My local church puts out big signs in front telling you what to vote for. Regularly see cops attend that church. No one cares
The police don’t enforce tax regulations. The IRS has its own people for that.
Would you expect an IRS auditor to pull someone over for speeding? Of course not, that’s ridiculous.
I don’t even expect my local PD to pull anyone over for speeding. They don’t do shit.
Unless they’re Black drivers who don’t even have to be speeding.
Except the last 3 days of the month
I got pulled over for it once by local PD
I don’t expect an IRS auditor will put their career on the line to tax a church, either. That’s a third rail for a government employee. And imagine how loudly the Republicans will squawk.
I mean, it worked so well for Cervantes.
All these church regular attendees are constantly being told what to do with their lives. “No abortion, no lgbt”, etc. I would say, even if they were not told who to vote for explicitly, they are still being told who to vote for implicitly.
(Not saying what they doing is right, just saying how this whole religion thing works)
Yep. That’s 100% the bigger issue. The church may or may not officially say to vote for a specific person or party, but they sure as shit will manipulate their entire group to think and vote a certain way.
And even more insidious is most of the people will deny they are being manipulated. They will insist that they decide how to vote all by themselves. It’s just years of indoctrination and manipulation to the point most of them don’t even realize they are being controlled and used.
And maybe some truly believe it all too, but most have doubts and realize it’s messed up, but have been gaslit into thinking it’s THEIR shortcomings or flaws or human nature to blame. Not the organization, them personally.
And here we are millennia later still arguing with grifters and con artists so good at the grift they believe it works.
That’s why religion still exists. When it’s still gaining momentum, it’s a threat to existing powers until they can get control of the religion, then they push it on everyone they can because when you can control the religion, you can control massive populations with little threat of rebellion. See: “holy” Roman empire, Church of England
deleted by creator
the irs already knows that line is violated constantly. unfortunately, they don’t have the resources or the kahunas to go after the churches that do this. there’s way too many (like most of them, probably), and “going after churches” would be a political shitstorm regardless of the constitutional validity of such “persecution”
The word you’re looking for is cajones. Also, capitalization exists for a reason.
Nope, in that context the word is cojones. Balls.
Thanks, my spelling was a bit off. 🤙🏼
Thank you for correcting them, I would’ve never been able to deduce what they were actually trying to say without your help. The Internet needs more people like you, there are so few out there doing the good work you are…
Come on over to the anti-theist side and kill gods while we’re at it. 🥰
I’d be honored
Good, 'cause we’re taking your car. Let’s ride!
Jesus, take the wheel!
Funnily enough, kahunas could feasibly work in that context; it translates to someone with a lot of authority in Hawaiian.
are you ares35’s english teacher? because if not then you’re just an annoying prick
Why would an English teacher be correcting someone’s mistaking a Hawaiian word for a Spanish word? You sound like an ignorant asshole.
at least i"m not corecting gramar like a pedant
deleted by creator
I think you meant grammar.
And you’re a toddler in need of blocking, cupcake. Congrats. 😘
The thing about the IRS is that they exist mostly outside of the consideration of political pandering. They just need to enforce tax code, not care about what people think. Kind of like a computer program. They don’t write the rules they just enforce whatever is on the books. They aren’t really elected or responsible for the perception of their acts. They are already generally unpopular publicly so I don’t see them being overly concerned about political shitstorms.
Except a few years ago when they started going after fraud by conservative groups and Congress went after them for that. No government agency is as independent as they want you to believe. All it takes is one Congress member to decide to make a big deal about something and the program gets shutdown.
If they start going after the Churches how are the senators from the Bible belt going to react? What do you think Biden is going to do? Take a hard stance against churches, does that sound like Joe “Bible the size of a small dog” Biden?
Kahuna lol 🤣🤣🤣
(Hawaiian) a wise man or shaman.
(Surfing) a large wave.
and “going after churches” would be a political shitstorm regardless of the constitutional validity of such “persecution”
Say that again. No one likes the IRS. Imagine how little it would take to spin this. In this corner you have a soulless government agency that all of us have had to deal with on and in the other corner you have a church, the institution that generally is well liked, being “attacked” because the pastor expressed their first amendment rights. Sure it’s spin but it would definitely work. Big mean government vs tiny church.
Churches should be tax liable anyway, regardless of whether they tell you how to vote. Why are they exempt, but other businesses aren’t? Or rather, why are other business tax liable when churches aren’t?
aren’t most non-profits free from taxation?
Yes, and they are held to certain standards and have reporting requirements. Churches do not have to do anything except declare they are a church. No standards, no reporting. They can just count their profits.
But are all churches really non-profit?
I’d settle for a church that’s non-prophet.
Lmao.
I would argue the absolute majority of them aren’t, yeah
This is anecdotal but I sat on a small church board as I was heading out of religion and from what I saw the majority of them couldn’t keep the lights on. We had to partner with one of those interfaith groups just to do collective bargaining on stuff like insurance. So many of the religious temples/churches in the area were just like a dozen elderly people.
I point out to some people just because a church is small and poor doesn’t mean it does good work it just means it is small and poor.
If only we could come up with some sorta department of parks and recreations that could provide activities to seniors. Nah too crazy.
I’m personally very jaded of all religion, but especially southern Bible belt style. Thanks for sharing your experience on the matter!
God created everything right?
God doesn’t need money then.
God doesn’t but the pastor has to eat presumably.
Maybe the pastor should get a job working every day but Wednesday and Sunday?
Sounds like the landlord issue to me.
What’s happening on Wednesday?
A lot of churches have small group gatherings, youth church, or other similar events on Wednesdays, while the main service is on Sundays.
Thanks.
It’s when they groom the kids. Oops I mean youth group.
Wednesday gathering. Mine did it. Umm kinda like an after school program. My most distinct memory of it is the ping pong balls would keep on vanishing so it would be just a table.
God will provide, I’m sure.
Technically you’re right, but that example (moses and the others in the wild) is from the old testament which doesn’t even apply to Christians. Christians are only to follow the new testament.
Technically you’re right, but that example (moses and the others in the wild) is from the old testament which doesn’t even apply to Christians. Christians are only to follow the new testament.
Didn’t jesus say that he did not come abolish the law of the prophets (aka the old testament)?
See that’s kind of the thing right? The bible does a lot of back and forth on this shit where the old testament matters one second and then it doesn’t the next, but that’s aside the point.
Jesus himself did say this, but god rid many of the rules before that as well, so technically that would mean they would be the law of the prophets as well.
One big change for instance is the requirement of a sacrifice to worship god, yet this was changed in the new testament with the sacrifice of Jesus Christ. Yes, some laws before apply such as the ten commandments, but those are also a part of the new testament, they can have overlap.
Why doesn’t God just rain manna on the priest like the old days?
Old testament doesn’t apply to Christians
Budget cuts. Try next heaven business quarter.
I’m confused now. So if the money goes to God, and God has to eat flesh, then…
So many questions…
Pastors must eat extremely well
Render into Caeser that which is Caeser’s, after all.
Right? Talk about privilege and special rights! I don’t get why these megachurches have these millionaire pastors flying around in private jets and nobody bats an eye. Right, Joel Olsteens?
Ngl I’m not against churches in general because I’ve found a lot of peace there when life was rough, so even if I was an atheist I would still support non-hateful churches.
But megachurches with rich pastors that constantly brag about how God wants them to be wealthy? No. No. No. “It is an abomination” - Butt-Head voice.
Even if they give people comfort they should be taxed. Same as prostitutes. I guess they don’t usually pay tax either 🤷♀️
*this is not an opinion just an objective explanation based on the information I have
The reason that churches aren’t taxed, legally, is because the US constitution states, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion” There are disagreements about whether taxing everyone including churches counts as a “law respecting an establishment of religion” but that is the current state of affairs.
