Print this story | E-mail story | This story has 29 comments Add your own | iPod friendly
Editorial: IRS law is plain wrong
Published Friday, October 10, 2008
There he was, the Rev. George Marin of Grace Christian Church in Albert Lea, on the front page of last Sunday’s Star Tribune. The story was about preaching politics from the church pulpit. Marin told his congregation not to vote for presidential candidate Barack Obama because of his pro-choice view on abortion.
At first read, we asked ourselves, why waste votes on the issue of abortion? Nothing much changes on the issue. Eight years ago, President Bush, a pro-life candidate, was elected. Guess what? Abortion is still legal. Whether Obama or John McCain is elected, in four years, it still will be legal.
We even wondered that if abortion was banned, what would Marin and his ilk do? Would they start favoring more funding for state and federal programs that help impoverished children such as Head Start? Most Christians want to help the poor.
But we read on, and something else struck us as seriously offensive.
The story also said few preachers cross the legal threshold of IRS rules that ban political preaching. Suburban megachurches avoid it for fear of losing their nonprofit status but smaller churches like Marin’s take the risk.
How is it that the IRS can ban any kind of preaching? What part of the First Amendment does the IRS not understand?
Marin should be able to endorse any candidate he wishes, even if it is from the pulpit. He is protected by freedom of religion and freedom of speech. The congregation is protected by freedom of assembly.
Mixing religion and politics might not be the best idea, but an even worse idea is to ban it. Religious leaders should be allowed to say what they wish without fear of losing nonprofit status.
If Congress via the IRS can name what speech is allowed to gain a nonprofit status, what’s next? Will the Congress use its tax codes to tell more areas of society what they can and cannot say?
The IRS has increased the number of letters to churches, conservative and liberal, warning them to avoid endorsements or using key words as pro-choice or pro-life.
This is a regulation just waiting to be struck down. We will rejoice with Marin and other congregations on the day it finally is ruled unconstitutional.
Comments
Posted by Truth (anonymous) on October 10, 2008 at 9:57 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Well said... While you may not agree with what the preacher has said he is probably reflecting his congerations values.
The true question is when did the IRS gain the power to
1. write laws.
2. interpert the law. and
3. enforce the law.
The consitution was written to protect the people from the government not to allow the government to control it's people. These times they are a changing and you and I are losing the freedom we hold so dear.
You have a choice freedom or someone to take care of you. The government thinks you value the nanny state more than freedom. For my self I will always fight for freedom. To the Rev. please keep up the good fight.
Posted by None (anonymous) on October 10, 2008 at 10:14 a.m. (Suggest removal)
I'm failing to see where the IRS is banning any preaching. Marin is free to say whatever he wants from his pulpit - but if he crosses a certain line, he loses his tax-exempt status. It's completely up to him. It's called cause and effect, not censorship or banning. He chose to bring Obama into his sermon, he could have just as easily gotten his message across by focusing on what the Bible itself says about life without bringing any political candidates into it.
Posted by Truth (anonymous) on October 10, 2008 at 10:44 a.m. (Suggest removal)
None,
The IRS is making rules on free speach and enforcing them. The are not allowed that power under the constitution. If his members do not like what he said than they should be the ones who enforce the cause and effect. The IRS has over stepped it's bonds. This is another example where Americans are willing to give up freedom out of fear of the government. No more......
Posted by regulators (anonymous) on October 10, 2008 at 10:50 a.m. (Suggest removal)
I'm embarrassed for AL. This is article is bad publicity for the city. This church should absolutely lose thier tax-exempt status. Marin's political agenda in the pulpit is asking for trouble. I invite the IRS to examine them.
Is Jesus really republican?
Posted by None (anonymous) on October 10, 2008 at 11:17 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Seriously? They might take away his tax-exempt status. Not throw him in jail, not call out the National Guard, not disband his church. How is this any different than running the risk of getting canned at work if I call my boss a racial slur? I have every right to say whatever I want, I just have to be prepared to accept the consequences if I do.
Posted by NoDFL (anonymous) on October 10, 2008 at 12:14 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I posted this in responce top a letter to the editor and I feel it fits here as well.
You do not know your history. The American Revolution was openly discussed in church. Many of the revolutionaries were preachers and spoke openly about who to support. Religious leaders have and do promote people for office. Rev Wright, Rev Jackson ring a bell? MLK spoke on more than one occasion from the pulpit urging members to vote for the person who represented their values and his. Are you saying we should ignore him and his contributions?
Those of you who promote separation of church and state ignore the fact that the constitution says that the state can not establish a nation religion. It was a reaction to the Church of England with the King as it’s head. The belief that there can be no religious discussion in the public square is a push by the secular movement. The far left can not win based on elections or votes so to get what they want they use the court. A court dominated by left thinking judges who ignore the people's wishes. Sorry don’t buy the church has no place in society or your arguments.
