The Church Needs To Drop 501C, Not For Prophet

[Steve40]

How can the Church be a Prophet when they are more worried about not for profit status? With evil men and women who think nothing of letting kids be ripped from womb piece by piece, the Church needs to speak up. No lesser of evil will do. All those who are on the side of death must be called out by name as a supporter of killers.

The IRS has control over our pulpits and over organizations like this one who refuse to call a killer a killer. Where is our trust in God? Or is our god the almighty buck?

Don’t vote for any baby killers. Stand firm no matter what. It is the only way.

If I mention their name this thread will be deleted which is another sign of the IRS muzzle on the Church.

 

[boppaid]

That’s a very good point that I hadn’t thought of before. I wonder why it hasn’t done so already? It’s like weighing money versus fighting against abortion. I’m surprised that so far it is choosing the tax break. Of course, I’m not knowledgeable about things like this. Maybe there are other reasons it doesn’t drop the 501C?

 

[vern_humphrey]

I have said again and again, who takes the King’s shilling is the King’s man.

When the Church applies for tax exemption, or accepts taxpayer money – no matter how worthy our intentions, we become subject to government control.

 

[Scottgun]

If I mention their name this thread will be deleted which is another sign of the IRS muzzle on the Church.

I don’t recall CA saying that they are banning political candidate threads because it threatens their tax status.

 

[Steve40]

I don’t recall CA saying that they are banning political candidate threads because it threatens their tax status.

Ask them why the new rule was put in place in Staff Chat Forum. There they said “The IRS prohibits discussion of political candidates under certain circumstances.”

 

[vern_humphrey]

Ask them why the new rule was put in place in Staff Chat Forum. There they said “The IRS prohibits discussion of political candidates under certain circumstances.”

And what do you bet they got a “friendly warning?”

 

[Steve40]

And what do you bet they got a “friendly warning?”

I doubt it was friendly and understand their predicament. But it doesn’t excuse Catholic Answers or the Church. We all need to move away from IRS 501C and speak the truth.

 

[vern_humphrey]

I doubt it was friendly and understand their predicament. But it doesn’t excuse Catholic Answers or the Church. We all need to move away from IRS 501C and speak the truth.

Unfortunately, the system means that would be organizational suicide.

If the Church can pony up a half billion to settle sexually-related lawsuits in the Diocese of San Francisco, the Church ought to be able to finance itself without a tax break.

Come to think of it, the Church ought to be able to finance a lawsuit accusing the IRS of violating the First Amendment.

 

[MichaelTDoyle]

Unfortunately, the system means that would be organizational suicide.

If the Church can pony up a half billion to settle sexually-related lawsuits in the Diocese of San Francisco, the Church ought to be able to finance itself without a tax break.

Come to think of it, the Church ought to be able to finance a lawsuit accusing the IRS of violating the First Amendment.

Has anyone seen a study of what it would cost? How much more would we need to tithe to make the difference?

Can someone point to something specifically stopping the Church from being pro-life and evangelizing because of 501c?

I’d like to disentangle the two, but I’m not sure…

 

[Scottgun]

Ask them why the new rule was put in place in Staff Chat Forum. There they said “The IRS prohibits discussion of political candidates under certain circumstances.”

Could you link that please?

 

[vern_humphrey]

Has anyone seen a study of what it would cost? How much more would we need to tithe to make the difference?

It would cost more than Catholic Answers can afford. The Church could survive, but who in the Council of Bishops has the moxie to stand up the the government.

Can someone point to something specifically stopping the Church from being pro-life and evangelizing because of 501c?

They don’t have to – they merely say it, and Catholic Answers loses their tax-exempt status. We can sue, of course, but we have to pay our lawyers and the government lawyers are paid by the taxpayer.

I’d like to disentangle the two, but I’m not sure…

That’s the price we’ve paid for allowing those in power to make the Constitution a “living document.”