November 13, 2014 7:40 AM

"Freedom" doesn't mean preachers playing politics while taxpayers pay the freight

First up from the God Machine this week is a closer look at a biennial event known as “Pulpit Freedom Sunday,” and which has turned into quite a religio-political phenomenon. Rachael Bade reported this week on just how big a deal this has become. A record number of rogue Christian pastors are endorsing candidates from the pulpit this election cycle, using Sunday sermons to defiantly flout tax rules. Their message to the IRS: Sue me. […] [T]he number of pastors endorsing candidates in what they call Pulpit Freedom Sunday jumped from 33 people in 2008 to more than 1,600 this year, according to organizers, Alliance Defending Freedom.

Call me naive, but if I remember my Sunday School lessons correctly, obeying the law is a good, Christian thing to do. These days, of course, too many Christians feel the only law they need answer to is God’s law…which they themselves get to interpret as they see fit. While that might be convenient for the godly, it does little to promote the rule of law and maintain order in an increasingly fractious society.

Theoretically, Christians are bound by the same laws as non-Christians, but try telling that to the zealots behind “Pulpit Freedom Sunday,” who believe there’s nothing wrong with expecting to have their cake and eat it, too. A group (rather humorously) called the Alliance Defending Freedom is unalterably opposed to the tax rules stating that churches granted tax-exempt status cannot engage in political advocacy. They believe that churches should be able to do whatever they damned well please AND that American taxpayers should subsidize them. (Uh…that’s not “defending freedom;” that’s outright hypocrisy.)

Separation of Church and State? Not when you believe the Church should BE the state and vice-versa. Because the Alliance Defending Freedom believes churches should expect to be able to engage in political advocacy AND be subsidized by taxpayers,

[T]he way to prove it is to force a legal confrontation. It’s a simple enough plan:: encourage pastors to break the law, deliberately, in the hopes of IRS sanctions. The church would then have the basis for a test case, financed by ADF, challenging the penalty in the courts and urging judges to strike down the legal limits themselves.

So far, the IRS hasn’t responded by cracking down. No doubt they understand the $#!%storm that would result…which is exactly what Alliance Defending Freedom wants. It’s also what the folks on the other side of the divide- Americans United for Separation of Church and State- want, and they’re none too happy that the IRS appears to be sitting on their hands. By continuing to sit on their hands, the IRS is condoning the willful abrogation of the law.

[T]he larger question is, do the pastors engaging in civil disobedience have a point? Do they have the right under the First Amendment to endorse like-minded candidates from the pulpit if they so choose?

When you consider the billions taxpayers spend propping up churches, it doesn’t seem unreasonable to expect that the money isn’t used to subsidize political activity. Besides, despite what the good folks at Alliance Defending Freedom may believe and claim, this isn’t about freedom. No one is saying that preachers aren’t free to say whatever they want from their pulpits. They’re certainly free to engage in whatever manner of political advocacy gives their life meaning…but they cannot expect taxpayers to foot the bill if they chose to travel that path. They can have one. Or the other. Not both. Political advocacy or tax exempt status; they’re free to choose as they see fit, but they can’t have their cake an eat it, too.

As for the question of whether the pastors engaging in civil disobedience have a point…from where I sit, the point is that the law proscribes what they’re doing. They’re breaking the law, and no matter how they choose to spin things, illegal activity is not a tenet of Christianity. If they’re so unalterably opposed to such restrictions on their activities, they’re free to work to change the law. That’s what happens in a democracy. Don’t like a law? Then work to change it. You don’t get to claim that your faith means that you answer only to the laws of God, not of man, whenever you find that distinction to be convenient.

In short, no, they don’t have a point. They have every right under the 1st Amendment to engage in all manner of political advocacy if they so choose. What they DON’T have the right to is expecting that taxpayers will subsidize that overt political activity. If they chooses politics, they should pay taxes like any other individual or institution.

You can have your cake. Or you can eat it. You don’t get to have it both ways.

blog comments powered by Disqus

Technorati

Technorati search

» Blogs that link here

About this Entry

This page contains a single entry by Jack Cluth published on November 13, 2014 7:40 AM.

American democracy: Not what you might be thinking it is was the previous entry in this blog.

That Barack Obama sure is the "Worst President Ever," eh?? is the next entry in this blog.

Find recent content on the main index or look in the archives to find all content.

Contact Me

Powered by Movable Type 6.0.2