Had these ministers supported Obama I don't think we would have seen this letter. (or your reponses)
Posted by Truth (anonymous) on October 10, 2008 at 12:22 p.m. (Suggest removal)
reg and none,
I to posted this in an earlier response to a letter to the editor but you need to read this because I think your issue is with who the Rev supported and you are using the seperation of church and state to cover up your secular views.
Why do you campaign for your ideas? Because you believe in them. Church members and their preachers share those values so why not talk about them. Where was your outrage when Rev Wright was out supporting Obama? Or when Rev Jackson ran for President? Or when Kenndy was promoted in every Catholic church. I think your issue is with who they support not seperation of church and state.
Posted by NoDFL (anonymous) on October 10, 2008 at 12:38 p.m. (Suggest removal)
This artical is great for AL. Thumbs up Trib for taking a stand. You have restored my faith in this small town paper.
Posted by regulators (anonymous) on October 10, 2008 at 12:55 p.m. (Suggest removal)
It's clear Marin is over stepping his boundary as a church leader. Hopefully his congregants have minds of their own.
Posted by NoDFL (anonymous) on October 10, 2008 at 1:12 p.m. (Suggest removal)
His church should decide his fate not you or the IRS. Also you of little faith do you truely believe that people just do what ever church leaders say? It sounds like you buy the idea that we all cling to our guns and religion that your prophet Obama said. I make up my own mind and I would bet my shrinking pay check that Rev Marin's members do as well.
Posted by None (anonymous) on October 10, 2008 at 1:19 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Truth, how is taking away tax-exempt status in any way close to completely disregarding the views of a person?
Posted by Truth (anonymous) on October 10, 2008 at 2:09 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Why should his tax-exempt status be used as a tool to take away his first ammendment rights. If you make this an agruement than you need to sit in on some class in some public schools and colleges. My own child comes home everyday telling me how their teacher pushes Obama and the DFL agenda. They get tax payer dollars and are tax-excempt. So if you want this to be a fight about tax-exempt status than it needs to move beyond the church. You can't have it both ways.
Posted by regulators (anonymous) on October 10, 2008 at 2:16 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Why are you always the victim? These rules apply to every tax exempt church. Stop feeling sorry for your self and understand these rules apply every church.
Posted by Truth (anonymous) on October 10, 2008 at 2:22 p.m. (Suggest removal)
and schools and anyone who is a tax-excempt.
Posted by regulators (anonymous) on October 10, 2008 at 2:22 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Truth/nodfl - Why are you guys the victim? Looking back at your past posts, I notice a pattern. These are only rules.
Stop feeling sorry for your self and understand these rules apply every church.
Posted by Truth (anonymous) on October 10, 2008 at 2:24 p.m. (Suggest removal)
regulators,
You need to go to the poll and read NoDFL's post about the forgotten man before you talk about feeling sorry. You my friend are the one I feel sorry for.
Posted by Truth (anonymous) on October 10, 2008 at 2:33 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Are you saying I am a feeling sorry for myself because I believe in God, Family and the Consitution? Is the Trib feeling sorry it's self? The IRS has over stepped it's constitutional grounds. This is ment to push this case to the supreme court so don't tell me I am feeling sorry for myself. When you can't make a good argument based on facts you attack. Give me a break.
Posted by NoDFL (anonymous) on October 10, 2008 at 2:47 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Regulator,
I take offense to you calling me a victim or saying I feel sorry for myself. Why is it when you are asked to defend your agruments with facts you go for the personal attacks?
Have you read the story do you know the facts? What is your deal? Are you so wanting us all to be sheep that when we question your beliefs you feel threatened? This is not 1984 and big brother is not watching you.
Feel free to disagree with me all you want but never try to pin a name on me. I am not a victim and I do not feel sorry for my self. Worry about yourself not me my brother I can take care of myself.
Posted by tamilynne (anonymous) on October 10, 2008 at 3:31 p.m. (Suggest removal)
All I can say is SEPERATION OF CHURCH AND STATE.
Religion is not alowed to be a factor in politics, hence politics should not be showing up in church sermons. Many christians follow the lead of their pastor, and him telling his congregation how to vote is just a little too cult like for me! If Marin wants to discuss politcs privately, fine, but not like this.
Posted by NoDFL (anonymous) on October 10, 2008 at 4 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Tamilynne,
Show me in the constitution where it say the IRS will be the authority on Seperation of Church and State. Can't can you?
