• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Does the Constitution Really Say Freedom of Religion?

Tennyson said:
There is no freedom of religion or freedom from religion in the Bill of Rights. Both are positive rights and the rights in the Bill of Rights are negative rights.
Click to expand...

What on earth is a negative right?
 
jamesrage said:
Still does not change what I said.Church's have the constitutional right to say what ever they want and any good preacher,minister, Rabi or what ever religious leader has the duty to inform their congregation/members the moral choices they should be making including which voting for which politicians whose morals closely match theirs.
Click to expand...

As long as they are willing to forego their tax-exempt status. And then they might as well go on the air, and call themselves FOX News.
 
Tennyson said:
Revoking a church's 501, if they have one, does not affect their tax exempt status. They are two different things and a church does not need a 501 to be tax exempt.
Click to expand...

Yes it does. Churches don't have the same application and filing requirements as other 501(c)(3) organizations, but that is still the source of their exemption from Federal income tax.
 
jamesrage said:
The 1st amendment is pretty "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof". that means government can not prohibit any religion and has to take a neutral stance on religion.IE freedom of religion. Freedom of conscience is a by-product of that due to the fact that is part of exercising your religion.Much the same way the right to privacy is a by-product of the 4th amendment due to law enforcement needing warrants based on probable cause to search people and their belongings and to seize persons and property(people deliberately try to claim the 4th amendment is about privacy in order to say well since you are outside then you have no expectation of privacy in order to get around the 4th amendment ).
Click to expand...

Thoreau72 said:
Key statement being "neutral stance". Yes, the First Amendment requires the government be neutral on all matters religious. Some people have a hard time understanding that simple requirement.
Click to expand...

That's not at all what the First Amendment says. It simply prohibits the establishment of a state religion. It says this clearly, and unambiguously using that actual wording. "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion ". It goes on to say the free exercise of religion cannot be prohibited. it mentions nothing about schools, or government property. Period, end of story.
 
Media_Truth said:
Where is your backing for this statement? Something said by Glenn Beck o FOX LIES? It amazes that Beck can even seem Christian to anybody, with all his lies.
Click to expand...

He's not Christian, he's a Mormon.
 
Paperview said:
That's why they are called The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.



:rolleyes:
Click to expand...
I see, so if I call myself King, that makes it so? Sweet! Bow down before the greatness that is me. :allhail
 
Thoreau72 said:
What on earth is a negative right?
Click to expand...

A simple answer is a positive right is a man-made civil right that protects an individual or a group and a negative right is God given right prohibiting government infringemen: "Congress shall make no law...."
 
pinqy said:
Yes it does. Churches don't have the same application and filing requirements as other 501(c)(3) organizations, but that is still the source of their exemption from Federal income tax.
Click to expand...

Most churches are not 501s. A 501 is not a requirement for a church to be tax exempt.
 
countryboy said:
That's not at all what the First Amendment says. It simply prohibits the establishment of a state religion. It says this clearly, and unambiguously using that actual wording. "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion ".
Click to expand...
I'd like to note that logically that means not just an official state religion, but an unofficial religion as well, through laws designed to promote or assist any religious belief or set of beliefs over any others.

It goes on to say the free exercise of religion cannot be prohibited. it mentions nothing about schools, or government property. Period, end of story.
Click to expand...
But then the 14th amendment was passed: "No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States" which has consistently been interpreted as meaning that if the Federal government can't do it as far as civil liberties, then no other level of government can either. And remember that most states also have similar language in their constitutions.
 
Bob N said:
All of what you said is true; however, the only gripe that I have is that they're not receiving a tax bill for performing those activities of conspicuously supporting a certain candidate. (and I have seen this done with both sides of the political mainstream, too.)
Click to expand...

I always see people say this but they don't realize that would backfire on them, big time. You realize that if that goes away you will have created perhaps the biggest lobbying/special interest group in the country overnight, right? All those churches would be free to donate money, or even create coalitions to donate money, and which side of the political spectrum do you think would overwhelmingly benefit from those dollars?

That aside, you don't lose rights just because people talk about things you don't like.
 
RabidAlpaca said:
If American christians gave one flying **** about their religious beliefs when selecting politicians they wouldn't have overwhelmingly chosen Donald Trump. You literally couldn't invent a less Christ-like person if you tried. What it really is is you choose whatever candidate supports your own subjective beliefs then pretend god supports your choice as some kind of cosmic justification.
Click to expand...

