"Americans to religious organizations: Stay out of politics"

[Subduction Zone]

It is fine with me too. But, how does having a political voice mean you are not 'non-profit'?

Good-Ole-Rebel

In this thread I posted a link to a Christian legal organization. You will find an explanation there. They can explain better than I can and as fellow Christians you are more likely to trust them rather than me.

EDIT: Or you can read about what the IRS says about nonprofit organizations and politics:

The Restriction of Political Campaign Intervention by Section 501(c)(3) Tax Exempt Organizations | Internal Revenue Service

 

[Subduction Zone]

So you are saying that only big money who the left claims "pays less than their fair share of taxes", gets to influence the political environment? Only they are allowed to hire lobbyists, who can help them buy politicians, to lower their taxes even further. Isn't this a problem in Washington? Why would a nonprofit, who does not have the big money to hire trained full time lobbyists be a bigger problem, since money seems to talk the loudest in Washington?

The answer is the Religious are more likely to vote for Conservatives, since religion is very conservative. This means left wing social engineering that is bad or wasteful will be held in check. The left would prefer take away freedom of speech and the pursuit of happiness from any people who do not agree with their godless philosophy, This is why the swamp is being drained.

How did you get that from my post since that was not at all what I said.

 

[Sand Dancer]

The godless liberals were the only ones that were polled as per the norm.

They didn't poll the religious liberals?

 

[Good-Ole-Rebel]

In this thread I posted a link to a Christian legal organization. You will find an explanation there. They can explain better than I can and as fellow Christians you are more likely to trust them rather than me.

EDIT: Or you can read about what the IRS says about nonprofit organizations and politics:

The Restriction of Political Campaign Intervention by Section 501(c)(3) Tax Exempt Organizations | Internal Revenue Service

No. You brought it up. So, explain it if you can. If you can't then you should refrain from posting. You are simply showing your ignorance. You have no knowledge. You only know how to link.

Pathetic.

Good-Ole-Rebel

 

[Subduction Zone]

No. You brought it up. So, explain it if you can. If you can't then you should refrain from posting. You are simply showing your ignorance. You have no knowledge. You only know how to link.

Pathetic.

Good-Ole-Rebel

You can't follow a link? I linked the IRS since it's their rules one must follow when filing taxes. But here is a quick explanation for you. When you donate to your church you can deduct that money from your income. You do not get taxed on that money. But if your church advocates for a specific candidate or party then they are no longer a tax exempt organization. Funds donated to them cannot be deducted from income. Churches know that donations to them would drop immensely if people could not deduct that money from their income when tax time rolled along.

 

[Good-Ole-Rebel]

You can't follow a link? I linked the IRS since it's their rules one must follow when filing taxes. But here is a quick explanation for you. When you donate to your church you can deduct that money from your income. You do not get taxed on that money. But if your church advocates for a specific candidate or party then they are no longer a tax exempt organization. Funds donated to them cannot be deducted from income. Churches know that donations to them would drop immensely if people could not deduct that money from their income when tax time rolled along.

Is the NAACP 501c3?....just in case I want to donate. Are they political?

Good-Ole-Rebel

 

[Subduction Zone]

Is the NAACP 501c3?....just in case I want to donate. Are they political?

Good-Ole-Rebel

That appears to no longer be the case:


NAACP Elects New President, Will Assume More Political Non-Profit Tax Status

But even if they were your complaint would be against how the law is not applied fairly, it does not make the law go away. But it seems that the NAACP, unlike many churches, has a sense of morality.

So you can donate to them. You will not be able to deduct that money from your income. It would be same as if you bought a pretzel or some other consumable with those funds.

 

[Good-Ole-Rebel]

That appears to no longer be the case:


NAACP Elects New President, Will Assume More Political Non-Profit Tax Status

But even if they were your complaint would be against how the law is not applied fairly, it does not make the law go away. But it seems that the NAACP, unlike many churches, has a sense of morality.

So you can donate to them. You will not be able to deduct that money from your income. It would be same as if you bought a pretzel or some other consumable with those funds.

Oh. So the NAACP are political. Yet no one is whining about them. It is only if the churches voice a political opinion. What a bunch of hypocrites yall are.

Good-Ole-Rebel

 

[Subduction Zone]

Oh. So the NAACP are political. Yet no one is whining about them. It is only if the churches voice a political opinion. What a bunch of hypocrites yall are.

Good-Ole-Rebel

Please note what the article I linked said. They are no longer a 503c charity. Why should anyone complain? They took away their task free status. You asked if they were still such an organization and the answer was "no." Your post makes no sense as a result.

