They are preaching what they consider "morality."

That said, I'm for revoking their tax exempt status for activities that are not directly religious. (If you can figure it out. )

--imm

From the IRS website:

Issue Advocacy vs. Political Campaign Intervention

Under federal tax law, section 501(c)(3) organizations may take positions on public policy issues, including issues that divide candidates in an election for public office. However, section 501(c)(3) organizations must avoid any issue advocacy that functions as political campaign intervention. Even if a statement does not expressly tell an audience to vote for or against a specific candidate, an organization delivering the statement is at risk of violating the political campaign intervention prohibition if there is any message favoring or opposing a candidate. A statement can identify a candidate not only by stating the candidate’s name but also by other means such as showing a picture of the candidate, referring to political party affiliations, or other distinctive features of a candidate’s platform or biography. All the facts and circumstances need to be considered to determine if the advocacy is political campaign intervention.

I think when they start talking about "defeating Obama" or using that kind of language they are getting close to Campaign Intervention

Favoring or opposing distinctive features of a candidate's platform makes it Campaign Intervention.

Certainly seems worth going after.

The first thing we as citizens can do is get our regulatory agencies, like the FCC, to actually work for ALL the people. Maybe grant low power FM licenses to progressive groups instead of locking down the window for providing these licenses for YEARS.

Maybe we can stop the stranglehold that the Right has on our AM public airwaves. Just a suggestion.

I've been looking at the FCC website on how to file a complaint, not getting much. A couple of years ago IRS told me that they don't infringe on "free speech."

Said rules forbid them from engaging in partisan political activity, i.e. endorsing or explicitly supporting a specific candidate or political party, but not from advocating on specific political issues.

to stop the perceived "War on Religion".

I'm not a lawyer, but mentioning candidates by name would seem to be partisan political activity.

Our UU church spoke out against the war in Iraq, encouraged people to write their reps for marriage equality, and we were very careful to make that distinction between discussion of 'issues' and discussion of 'candidates.'

We knew that our church - which is large and near DC - would be watched for any violations of this during the Bush Administration.

You can tell people to contact politicians, and Obama is a sitting politician, about an issue, that's not in violation of their tax exempt status. You can even encourage people to get out and vote, and sign people up to vote - and still have your tax exempt status.

There is no mention in the OP about them doing anything to vote for, unseat, impeach or recall any politician.

The church saw a big drop in donations when the pedophile priest scandal made its way into the MSM. Perhaps another big decline in donations will help force the church's attitude toward women out of the 12th century.

There's a number of them that wouldn't imagine giving such a lecture. I can think of a few I've known, off the top of my head. Personally, I wouldn't enter a church that maintained such practices... come to think of it, I haven't entered any church at all in quite some time.

I see this sort of thing though, as more of an effort by conservative Priests and the Vatican than by the church as a whole. Quite a number are perfectly inclined to simply ignore the Vatican - and do so. If someone had asked Andrew Greeley, for instance, to give such a lecture, he would have laughed in their face.

There are many corrupt elements of the church and its leadership, but I am convinced that this sort of thing is not being spread throughout every Catholic Church in the Country. At least, I haven't heard of such in my area... yet.

Evangelical Protestant is President. Then the Catholic Church will finally learn that they are truly hated by those others.

Catholics must stop filling the pews and never, ever give the Catholic Church another dime! That is a message they will understand.

institution that continually slips into the realm of politics.

I suspect that many denominations (especially evangelical) delve into political subjects from time to time. Just haven't had the stomach to find out first-hand.

This very well may be the incentive I need.

appreciate his political view in church. If he continues anonymously record him then write another letter telling him you recorded him and you will send the tape to the IRS for removing the church's tax exemption. If you have any close friends that you could trust to not spill the beans maybe you can get some of them to do the same thing. Put the church on notice. Oh by the way stop giving the church your money. Send it to Planned Parenthood instead.

Because if this is meant for me, you clearly have not read my post.

1)I don't have a parish priest.
2)I am not Catholic (or *any* denomination for that matter).
3)I've never given money to a religious institution of any sort.
4)I haven't set foot in a church, synagogue or mosque for anything but weddings or funerals in my entire adult life.

I have no idea how you got what you did out of my post. Unless you intended it for someone else?

ready to post a comment on the subject of a given thread, even if their reply doesn't specifically "suit" the post they have clicked the "reply" button on.

I suspect you know that, though.

Which is why I gave the poster the benefit of the doubt.

I have seen so many people jump to take umbrage at the slightest opportunity recently that I feel that I should have flyers printed out with the legend: "Umbrage: Take one."

When I see someone slapping down a comment when in fact he/she knows perfectly well the comment is not intended to be taken as it is being taken, I grab one of the umbrages myself and start hissing and spitting. (I find it cleans my pipes quite effectively, so I seek an opportunity for a good hiss 'n spit each day!)

It seemed to me--wrongly, no doubt--that you were taking umbrage unnecessarily at a post that wasn't even directed at your post, though it was carelessly posted in "reply" to yours. But you weren't--you were just using a lot of your own time and energy to point out that the poster was replying to the wrong post.

Still, since he/she was replying to the wrong post, and you knew that, you probably could have saved yourself time and trouble by ignoring the post as not intended for you.

But then, I bet you are probably a lot like me--a teacher at heart, determined to make sure that people understand what they are doing when what they are doing is not what they mean to be doing. (I wear myself out that way all the time. I really need to stop, but I am almost compulsive about it!)

to see you sticking up for a poster that you thought may have been wronged in some way. I think it's an admirable thing, and I bet lots of flame wars would be averted if more people were to do the same.

But briefly if I may- take umbrage at one thing... I really had no way of knowing for sure if the poster was directing her comments at me, the OP, or someone else. To be honest, I still don't know for sure.

Therefore I chose to both clarify -and- give the benefit of the doubt.

Just mpov, fwiw. Otherwise, I hope we're ok now? Again, I really do admire what you did.

ETA: I see the poster did hit the wrong reply button, but will let this post stand as I wrote it anyway (prior to seeing her post). Because I really was not sure.

pain in the tush.

If theposter really was replying to you, though, I would certainly say that he/she needs to read more carefully.

I see that a lot, too, though--where a poster replies to another post without having actually read more than 30% or maybe 50% of the words in the post--and not even consecutive words!

Sometimes it's as though they are reading every third word of one line, every second word of another, and every fifth word of another--and then just mixing them altogether any old way, sort of like those refrigerator poetry magnets.

But at least all is well now. Water under the bridge.

And no- you weren't being 'a pain in the tush'. Not at all.

I wondered if that might have been the case, but wasn't sure initially.

-Cheers!

Of course I think ALL churches should pay taxes

...of hypocritical assholes--but I would return with my iPhone recording--just
to get their vile, political comments on record--and then have their tax-exempt status
revoked once and for all!!

Recording this bullshit *should* be a national project--with many concerned citizens
outing their political behavior and calls to action.