mperry's Blog

One should ask themselves two very simple questions. The first questions should be, What does Billy Graham, John Hagee and Rev. Jeremiah Wright, Jr. all have in common? The answer is they are all pastor's and the leader's of their churches and they have all have given their endorsements to presidential candidates. Billy Graham to Hillary Clinton, John Hagee to John McCain and Rev. Jeremiah Wright, Jr to Barack Obama. The second question should be, What about separation of church and state? The answer is there is absolutely nothing in the Constitution of the United States of America that mentions anything about separation of church and state. There is, however, the First Amendment. It states that Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances. http://www.house.gov/paul/const-amend.html. What this means is that the government will not interfere with the way you worship, your freedom of speech, the freedom of press, or the rights of individuals to gather peacefully. You might be thinking now, How does all of this tie back into Billy Graham, John Hagee and Rev. Jeremiah Wright, Jr.? They are all connected through an Internal Revenue Service filing status called a 501(c)(3). Under the 501(c)(3) filing status the church is exempt from paying taxes.

The following was researched and taken from http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-drop/rr-07-41.pdf Issue Advocacy vs. Political Campaign Intervention
Section 501(c)(3) organizations may take positions on public policy issues, including issues that divide candidates in an election for public office. However, section 501(c)(3) organizations must avoid any issue advocacy that functions as political campaign intervention. Even if a statement does not expressly tell an audience to vote for or against a specific candidate, an organization delivering the statement is at risk of violating the political campaign intervention prohibition if there is any message favoring or opposing a candidate. A statement can identify a candidate not only by stating the candidate’s name but also by other means such as showing a picture of the candidate, referring to political party affiliations, or other distinctive features of a candidate’s platform or biography.

26 CFR 1.501(c)(3)-1: Organizations organized and operated charitable, scientific, testing for public safety, literary or for the prevention of cruelty to children or animals.

Rev. Rul. 2007-41, 2007-25 I.R.B. (June 18, 2007)
Issue Advocacy vs Political Campaign Interention All the facts and circumstances need to be considered to determine if the advocacy is political campaign intervention. Key factors in determining whether a communication results in political campaign intervention include the following:
• Whether the statement identifies one or more candidates for a given public office; • Whether the statement expresses approval or disapproval for one or more candidates’ positions and/or actions;
• Whether the statement is delivered close in time to the election;
• Whether the statement makes reference to voting or an election;
• Whether the issue addressed in the communication has been raised as an issue distinguishing candidates for a given office;
• Whether the communication is part of an ongoing series of communications by the organization on the same issue that are made independent of the timing of any election; and
• Whether the timing of the communication and identification of the candidate are related to a non-electoral event such as a scheduled vote on specific legislation by an officeholder who also happens to be a candidate for public office. A communication is particularly at risk of political campaign intervention when it makes reference to candidates or voting in a specific upcoming election. Nevertheless, the communication must still be considered in context before arriving at any conclusions. Pastor's who choose to walk this road are basically walking a tightrope high above the law and the ban on any political activity from a 501(c)(3) organization.

Now back to the first amendment, which states that the government shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion. It is a complete lie that a church must file under the 501(c)(3) status. The IRS has a 501(c)(1)(a) which states that a church is automatically tax exempt. This is known as the "Mandatory Exception" rule. Why do the churches ask to be exempt from a tax that they never owed to begin with and why do churches as to be tax exempt when they already were in the first place?

Case and point is this, If the churches do not want the government involved, THEN QUIT ASKING THEM TO!!!!! As a church you are automatically tax exempt!!!! It should not be a question of "Separation of Church and State" but rather "Separation of Church and Government". We need to get back to how the church was supposed to function and operate as originally intended and stop acting like a business.

The following should answer questions about taxes in regards to the church:

Matthew 22:
15: Then went the Pharisees, and took counsel how they might entangle him in his talk.
16 And they sent out unto him their disciples with the Herodians, saying, Master, we know that thou art true, and teachest the way of God in truth, neither carest thou for any man: for thou regardest not the person of men.
17 Tell us therefore, What thinkest thou? Is it lawful to give tribute [NKJV: pay taxes] unto Caesar, or not?
18 But Jesus perceived their wickedness, and said, Why tempt ye me, ye hypocrites?
19 Shew me the tribute [NKJV: tax] money. And they brought unto him a penny.
20 And he saith unto them, Whose is this image and superscription?
21 They say unto him, Caesar's. Then saith he unto them, Render therefore unto Caesar the things which are Caesar's; and unto God the things that are God's.
22 When they had heard these words, they marvelled, and left him, and went their way.

And Romans 13:2 gives this warning:
"Consequently, he who rebels against the authority is rebelling against what God has instituted, and those who do so will bring judgment on themselves."

We need to wake up and get educated about how are churches should be acting.

You Can also visit www.planb4america.com to blog in detail about this discussion. You must create an account which is free before posting comments to the blogs.

God Bless, MP