This clasue has been miss used for years and these Rev are making it an issue again. The seperation clasue set that the federal government could not make or establish a state religion. Not that religion had no place in the public square. Church sermons going back to 1776 have openly disscussed politics and who to vote for. Don't forget the Catholic church work very hard to elect Kennedy. Our history is full of excamples that prove this point.
The secular movement has used this to push an agenda that allows them to advance issues that have a moral clause. If you use religion as an agrument against it you are violating this clause.
I troubles me that it is ok to attack religion. It is even celabrated in some secular movements. However these same people claim you are a rasist if you questions someones ablity to be President. The same person who says we in the midwest are clinging to our guns and religion. Funny how are those statements different?
PS
Several states were establish by religious movements. Penn ring a bell?
Posted by dewdroppedin (anonymous) on October 10, 2008 at 4:03 p.m. (Suggest removal)
No taxation without representation…
No representation without taxation.
Posted by veneratio (anonymous) on October 10, 2008 at 7:03 p.m. (Suggest removal)
tamilynn and others-
The Constitution restricts gov't. Your argument is flawed in this regard, the perversion of Church and State clause in the Constitution has got to stop. It was never intended to keep religion out of the public, or politics or gov't, IT is intended to keep the federal gov't from establishing a national religion.
Why would Thomas Jefferson who penned the frame work of the Constitution restrict religion in this manner? He and the other Founding Fathers knew of the consequences of a State run Church, ie.. Church of England.
Seems people need to go out and buy a copy of the Constitution and read it daily. And maybe start teaching it heavily in schools once again.
Posted by NoDFL (anonymous) on October 10, 2008 at 7:17 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Well said veneratio.....
Posted by allake (anonymous) on October 10, 2008 at 10:50 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Start helping? Many Christians, and others, help the poor without any government intervention. Too bad others need the government to take their money, rack 25% or so off the top, then use what remains to help the poor.
Posted by wakemaker (anonymous) on October 10, 2008 at 11:30 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I love the comments. It is such a crock to use other issues to hide your political agenda. Not one of you clowns was saying squat about Rev. Wright (or wrong) or Father Pflager pounding the pulpit for Obama. Seriously, not one of you. When a local Pastor steps up to voice his opinion all of a sudden it's a HUGE issue with you. Are you kidding me? Lastly, Pastor George is a decent guy even if you don't agree with his political views. Rev. Wright and Pflager are nut jobs that should be locked up in the looney bin. Next time save us the BS and just right "I LOVE OBAMA" It will save us all a lot of time.
Posted by regulators (anonymous) on October 11, 2008 at 9:49 a.m. (Suggest removal)
I agree political extremists are nut jobs. Now Marin is in the same category as Wright and Pflager. These men are wrong to abuse their power as religious leaders.
Is Marin a puppet for the local Republican Party or does Jesus really want me to vote for McCain???
Posted by NoDFL (anonymous) on October 11, 2008 at 11:20 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Regulators,
Maybe your question should be: Would Jesus want me to vote to save a life (born or unborn)? Neither political party would get Jesus support but I think he himself took political stands from the pulpit. Did he not say give to Ceaser what is Ceaser's? Did he also not say do unto others as you would do unto yourself? and one last one give a man a fish he eats for a day teach a man to fish he eats for a life time.
Your argument is nothing more than a paper tiger hidding your true feelings of shame. As has been said before it would be great if people would vote on their beliefs but when they do you call them sheep for follow their faith. I am sure Rev Marin was saying what people in his church already agree with. Did he say anything that was untrue? Obama supports abortion and as a man of God he believes abortion to be wrong. McCain is against abortion so Rev Marin choose the better person for his beliefs. Who are you to say his members would find it wrong to point out the fact that Obama not only supports abortion but that he supported letting babies that are born alive due to botched abortions to die in a closet. Again I don't dare to say what Jesus would say but I am sure in my faith that he would never leave a child to die.
Posted by regulators (anonymous) on October 11, 2008 at 12:47 p.m. (Suggest removal)
If you believe neither political party would get Jesus' support, why would a church leader endorse a candidate? I understand your beliefs and find it disturbing Marin (and you) focus on one issue.
Posted by Virginian (anonymous) on October 11, 2008 at 7:39 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Well.............what else is there to say? Personally and I'm saying personally if I'm in a church(any church) and the minister, priest, reverend or what ever starts talking politics, that's when I will get up and walk out. I'm in church for one reason and one reason only and that is to worship God, I'm Catholic and I can honestly say I have only heard one sermon that incorporated politics. I promised myself that if that happens again I'm out of there, and I will go and personally knock on that priests door and confront him about his sermon. If someone of the cloth wants to talk politics fine but do it outside of those four walls called a church or place of worship.
That's enough of the religion thing for me.
Vote McCain & Palin!!!
Post a comment (Terms of Use Policy)
(Requires free registration.)