SC priest: no communion for obama voters

[Article 15]

No answer I see. He made no effort to tell them NOT to vote for Obama. He simply said after they did they had to confess. He did not influence the election at all.

I do however suggest that all those black churches lose their tax exempt status since they DID preach from the pulpit and did attempt to influence the election.

As for the McCain supporters I do not recall the churches actually doing anything other then acknowledging they wanted him to win. NO preaching, no demands their followers actually vote for him at all. But hey remove their tax exempt status too.

Ohh by the way tax exempt entities CAN participate in the election process. Or have we forgotten Moveon.Org?

So Obama wont be running for reelection in 2012?

And yeah, moveon.org shouldn't be tax exempt either.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

So Obama wont be running for reelection in 2012?

And yeah, moveon.org shouldn't be tax exempt either.

The law disagrees. The LAW specifically allows groups like Moveon.Org to exist. Your argument is weak and bad.

Again this priest did not influence the election. What may or may not happen in 4 years is irrelevant.

 

[YWN666]

It's a wonder that anyone attends church when priests make such comments. I have no doubt that some of the mindless sheep will allow themselves to be chastised for exercising their right to vote.

 

[xsited1]

Obama's views on abortion are rather extreme. His opposition to the Born Alive Bill is a perfect example. I'm with the Priests on this one.

 

[Care4all]

This has NOTHING to do with Freedom of religion or from religion...this has to do with regs and rules and laws pertaining to NONPROFITS.

 

[jillian]

Well, there is a difference. We have freedom FROM a government sanctioned religion, but we do not have freedom FROM religion. If I walk down the street wearing a crucifix around my neck that is clearly visible, you have no right to tell me to remove it.

I know.

I assumed it was a given that we were talking about government interference given the context of the discussion. Apologies for not being clear.

 

[jillian]

Obama's views on abortion are rather extreme. His opposition to the Born Alive Bill is a perfect example. I'm with the Priests on this one.

And who decides what is extreme and when laws can be ignored? You? Some parish priest? The LDS?

they know they're violating the law. If they want to do that, fine, but their tax exempt status goes bye bye.

 

[Macintosh]

Planned Parenthood should lose its tax-exempt status, because:

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pf0XIRZSTt8]YouTube - Barack Obama Promises to Sign FOCA[/ame]

Catch the backdrop?

How far are we going to take this?

Precisely why I'm undecided.

 

[Sunni Man]

And who decides what is extreme and when laws can be ignored? You? Some parish priest? The LDS?

Most likely the IRS

 

[CSM]

This has NOTHING to do with Freedom of religion or from religion...this has to do with regs and rules and laws pertaining to NONPROFITS.

Agreed.

 

[jillian]

Planned Parenthood should lose its tax-exempt status, because:

YouTube - Barack Obama Promises to Sign FOCA

Catch the backdrop?

How far are we going to take this?

Precisely why I'm undecided.

Has planned parenthood recently become a religious organization?

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Agreed.

Non Profits CAN participate in the election process. It is a straight up lie to claim otherwise.

 

[Macintosh]

Has planned parenthood recently become a religious organization?

Did you not read the Tax Code that was recently posted by Care?

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Has planned parenthood recently become a religious organization?

Are they a non profit organization? You are claiming that THAT status prevents them from participating. Why would it be different for Planned Parenthood in YOUR argument?

 

[xsited1]

And who decides what is extreme and when laws can be ignored? You? Some parish priest? The LDS?

they know they're violating the law. If they want to do that, fine, but their tax exempt status goes bye bye.

This is a religious matter and the Priests can point to verses in the Bible that back-up their views. The government should have no say in this.

As far as their tax exampt status goes, you really don't want to go down that road. For example, black southern churches were pushing for Obama this election. Should they lose their tax exempt status? Yes, they should, but the outcry would be overwhelming so it'll never happen.

 

[jillian]

This is a religious matter and the Priests can point to verses in the Bible that back-up their views. The government should have no say in this.

As far as their tax exampt status goes, you really don't want to go down that road. For example, black southern churches were pushing for Obama this election. Should they lose their tax exempt status? Yes, they should, but the outcry would be overwhelming so it'll never happen.

Really? What churches were telling their parishoners to vote for Obama? If they did, same rules apply.

There's a difference between talking about issues and endorsing a candidate. It's a fine line, but one is legal, one isn't. It's really not that complex.

 

[Macintosh]

The argument has seemingly bifurcated here. The original discussion pertained to religious organizations and if by endorsing a certain candidate or position they are violating the First Amendment, thereby giving cause to have their tax-exempt status revoked. Now we seem to be discussing if tax-exempt organizations in general, like Planned Parenthood and MoveOn.Org, should lose their exemption status for participating in an election process.

According to the Tax Code Care posted, they should.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Really? What churches were telling their parishoners to vote for Obama? If they did, same rules apply.

There's a difference between talking about issues and endorsing a candidate. It's a fine line, but one is legal, one isn't. It's really not that complex.

Again this Priest did not encourage his flock to vote one way or the other. He simply said AFTER the fact if you voted for Obama you sinned. Which IS a position a church can take.

 

[editec]

Except this catholic priest did nothing to influence their vote, he simple said AFTER they voted they had to confess. So remind me how he "influenced" the election again?

Good point, and one I hadn't thought of

He's (ironically) using his authoritywithin the church to deny his parisioner their civil right to freedom of religion

This may actually go worse on that chucch than I'd originally thought.

Before I thought the church was merely violating the tax laws, but denying people their civil rights?

Interesting.

 

[xsited1]

Really? What churches were telling their parishoners to vote for Obama? If they did, same rules apply.

There's a difference between talking about issues and endorsing a candidate. It's a fine line, but one is legal, one isn't. It's really not that complex.

There are plenty of black churches doing this, but you know the same rules would not apply.

You seem to be stuck in 'rage mode' this morning. I suggest you go outside and take a few deep breaths.