IRS working with atheist group to monitor church sermons

[breakingcontact]

IRS Strikes Deal With Atheists To Monitor Sermons And Homilies - Investors.com

For my Christian brothers here...get ready.

 

[TAZ]

And here in lies the great fed gov trap. You let the camel stick its nose under the tent cause you wanted tax exempt status and voila you now have the thing crapping in your living room.

People should really think about the long term implications of getting in bed with the Feds.

 

[benenglish]

And here in lies the great fed gov trap. You let the camel stick its nose under the tent cause you wanted tax exempt status ...

It's not even really a trap. Churches want to be tax exempt. They are exempt as long as they don't get too political.

They still have their freedom of speech. No one is making any laws about what they can and can't say.

But if they want to fully exercise their political muscle, they must give up their exempt status. TEGE (Tax Exempt and Government Entities) Revenue Agents from the IRS investigate these cases all the time. They're the ones who went after the Church of Scientology and ultimately lost due to the political power wielded by that church.

Since that debacle, they've been a little reticent to go after mainstream churches for activities that violate their tax exempt status. So someone sued and asked the IRS to do a better job of enforcing the law.

That's bad? According to the article, yes. According to me, the article is straight outta Crazy Town by way of Paranoiaville.

One postscript that may put some people's minds at ease - The IRS never, to my knowledge, sends anyone to churches to monitor what is said from the pulpit. TEGE makes cases based on publications and other hard evidence that can fit in a case file. Churches that distribute voter guides marked with approved choices are risking their status. Pastors that hint in favor of candidates from the pulpit are generally risking nothing. Only in egregious cases, such as threatening to excommunicate members who vote for the pro-choice candidate (Yes, this was a real case.) do the spoken words of a priest bring IRS scrutiny...and in that case, the church escaped without problems because the priest was smart enough not to call the pro-choice candidate by name, even though everyone knew who he was talking about.

The article was, at best, an unwarranted over-reaction to an agreement by a law enforcement agency to actually do its job.

 

[breakingcontact]

Interesting view.

 

[Younggun]

Lol

 

[XinTX]

So I wonder if all those churches that have Dem candidates come and make campaign speeches will get their status pulled?


Didn't think so.

 

[Mexican_Hippie]

I hardly call it egregious to excommunicate someone who votes for abortions. Those people have already excommunicated themselves and should not be receiving communion.

It doesn't mean they can't come to church it means they've committed a mortal sin and can't receive communion until they've gone to confession.

This is yet another reason the IRS needs to be disbanded along with the Federal income tax.

 

[Ole Cowboy]

I am a little stunned at some of the views.

What if you went to a church and most of the sermon was about who to vote for, how to vote, how to get govt benefits, things to say to tell govt agencies so you can qualify. Does anyone think that would be over the edge? Bet on it and it does happen and has been going on at least since the 70's. In fact its the norm in many churches across the US...before someone says I don't know what I am talking about, GO to one of them, see for yourself.

The Army had a program back in the mid 70's and junior grade officers had to attend minority churches in the area where they were stationed.

Point is that IF the IRS will investigate anyone for their political activities or POSSIBLE political political activities this is a page out of any dictatorship. For further study watch the series on the 10 years leading up to WWII, the rise of Hitler...He was elected you know.

The IRS and EPA are a page straight from hell and Hitler's Brown shirts.

Feds raid S.C. home to seize Land Rover in EPA emission-control crackdown:

When it comes to environmental regulation compliance, the Department of Homeland Security isn’t playing — as evidenced by a recent federal raid of a South Carolinian’s home to confiscate a Land Rover that violated EPA emission rules.Jennifer Brinkley said she saw a line of law enforcement vehicles approaching her home and wondered what was wrong, the local WBTV reported. Homeland Security agents then went to her 1985 Land Rover Defender and lifted the hood.“They popped up the hood and looked at the Vehicle Identification Number and compared it with a piece of paper and then took the car with them,” she said, WBTV reported.

Read more: Feds raid S.C. home to seize Land Rover in EPA emission-control crackdown - Washington Times

 

[benenglish]

I hardly call it egregious to excommunicate someone who votes for abortions. Those people have already excommunicated themselves and should not be receiving communion.