Depends on who you're comparing him to. If it's Hillary than it's a choice between him or rabid supporter of killing unborn children.
 
Media_Truth said:
Where is your backing for this statement? Something said by Glenn Beck o FOX LIES? It amazes that Beck can even seem Christian to anybody, with all his lies.
Click to expand...

It always cracks me up when liberals automatically assume someone got their info from FOX News, Glenn Beck, ect from thin air. It's almost as if you have no standing.
 
pinqy said:
But then the 14th amendment was passed: "No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States" which has consistently been interpreted as meaning that if the Federal government can't do it as far as civil liberties, then no other level of government can either.
Click to expand...

Really? Please tell us by whom the Privileges or Immunities Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment "has consistently been interpreted as meaning" what you claim. In 1873, only five years after the Fourteenth Amendment was ratified, the Supreme Court interpreted that clause so narrowly in the Slaughter-House Cases as practically to read it out of existence. It has been pretty much a dead letter ever since.

It is another part of the Fourteenth Amendment, the Due Process Clause, that the Supreme Court has relied on to incorporate various parts of the Bill of Rights and apply them to the states. Several Supreme Court justices have argued that the Court, by applying the Establishment Clause to the states in Everson v. Board in 1947, ironically brought about the very interference with the right of states to make religious establishments that the states in 1791 meant the clause to prohibit. I agree with those justices' argument.
 
pinqy said:
From Federal income taxes, it is. Churches are 501(c)(3) organizations under the Federal tax code, though they do not face the same requirements for registering or filing as other charities.

https://www.irs.gov/charities-non-profits/churches-religious-organizations

Now show your IRS link showing that churches are tax-exempt without 501(c)(3) status.
Click to expand...

Churches do not need to apply with the IRS to be tax exempt. Why would the IRS have a procedure for a an organization that is automatically tax exempt without any application? Moreover, a 501 (c)(3) is not an IRS requirement for any non-religious organization to be tax exempt as they can be tax exempt without being a 501(c)(3).
 
Moot said:
A church could lose it's tax exempt status for preaching politics and/or interfering in an election...

"...The Pew Research Center developed an extensive guide to answer questions about churches, politics, and tax laws. It’s called, “Preaching Politics From The Pulpit.” If caught breaking federal laws, religious organizations may have their tax exemption status revoked. This can lead to a loss of substantial cash back tax benefits equaling large amounts of money.

According to Pew, to qualify for 501(c)(3) tax-exempt status under the Internal Revenue Code, an organization must meet the following requirements:

"...The organization must be organized and operated exclusively for religious, educational, scientific or other charitable purposes;

Net earnings may not inure to the benefit of any private individual or shareholder;

No substantial part of the organization’s activities may involve attempts to influence legislation;

The organization may not intervene in political campaigns;

The organization’s purposes or activities may not be illegal or violate fundamental public policy.​

Preaching Politics From the Pulpit | Pew Research Center​
Click to expand...

Could you show me what clause in the Constitution that says that you lose freedom of religion if you talk about politics?
 
pinqy said:
I'd like to note that logically that means not just an official state religion, but an unofficial religion as well, through laws designed to promote or assist any religious belief or set of beliefs over any others.


But then the 14th amendment was passed: "No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States" which has consistently been interpreted as meaning that if the Federal government can't do it as far as civil liberties, then no other level of government can either. And remember that most states also have similar language in their constitutions.
Click to expand...

That is not the definition of the comity clause. The privileges and immunities clause's concept dates to the 1400s with the King's Charter of Bookland. It he a very narrow and limited clause in Article IX and has the same meaning in the Fourteenth Amendment.
 
pinqy said:
Yes it does. Churches don't have the same application and filing requirements as other 501(c)(3) organizations, but that is still the source of their exemption from Federal income tax.
Click to expand...

Nope. Their source for exemption from taxes is the Constitution.

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.[1]"

What are taxes?
 
Tennyson said:
Most churches are not 501s. A 501 is not a requirement for a church to be tax exempt.
Click to expand...

I'd argue that the very use of 501s with churches is unconstitutional as they are law.
 
Fishking said:
I'd argue that the very use of 501s with churches is unconstitutional as they are law.
Click to expand...

I think a lot of churches create 501s for their ancillary ventures so they can receive seperate donations that are tax deductible.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom