Point #1: The 1st Amendment is a restriction on GOVERNMENT, not everybody else. That means, among other things, that it is not a restriction on churches. As a result, the "separation of church and state" doctrine is only a restriction on government, not church.

Point #2: When 50 people all get together and endorse a specific candidate, and the only thing that they all have in common is their common occupation as preachers, it seems kinda silly to conclude that they're acting "solely as private citizens." No, they are trading on their religious credentials. Thus, those who dismiss the Gephardt endorsement as not relevant, different, etc, but are attacking the RC on this are, at best, disingenuous. Likewise those who turn a blind eye to candidates who stump at churches.

Point #3: "The power to tax is the power to destroy", hence, the limitations on taxing religious entities.

Point #4:

This attitude is why we have the 1st Amendment to protect us from government. Punitive taxation because one party doesn't like another party's metaphysical beliefs. Government defines how religious leaders are supposed to behave. Priests of Ganesha, Hindu Goddess of Prosperity must live in poverty?

Point #5: Only the NON-religious are permitted to address moral issues? How upside down is that? Who were the abolitionists? Who led the civil rights movement? When a candidate clearly declares himself on one side of a moral issue, must any religious opposition to that issue be silenced for the duration of the campaign because it may be "electioneering?"

Point #6: Silencing the church is a feature of tyrants, worldwide, throughout history. Such silence is attempted in many ways, from outright murder, to imprisonment, seizure of property, harrassment, and economic abuse. All aim at the same goal: to silence critics who make moral arguments attacking the legitimacy of the governments actions. This is what most of you are backing.

Um...the constitution never says "separation of church and state" the Supreme Court has interpret the constitution to mean that. With that in mind, add this though, is the government not following its "orders" from the court and the constitution. NO. Kerry is doing what he think is best for America, not his personal or religious life.

The Bishops are doing what they feel is best under God, and not always for America. HOWEVER since there is a "separation of church and state" the constitution has no application to the church. Which means it does not work in the opposite order. The church has alienable right equal to every individual in America that are above the government.

Besides, who would want to forced to live in a country of "freedoms" if you are not free to do as you please in Church?

When does a church cross the line from spirituality to political force, thus losing its tax-exempt status?


There are many angles to this question. There are times when the government seems to going overboard and times when religions do the same thing.

In May, Texas Comptroller of Public Accounts, Carole Keeton Strayhorn’s office lifted the tax exempt status of a Unitarian congregation, because in her thinking, Unitarians have a vague, if any, set of beliefs that do not necessarily define a supreme being. The story was in the Fort Worth Star Telegram for several days. Unfortunately, after seven days the paper charges for archived articles. Hence, I’ve used the alternate source in the link. Strayhorn, a likely challenger to Texas Governor Rick Perry in 2006, later reversed her ruling.

In my opinion, this was a case of the State of Texas, or at lest one of it’s top officials, crossing the line.



http://www.uui.org/uueye/editor_archive_2004-w22.php

Tuesday, the Rev. Jerry Falwell, spoke at Southwestern Baptist theological Seminary in Fort Worth.



http://www.swbts.edu/pr/pressrelease.cfm?id=165

In this instance Falwell, who’s judgment I’ve questioned often, seems to be skating close to the edge.

It must be noted that churches are not the only organizations covered by the electioneering prohibition.



Complaint against Planned Parenthood filed with IRS