It's not an egregious statement in situ. It is an egregious violation of the requirements by which churches operate without normal taxes.

I have no problem with a priest threatening to excommunicate members who vote for a candidate the priest doesn't like. I do have a problem with said priest playing games by not naming names and, thus, keeping the church tax-exempt via those games. He should have manned up, called 'em as he saw 'em, and given up tax exempt status for his church.

This is yet another reason the IRS needs to be disbanded along with the Federal income tax.

I have no problem with that. However, if we assume some government is needed (defense and courts, at least), it will have to be paid for. By whatever method that is done, some people will try to cheat. Some government agency will be tasked with collecting money and catching cheaters.

And everybody will hate that organization just as much as they hate the IRS. Nothing would be gained.

Disbanding the IRS is pointless since they have a valid function. Now, the income tax is a separate subject worthy of a separate thread. If you get rid of that, I suppose you could just change all the letterhead, give the IRS a new name, and say you've abolished it, too. But there will still have to be an enforcement organization. While it may be a bit smaller, I'm willing to bet it will be staffed by the same people who used to work at the IRS.

 

[Ole Cowboy]

You only need to have an IRS if you have 33,000 pages (and growing) of (unneeded) regulations to enforce.

States with sales tax models (Tex, Fl) have very small tax agencies.

What I like about the sales tax model is that its near impossible to cheat. Ohh sure you can beat the sales tax on some item because you paid cash for it, but sooner or later you end up paying the sales tax as long as you consume. Which brings up the basis of the sales tax model...its a consumption tax, not a revenue tax. What tax based upon how much you make rather than how much you spend. Not smart economics.

 

[benenglish]

What if you went to a church and most of the sermon was about who to vote for, how to vote, how to get govt benefits, things to say to tell govt agencies so you can qualify. Does anyone think that would be over the edge? Bet on it and it does happen and has been going on at least since the 70's. In fact its the norm in many churches across the US...before someone says I don't know what I am talking about, GO to one of them, see for yourself.

I'm not at all surprised. When I was in high school in the 1970s in central Texas, the local Methodist minister, Baptist preacher, and Catholic priest showed up at school functions to pray for our success. I remember thinking, as they prayed over our band before we hit the field for marching band contest, that if we hadn't practiced enough to make the grade by now, it was a little late to be asking the Lord for assistance.

Nowadays, kids get hammered for thanking God in their graduation speeches. I got no static for thanking God in my valedictory speech. I wondered at the time, though, if I would have gotten the same reaction if I had chosen to thank Baal.

My point is: Everybody knows that egregious violations of the separation of church and state (and, yes, I know a bit about the nuances; I'm specifically referring to state institutions that promote exclusively Christian rituals and tax-exempt religious entities that include "Vote my way" as informal but sacrosanct doctrine) happen all the time.

The IRS has traditionally ignored individual church non-compliance. That's a tar baby they don't want to hug.

However, they did see a huge problem with Scientology and went after them. Many countries have officially labelled it a cult and stripped it of tax advantages. In the U.S., the case seemed a slam dunk to reach the same conclusion but, at the last second, there were behind-the-scenes political maneuvers and the rule of law lost. The IRS was slapped, hard, and they've been pretty cowed when it comes to enforcement in that whole area of law ever since.

The law is unenforceable and the IRS gets spit on when they try. I think the solution is to change the law. Let churches dictate how members must vote. Just kill off the tax exemptions for religious entities. That would solve the problem.

It would create new ones that I think would be worse...but that's just my opinion.

PS - And that seized vehicle? I fully agree that the people who had their vehicles seized got screwed. However, they got screwed by the importers who altered VINs and illegally brought them into the country, not by the law enforcement agencies that have to deal with the messes created by the smugglers.

 

[benenglish]

You only need to have an IRS if you have 33,000 pages (and growing) of (unneeded) regulations to enforce.

States with sales tax models (Tex, Fl) have very small tax agencies.

Agreed.

However, no one has come up with a decent plan to migrate federal spending to this source of funds. To maintain current levels, the national VAT would, despite what some snake oil salesmen would have you believe, exceed 30%. We'd also get a federal-level bloodbath of dirty politics when it comes to deciding what gets taxed or what gets taxed and rebated. National sales taxes are generally simpler than progressive income taxes but they can still be surprisingly complex. And, hoo boy, the number of shell corps that that would be set up to facilitate transfers of assets via any method other than a taxed sale would explode; there would be millions of new ones, overnight.

For national-scope expenditures to be funded via sales tax the transition is impossible unless those expenditures are first cut to a manageable level. Most functions would need to be returned to state control and the size of the federal government radically reduced.

I'm in favor of starting down that path but I don't see anyone making any notable progress in that direction.

Returning to the original subject of the thread - I wonder how the principle of not establishing a state religion would survive under a government where power is radically shifted to the individual states? My guess is that in some states, sharia law would officially take hold. In others, they'd start burning witches at the stake again.

And that's only a mild exaggeration.

Still, it would be an interesting experiment.

 

[Ole Cowboy]

Ben, here is the problem. The IRS/EPA have become omnipotent and do as they want. This is NOT by accident, its by choice of the POTUS.

While we may or may not agree on the Land Rover, the reality is the govt does not come take your property without due process and you certainly do not send armed raiders by the truckload to do it. You know on the door and ask!

Lets look at Waco. A knock on the door would have worked instead they chose to use about 1600 feds and military, tanks, helicopters and a whole bunch of guys dressed up in Ninja suits to attack and murder, then burn it to the ground to destroy the evidence (in this case the lack there of). This is not how govt for the people, by the people operates.

But its what is wanted in DC.

 

[benenglish]

The IRS/EPA have become omnipotent and do as they want.

I don't know much about the EPA but I do know about the IRS. The history of the agency from Nixon to today is complex, sad, and weird. They are worse in some ways people don't think about and surprisingly good in others that people think they know about but actually don't.

Unfortunately, I have to leave the house sometime today so I don't have time to write a history book. I'll give you this (as is reflected in the rest of this post) - things aren't as they should be.

...you certainly do not send armed raiders by the truckload to do it. You kno(ck) on the door and ask!

Agreed, fully.

Lets look at Waco.

Let's not. I really don't need the blood pressure rise. It started as a politically motivated tactical cluster and devolved into mass murder by the government. That's why when you say:

This is not how govt for the people, by the people operates.

I can only agree in the strongest possible terms.

But its what is wanted in DC.

This, however, is something I disagree with in degree. It's not a DC problem. It's a human problem. Authoritarians, no matter where they are, are the type of people who want this. They just tend to congregate in DC.

The problem isn't a national government with too much power. It's not the IRS. It's a war on a broad front between individual freedom and authoritarianism. The stuff that makes the news are isolated skirmishes in a much larger action, one that the forces of good seem to be losing at the moment.

Or maybe I'm just in a negative mood this morning.

 

[Mexican_Hippie]

The IRS isn't needs if they collect revenues directly from ye states and end apportionment and Federal social programs.

 

[Mexican_Hippie]

No replacement would be needed either, just a simple treasury function to process.

 

[benenglish]

The IRS isn't needs if they collect revenues directly from ye states and end apportionment and Federal social programs.

No replacement would be needed either, just a simple treasury function to process.

I suppose so.

The problems with transitioning to that are pretty profound, though. I still maintain that moving functions to the states (to kill or fund as they see fit) with the concomitant massive reduction of the federal government (that should result) is a necessary precursor to successful implementation.

And that's if I grant that it's a worthy goal...which I'm on the fence about.

 

[mitchntx]

I find human reaction interesting.

If the media reports on something a person or group opposes, the reporting media are idiots who report sensationalized tripe in an attempt to mislead the lemming public.
If the media reports on something a person or group supports, its taken at face value.

 

[Acera]

When you try to legislate morality, you get blurred lines.

Big government that has thrust itself into the private lives of it's citizens makes it hard to differentiate between talking points.

Our public schools are furthering the problem by injecting their ideas into areas traditionally reserved for the family and church.

I don't see any help in sight.

 

[Sapper740]

Once again, of course it's all about attacking Christians and Conservatives via one arm of the federal government or another. Maybe we should form a "Freedom from Public School Left-Wing Indoctrination" group and sue the IRS to remove the tax exempt status of school districts that force students to sing The Obama Song? ?He?s Our Man, Yes We Can!?: Pro-Obama Song Taught to Kindergarteners at TX School | TheBlaze.com