Alan Brownstein UC Davis
At 11:31 AM 6/3/2004 -0400, you wrote:
content-class: urn:content-classes:message Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C4497F.D21C6BEE"
"urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:st1 = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags">
How about: "This moral principle [pick from among the usual suspects] is so important to this religious congregation that, if a congregant supports any candidate for any office who actively subverts the principle -- or who even fails to support the principle actively enough -- that congregant shall be excluded from the congregation."
What result for the congregation when its exemption is challenged? Easy case, one way or the other?
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of marc stern
Sent: Thursday, June 03, 2004 11:20 AM
To: 'Law & Religion issues for Law Academics'
Subject: RE: Gay Activists Threaten Church Tax-Exempt Status
The IRS has spoken reasonably authoritatively about this in its training manuals. By and large, unless the advocacy is express (vote against candidate Q because of their stand on&.) pronouncements on policy in the airare not construed as endorsements. Otherwise all not for profits would have to shut down every election season.
Marc Stern
----------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Anthony Picarello
Sent: Thursday, June 03, 2004 9:53 AM
To: Law & Religion issues for Law Academics
Subject: RE: Gay Activists Threaten Church Tax-Exempt Status
The "susbtantial" limit on lobbying does provide ample breathing room for most religious institutions, including any bona fide house of worship I could imagine. And there's probably no limit on religious groups' advocacy re moral issues, where the advocacy isn't also lobbying.
But there's no such latitude re advocacy for candidates, and we are, after all, in an election year. So I expect that the candidate part of the limit will be asserted frequently in the months to come, and it could well represent a meaningful threat.
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of marc stern
Sent: Thursday, June 03, 2004 9:44 AM
To: 'Law & Religion issues for Law Academics'
Subject: RE: Gay Activists Threaten Church Tax-Exempt Status
There really is nothing to the threat. Churches are free to take stands on political issues provided they do not spend a substantialamount on these activities. The late Dean Kelly obtained an internal IRS memo which indicted that insubstantial was between 5-20% of an organizations budget. The document was informal and would not bind the IRS, but it describes a fairly safe harbor. Non-church groups can opt for a different and more predictable set of rules, but at the behest of churches which then insisted that the government could not stop them from advocating for legislation at the expense of exemption, churches were not offered the option.
Marc Stern
----------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Francis Beckwith
Sent: Thursday, June 03, 2004 8:16 AM
To: Religion Law Mailing List
Subject: Gay Activists Threaten Church Tax-Exempt Status
Importance: Low
Just got this from a friend. It is published by Focus on the Family,a conservative Christian outfit in Colorado Springs.
Frank
---
June 1, 2004
Church's Tax-Exempt Status Threatened
by Steve Jordahl, correspondent
Pro-homosexual group lodges complaint with the state against a Montana church that aired the "Battle for Marriage" satellite broadcast.
A Montana church, one of hundreds across the country to broadcast a pro-marriage TV special on May 23, has been threatened by a gay-activists group with removal of its tax-exempt status.
Canyon Ferry Road Baptist Church in Helena showed congregants "The Battle for Marriage" a video simulcast featuring Focus on the Family Chairman Dr. James Dobson and other pro-family leaders and circulated a petition at the event calling for a state constitutional amendment supporting traditional marriage. Those actions rankled the gay-activist group Montanans for Family and Fairness, which lodged a complaint with the state's Commission of Political Practices.
The complaint alleges that what the church did "may & have implications for an organization's tax status." The commission has said it will investigate, but Alliance Defense Fund (ADF) attorney Gary McCaleb said the argument is without merit.
"The letter that was sent out by these far-left activists is outrageous," McCaleb said. "I think it's defamatory, and it's certainly an intolerant effort to suppress free speech."
Canyon Pastor B.G. Stumberg said his church is not intimidated. The commission is unable to affect a church's tax-exempt status on its own, but a decision against the church is the first step in stripping a congregation of its tax benefits.
"I don't think it's scaring us at all," he said. "It's sort of galvanized us, in one sense, (and) I think everybody's sort of saying, 'OK, let's go.' "
The letter was also sent to several hundred other Montana churches, an obvious attempt to make them think twice about addressing the issue of gay marriage. McCaleb said churches should press ahead, anyway.
"You certainly don't convert your church into a political committee," he explained, "when you speak out in favor of marriage."
The ADF, McCaleb added, would be happy to consult with any church that has questions.
Copyright © 2004 Focus on the Family
All rights reserved. International copyright secured.
(800) A-FAMILY (232-6459)
Privacy Policy/Terms of Use <http://www.family.org/welcome/aboutfof/a0013445.cfm> | Reprint Requests <http://www.family.org/reprints/>
_______________________________________________
To post, send message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw
_______________________________________________ To post, send message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw
