Is yesterday's Justice rally cause to revoke the tax free status of

[BlueEyedSon]

churches? It was a completely partisan political event.... consider the subject matter and "special guests."

Could this issue be the Democrats/progressives "nuclear option"....?

[Atman]

1. I think it SERIOUSLY needs to be brought up

It is dangerous territory for the Dems, but if can be done IF EXPLAINED PROPERLY. Otherwise, the republicans will immediately jump on this and claim the dems "are trying to shut down your church!" Promise.

[liberal N proud]

2. Is the FRC Tax Exempt?

The should not be as they practice politics at the highest level.

[wicket]

7. yes- they are

But they definitely shouldn't be, especially after this.

[ProgressiveConn]

3. Not fair to call this a nuclear option.

This is not an extreme change only enforcement of current policy. And yes churches should be required to pay taxes. And oddly enough the Bush regime has already started enforcing this. Now only on liberal churches but thanks to that when there is a shift it will become widely enforced.

Thanks Dubya!

[MollyStark]

4. NO.... what don't DUers get about the separation of Church and State?

Do you like the separation or not? If you do you should understand that churches should not be taxed.

[liberal N proud]

6. BUT! the threat to take their Tax Exempt status away for

participating in politics and government should wake them up to the fact that the reason they are separate and tax exempt it to keep it that way!
If they want to participate in Government then they should lose Tax Exempt status.

[ProgressiveConn]

14. Thats a new one to me.

Care to explain?

[mmonk]

5. Yes

If churches choose to be a default wing of government through receiving and adminstering duties of the state through a default "contract" with taxpayer funds and a PAC for the republican party, they should not be tax exempt.

[Roland99]

8. I asked that in another thread...these "churches" are skirting the intent

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x1742851

[mmonk]

9. Exactly

Also, in addition, they are running roughshod over the establishment clause. Tax their asses.

[Cash]

10. No

Was this ever an issue when Jesse Jackson, et. el. would speak in various churches while on the campaign trail, or is this become an issue as of late? I never remember anyone having a problem with political candidates speaking at churches in the past.

And just because a particular church participates should mean all churches should be held to their account? You realize the overwhelming majority of churches never have political rallies of any kind.

[mmonk]

11. Tax the ones

that go against the laws.

[Cash]

13. I tend to agree...

...that churches should not be places that pols of any party (or independent) should speak. But I also agree with someone else's statement that if it were to be done it would be viewed by many as another attempt by liberals to eliminate G-d from the country.

[mmonk]

12. Why can't we as citizens

sue these particular groups, churches, politicians or parts of government etc. for constitutional violations?