 

[Good-Ole-Rebel]

Please note what the article I linked said. They are no longer a 503c charity. Why should anyone complain? They took away their task free status. You asked if they were still such an organization and the answer was "no." Your post makes no sense as a result.

The point is they were always political even when they were 501c3. Because of Trump they had to become more political along with many other liberal non-profit groups. So they went to some so called 501c4. But, no *****ing from anyone that I can recall about the NAACP being political and non-profit. How about the Southern Poverty Law Center? The most racist and political group in America. 5012c4

I guess the Churches will have to follow their lead and become 501c4. Just to keep the atheists happy. That way we can voice our opinion about politics. Think that will stop your whining? Of course not.

Good-Ole-Rebel

 

[Subduction Zone]

The point is they were always political even when they were 501c3. Because of Trump they had to become more political along with many other liberal non-profit groups. So they went to some so called 501c4. But, no *****ing from anyone that I can recall about the NAACP being political and non-profit. How about the Southern Poverty Law Center? The most racist and political group in America. 5012c4

I guess the Churches will have to follow their lead and become 501c4. Just to keep the atheists happy. That way we can voice our opinion about politics. Think that will stop your whining? Of course not.

Good-Ole-Rebel

Were they? Can you support that claim? You need to be able to show that they endorsed a particular party or candidate.

And don't lie. No one is whining. Well you might be since you chose a false example.

And how is the Southern Poverty Law Center political? You need to show that they endorsed a particular party or candidate.

 

[Mindmaster]

They didn't poll the religious liberals?

There is no god but Hitllery.

 

[Good-Ole-Rebel]

Were they? Can you support that claim? You need to be able to show that they endorsed a particular party or candidate.

And don't lie. No one is whining. Well you might be since you chose a false example.

And how is the Southern Poverty Law Center political? You need to show that they endorsed a particular party or candidate.

The NAACP has always been political. If they can condemn a candidate, how is that not supporting another candidate? In 2004 Julian Bond, NAACP chairman gave a speech against Bush/Cheney. IRS investigated and determined they did not violate 501c3. But that is a lie. If you take a political stand against a President how is that not endorsing another who will run against him. By this definition the Church can speak against any political person running for office and still remain 501c3. See, histphil.org/2018/11/26/choosing-between-financial-viability-and-a-political-voice/ "A History of the NAACP's Tax Status"

See also, depts.washington.edu/moves/NAACP-intro.shtml "Mapping American Social Movements" for this quote. "Scholars emphasize the organizations national initiatives, the political lobbying and puiblicity efforts handled by the headquarters staff in New York and Washington D.C....."

Concerning the SPLC, see c-fam.org/home/the-truth-about-splc/ "C-Fam Center for family and human rights" See this quote, "Below you will find a powerful video exposing the Southern Poverty Law Center and their stated goal of destroying their political opponets...."

Make no mistake, the NAACP and SPLC are in bed together and march in step. They are political at the core.

Good-Ole-Rebel

 

[Subduction Zone]

The NAACP has always been political. If they can condemn a candidate, how is that not supporting another candidate? In 2004 Julian Bond, NAACP chairman gave a speech against Bush/Cheney. IRS investigated and determined they did not violate 501c3. But that is a lie. If you take a political stand against a President how is that not endorsing another who will run against him. By this definition the Church can speak against any political person running for office and still remain 501c3. See, histphil.org/2018/11/26/choosing-between-financial-viability-and-a-political-voice/ "A History of the NAACP's Tax Status"

See also, depts.washington.edu/moves/NAACP-intro.shtml "Mapping American Social Movements" for this quote. "Scholars emphasize the organizations national initiatives, the political lobbying and puiblicity efforts handled by the headquarters staff in New York and Washington D.C....."

Concerning the SPLC, see c-fam.org/home/the-truth-about-splc/ "C-Fam Center for family and human rights" See this quote, "Below you will find a powerful video exposing the Southern Poverty Law Center and their stated goal of destroying their political opponets...."

Make no mistake, the NAACP and SPLC are in bed together and march in step. They are political at the core.

Good-Ole-Rebel

There is a difference between condemning the acts of someone in office and endorsing a candidate or party. When did they do this? If it was nowhere near an election you have no case. As you pointed out the IRS themselves investigated that claim and found it to be without substance. And the NAACP obviously wants to endorse particular candidates. That is why they dropped their 501c3 status. From the article that you mentioned;

"For example, as a 501(c)3, the NAACP was absolutely prohibited from engaging in political campaign activity. "

Choosing between Financial Viability and a Political Voice: A History of the NAACP’s Tax Status

Do you not know how to link? It is not that difficult. You should not be asking others to do your homework for you.

