2014




Pastor on sermon scandal: Houston has 'gone too far'
Never autoplay videos

Five Christian pastors will no longer have to turn their sermons over to attorneys for the city of Houston. Instead, they will be forced to turn over their speeches related to the Houston Equal Rights Ordinance (HERO).

I don’t mean to point out the obvious here – but what do those attorneys think a sermon is? It’s a speech.

According to an amended motion filed Friday in Harris County, Texas court, the city’s attorneys will no longer demand sermons related to homosexuals, g****r identity, or Mayor Annise Parker – Houston's first openly lesbian mayor.

The amended subpoenas do require the pastors to turn over “all speeches or presentations related to HERO” – along with 17 different categories of information.

I don’t mean to point out the obvious here – but what do those attorneys think a sermon is? It’s a speech.

The Alliance Defending Freedom is a religious liberty law firm that is representing the pastors. Attorney Erik Stanley tells me the amended subpoenas don’t solve anything.

“The city of Houston still doesn’t get it,” he said. “The subpoenas still ask for information that encompasses speeches made by the pastors and private communications with their church members.”

Stanley said the only resolution is for the city to rescind the subpoenas entirely.

“This tramples their First Amendment rights to free speech and the free exercise of religion,” Stanley said. “Any inquiry into what these pastors did in standing against the ordinance passed by the city of Houston and encouraging members to sign the petition is a violation of the First Amendment.”


The subpoenas were issued in a response to a lawsuit filed related to HERO, also known as the “Bathroom Bill.” Religious groups were opposed to a provision of the law that would allow men who identify as women to use the restrooms of their choice.

The city’s attorney said the pastors were subpoenaed because they were helping to lead opposition to the Bathroom Bill.

According to the Houston Chronicle, Mayor Parker said on Friday, "We don't need to intrude on matters of faith to have equal rights in Houston, and it was never the intention of the city of Houston to intrude on any matters of faith or to get between a pastor and their parishioners."

Folks, that's a load of grade A fertilizer.

"We don't want their sermons, we want the instructions on the petition process. That's always what we wanted and, again, they knew that's what we wanted because that's the subject of the lawsuit," she said.

There's just one problem, Madam Mayor, the pastors aren't party to the lawsuit. And if you weren't looking for their sermons, why did you put that in the subpoena.

The amended subpoenas are not likely to quell growing national outrage over what many are calling an all-out assault on religious liberty.

Sen. Ted Cruz forcefully denounced the city’s actions during a Thursday rally in support of the pastors in Houston.

“Caesar has no jurisdiction over the pulpit,” Cruz said to a cheering crowd of pastors and supporters. “When you subpoena one pastor, you subpoena every pastor.”

Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott issued a blistering letter to the city attorney Wednesday night – demanding they immediately rescind the subpoenas.

He called the subpoenas “aggressive and invasive” and said they show “no regard for the very serious First Amendment considerations at stake.”

“Whether you intend it to be so or not, your action is a direct assault on the religious liberty guaranteed by the First Amendment,” Abbott wrote.

Also on Wednesday, Mayor Parker issued a defiant statement on Twitter – justifying the city’s attack on the ministers.

“If the 5 pastors used pulpits for politics, their sermons are fair game,” Parker tweeted.

Stanley said the mayor’s tweet revealed the city’s true intent.

“I think the mayor’s comment unmasks what the city is really after,” he said. “The city views these pastors and the communications they make with their members, their sermons, and their speeches as fair game.”

He said it was nothing more than a “strong-arm intimidation tactic to silence these pastors.”

“They are sending a message that you better not go up against City Hall on these issues,” Stanley added.

Alliance Defending Freedom said they will move forward with a request to quash the subpoenas. Regardless of the outcome, the pastors will not turn over any documents to the city.

As Senator Cruz so eloquently said, Caesar has no jurisdiction over the pulpit.

scrap

:thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:

Apparently you do not believe that predators would use the idea that men are now welcome in the women's washroom to their advantage. I have spent my lifetime working with boys who have been molested by predators so I am not that naive. Why would you for one minute imagine that only men in the process of "becoming " women would use the women's facilities? I would suggest that you talk to the police in a couple of years and find out what the assault statistics have become.