*this is an opinion, though more of a speculative one
The reason, I believe, that the law mentioned in this post isn’t enforced, is because if the did the supreme Court would likely through the case and the law out as a result, for being unconstitutional, as it is unarguably a “law respecting an establishment of religion.”
deleted by creator
Religion is cancer
That’s kinda mean toward cancer.
Fuck cancer. Fuck organized religion, too. They both suck major donkey balls.
When was the last time the IRS actually did this?
recently enough that someone bragged about it on /r/chaoticgood before the Snoopocalypse, which got captured in a video of people reading & reacting to reddit posts.
Was there even a first time?
most recent I could find was last week
In my youth I went to your standard Roman Catholic schools and church and such, and they would never ever try to influence your decisions in this way. That’s wild.
Now, I dislike organised religion as much as the next person, absolutely. But if there’s a religious group that are trying to take away people’s agency on who to vote for, they need to be shut down immediately.
They are a threat to our democracy.
You’ve never been to a cowboy church in the south then. Because I went once with a friend and I swear the pastor talked more about politics than the bible.
The fundie evangelicals are so enamored with the south now that even yankee megachurch pastors are starting to talk with a fake southern drawl.
The worst a priest said, around where I live at least, is that “you should vote within your beliefs as a catholic. Primary issue is abortion, I’m not telling you how to vote but I am asking that you do your research and try to vote within the beliefs of the church”
Other than that, politics was NEVER talked about
Probably depends on you congregation and church.
Samesies. Two different Roman Catholic schools, actually. I’d even go as far as saying that thanks to my second school, is that I’m no longer affiliated (or feel, at least, since except for excommunication, you cannot leave the Church) to Catholicism. Even more so, because my Philosophy teacher and my Catechism teacher were SO good. The first one taught me to think by myself and critically, and the second one to actually question my religion by looking at other religions.
And now this year the Catholic dioceses in Ohio (Cincinnati, Cleveland, and Columbus) spent $900k in donations to support Issue 1.
Except it’s not enforced at all. First step is getting it actually enforced
With the power, influence, and money some churches have, there is absolutely no way in Hell it’ll ever be enforced against them. They’ll just end up asking for more money from their followers so they can offset the cost of throwing money at the IRS or whoever they need to.
are there any examples of this ever working? I’d like to be wrong but I don’t think this works or has ever worked
good to know there is a line, even if its far far too lenient
Wouldn’t we be rid of churches if this was actually enforced?
I am Catholic and it annoys me to no end when priests do this as if a politician is even honest about what they claim to support half the time in the first place. I didn’t know I could report them! Where’s the form?!
I was just about to post this haha, (I think this is the actual form you have to fill out tho)
To anyone saying the IRS would never enforce this, be the change you want to see in the world. Continue reporting until they start to enforce it. Even if they don’t, better to keep trying than living with a defeatist attitude.
And Saved. :)
I used to have a priest that was the nicest guy ever in person, but his facebook posts were all Trump-y bullshit, sticking it to the liberals, etc.
TBH, it made me lose a lot of faith.
Most priests I have met just consider it a job, not so much a reflection of their own holiness. Some of them are true shepherds, but a lot of them are sheep themselves. A few are wolves, unworthy of the office at all. Going to seminary opened up my eyes to a lot of things behind the scenes that are both inspiring and unsavory. The best kinds of priests I have found are usually the ones running retreats. I think the Bishops know and try to get them to be a good influence on people SENT to retreats… Anyway, do not confuse the faith for the shoddy work of a few old guys who answer to more old guys. Remember, Jesus Himself picked Judas and look what he did.
I guess we’ll have to send in spies, though, because congregation members are never going to report their own church.
Especially applicable to megachurches and those preaching prosperity theology.
Yep. Same with all 501c organizations. Make it a rule across the board. Churches, planned parenthood, BLM, all charities.
How does BLM or planned parenthood qualify here?
Especially when they’re directly opposed by one political side whereas church and charity is generally accepted by both sides?