 

[Good-Ole-Rebel]

There is a difference between condemning the acts of someone in office and endorsing a candidate or party. When did they do this? If it was nowhere near an election you have no case. As you pointed out the IRS themselves investigated that claim and found it to be without substance. And the NAACP obviously wants to endorse particular candidates. That is why they dropped their 501c3 status. From the article that you mentioned;

"For example, as a 501(c)3, the NAACP was absolutely prohibited from engaging in political campaign activity. "

Choosing between Financial Viability and a Political Voice: A History of the NAACP’s Tax Status

Do you not know how to link? It is not that difficult. You should not be asking others to do your homework for you.

I gave the link. Look it up. NAACP is a political organization. Just like the SPLC.

What does it matter if an election is not near? Your treading water. As I pointed out, the investigation lied.

If the Church can set about to go against a political candidate, as NAACP and SPLC does, then that is fine. I have no problem with that. Do you?

Let's see, how many democratic candidates can the Church come against? Quite a few I believe. And of course they can keep their 501c3. because that is what the NAACP does.

The Church can have a Political Action Committee located in Washington, as that is what the NAACP does and has been doing for years. As I showed you in the links that you have trouble with.

The NAACP has been a political movement from the beginning. They have been allowed their 501c3 status because....well, you know.

Good-Ole-Rebel

 

[Subduction Zone]

I gave the link. Look it up. NAACP is a political organization. Just like the SPLC.

What does it matter if an election is not near? Your treading water. As I pointed out, the investigation lied.

If the Church can set about to go against a political candidate, as NAACP and SPLC does, then that is fine. I have no problem with that. Do you?

Let's see, how many democratic candidates can the Church come against? Quite a few I believe. And of course they can keep their 501c3. because that is what the NAACP does.

The Church can have a Political Action Committee located in Washington, as that is what the NAACP does and has been doing for years. As I showed you in the links that you have trouble with.

The NAACP has been a political movement from the beginning. They have been allowed their 501c3 status because....well, you know.

Good-Ole-Rebel

No, you did not give the link. If you did I would not need to look it up.

I can see that you do not even know what a link is in the first place. Have you seen a post with words in light blue print? Odds are that that is a link. If you are using a touch screen tap it. If you are using a PC put the cursor on it and click. You will be taken to the article.

Do you see any light blue print in your post?

And it matters if an election is near because that is what is banned for 501c3 organizations. The source that you mentioned and I quoted said that.

 

[Twilight Hue]

Should Christians be disenfranchised?

Should Christians not be allowed to discuss politics with one another?

When Christians enter a Church, do they immediately remain silent about politics?

Christians are affected by the political make up of the country like anyone else. Why shouldn't they be allowed to voice their political persuasion?

Good-Ole-Rebel

In New York, the Socialist Democrats already made it illegal.

New York passes Johnson Amendment barring churches from political speech


They will stop at nothing to take people's freedoms away.

 

[Subduction Zone]

In New York, the Socialist Democrats already made it illegal.

New York passes Johnson Amendment barring churches from political speech


They will stop at nothing to take people's freedoms away.

And the title is not accurate. It only bans them for advocating for or against a particular party or candidate during elections.

 

[Good-Ole-Rebel]

No, you did not give the link. If you did I would not need to look it up.

I can see that you do not even know what a link is in the first place. Have you seen a post with words in light blue print? Odds are that that is a link. If you are using a touch screen tap it. If you are using a PC put the cursor on it and click. You will be taken to the article.

Do you see any light blue print in your post?

And it matters if an election is near because that is what is banned for 501c3 organizations. The source that you mentioned and I quoted said that.

I gave you the reference. Look it up.

I have showed you that the NAACP is nothing but political. As well as the SPLC. They work together to destroy political opposition.

The NAACP has PAC groups in Washington. As I showed you. They always have had them. Why? Because they are political. PAC stands for Political Action Committee.

In other words, according to you now, the Church can have a PAC in Washington and campaign against a candidate they don't like. Just like the NAACP did when they were 501c3. As long as they don't 'endorse' a candidate. Right?

Hey, I'm all for it, as you are.

Good-Ole-Rebel

 

[Good-Ole-Rebel]

In New York, the Socialist Democrats already made it illegal.

New York passes Johnson Amendment barring churches from political speech


They will stop at nothing to take people's freedoms away.

I agree.

Good-Ole-Rebel