It’d be hard to find a BLM member that supports the Republican party for instance. It’s a massive conflict of interest. Same with planned parenthood.
The difference is Republicans decided to make these organizations the enemy.
Fair cuz democrats might not like the church but I don’t think the majority directly opposes religion being allowed.
I’d love to see Christians actually being Christians, honestly. Like Jimmy Carter does.
There’s being “allowed” and then there’s being “taxed”
While it’s probably not that main stream in us politics, the US is one to the few places one of the largest hedge funds gets to operate tax free because it’s owned by the LDS; and I’m pretty sure they just get picked on because they’re “cult-y”. Catholic Churches have massive investment accounts, most denominations will have something large.
And then there’s the Bill Gates fund that is a giant tax shelter….
deleted by creator
Im surprised to find myself agreeing. Obviously BLM is a political / activisn organization. But ykw. They could form a PAC instead. Separate political activism from genuine charity work. And they should be expected to file correctly - because churches can’t.
BLM is a terrible example. There’s BLM the movement, and BLM the leech non-profit organization that purports to represent BLM the movement but gets terrible press because they have tons of private inurement and self-dealing issues - almost like they exist to undermine the actual movement.
Pretty sure it’s not a 501c corp. at least not the bits of it that are active in politics.
Keep in mind, BLM isn’t a single entity and doesn’t have heirachical control like a denomination would
I believe it’s already a rule. Never enforced.
I’ve sent them photographs of a local church with “Vote Trump” on the placard out front. Nothing happened.
Did you do it anonymously or did you have your name on it? According to their form
All referrals are sent to analysts at the EO Classifications Office in Dallas. After a referral is made, the IRS will send an acknowledgement letter to all non-IRS sources making a referral, unless it was made anonymously.
They should be required to process it, but only if it’s not anonymous. I’m guessing anything anonymous is thrown in the bin unless it’s super serious.
That statement doesn’t mean they don’t process anonymous submissions, it just means you don’t get a letter saying they got it if you submit it anonymously. It’s more likely that they just don’t have the resources to follow up on every tip unless it’s particularly egregious, given the number of churches who are definitely in violation in the US.
Yes, I’m sure they’re still processed but I think it would make sense to give less credence to anonymous tips as they’re less likely to be legit or serious than one that someone puts their name on.
are there any examples of someone successfully getting a church’s exempt status taken away?evidently there are a few examples, but probably only in really easy to pin on the church type situations. You probably need a printed doc from the church or a video of the pastor specifically mentioning a party or a candidate.
I’m sure it’s a pretty hard process, but it seems like you should at least get a response on the status of the submission and that the church would be informed too. Getting the message that it’s being investigated may at least be enough to spook many of them to stop.
Just read John 18:36 to them.
Jesus said, “My kingdom is not of this world. If it were, my servants would fight to prevent my arrest by the Jewish leaders. But now my kingdom is from another place.”
I’m really not seeing the relevance here.
Christian leaders taking a hand in political affairs means they concerned about this world, which Jesus clearly said his kingdom was not a part of. In other words, their actions show they aren’t a part of Jesus kingdom, but that of this world. Which… according to Matthew, currently belongs to Satan.
Seems easy to poke holes in.
“Yes we are in Satan’s kingdom now, and we are doing this to wrest control of his kingdom from him.”
“Jesus was talking about the afterlife when he said that.”
“Of course we’re concerned with this world, it is our Christian duty to do good no matter where we are.”
I’m an atheist so I’m not attempting to defend them here, but your argument isn’t very strong.
No worries. The point is to make them think a bit… and fwiw, I grew up in a cult that believed hardcore in that before I managed to get out.
Which version of the Kingdom of God? The Kingdom of God went from an earthly domain to a spiritual domain depending what gospels you read. Jesus taught about a temporal kingdom of god tied in with his apocalyptic views, which is more evident in the earlier gospels. By the time John was written, it’s something else entirely.
They’ll just read John 3:16 to you when Donald Trump gets indicted again for the millionth tome
