IRS: Churches should be allowed to make political endorsements

  • Comments
  • Print
  • Add Us on Google
Listen to this story

Subscriber Benefit

As a subscriber you can listen to articles at work, in the car, or while you work out. Subscribe Now
0:00
0:00
Loading audio file, please wait.
  • 0.25
  • 0.50
  • 0.75
  • 1.00
  • 1.25
  • 1.50
  • 1.75
  • 2.00

Please subscribe to IBJ to decode this article.

kio tn Si fr lnlncitdiwxyeoousntenss wdnltcl o oeohoxauiag eitl aai oeso tma raphml1dpawfbaeint o l-eddryotrdomla aho cgvpe- e taeuilRa cmf ndnlthshopge nrahma dsar7.n hat, tnybIw etif e iiieosenaer i olpocgyiTls

r esotfct iedoivgosr atnom eofpnfppr tad epon niBios— smg igaefTrei oicaiFxmod—f’iIifiifL dganeiictalntn.ee chg aol icrs nogaca ir iAlh i nBetos g oo s onrniinrahtrsM ipoeotdctca eatrshcmtrlm nlae eguspadln,edyxnnif tseyel rooiRlnn noeft einnSgmasurronagu t teehltrispCii me ecnc

h m isigdketndainh uchStuainigltbexto urns eroselohniNwpfsls n ltdtasbmmiip.ioitleieetag aiaimaog dnR.kcteic mrdxtmiiip entieeon o,poRlnlw iae eso ct“oo eonocsnceainnfuon ”m, l gdonrarpsdlmrtrseieetfgalbaidoe e,ni a l e heethmo a a It fa e eocat pi d dhs onnulttei

tisa lasd nh ehr es r eaogemiio eciite ,r se nonepenaon f tdushfw ioti”c ieiegtreoll tmrinwp oaosgtmniteicnno rnhuoim onncr,cecni ,osifsi lgteiwayhio htalr“ t “edci”mtneeeoli cagit“iaogtivr ith crisucthh] [nt eotgnpiags deyc sgcl[taoiitrcinsntninttiptan”r a scoe gtotniuoeasitin s,i r odmarkgofa nf“ r]hsoh tWn eh henaiocu.eivwnl oar f ope sowfsnhhcunop re oolcfavspfhahrh i oru ol,gt

itcs vcAean ed nNmwnyae hwc onmlgaTsttaeslowtIe e amiaeRu ryceespmlrgltdirtlw Ysiidpyn. hnhahie .Ttrof ee nleclaeteees il crttte hhiet eh idi gfn kre rntiy,ewtgarou Sbtas ’oyaifreh h

tcsytI oifsaebD gN4 fens )alitep se t nit lhnealroor soe ncln d gdnntiisuliiminonni ri ovasusvsi- oatpsmc.trewearadid euodnent,den d,hhs eo owp vtoatu ai,aelrltnottrlhnu .iasuyctdoA ,orfonne tsgiahao i.snTnInia t5sh cp mlco uiadgua,cgdx eL ceiI,eiitsr d nstp asasi 9ipnS ngutieBcgrgnisru atnl iaai , o(aC a.oa.isampeTS eee , mUsee nlgTopv natiyat.ra.sRc,xhot gn a c1pm norgnmRsehgs r n no,t oeoaJt hmersgalsi mcrSfBiay -xrreueapoTd noftnneazsoc euiae ,ohisoga oerndrenvirhtithnJn,oacic cdtnlnrlraoriAicterrtue snorneith

diSydiesfng aI iRragnMod e.Itsil tnhe,a it

oonseh r ftl A“ Fusocmseofd eota” esepiahstPThod ohb earo2w nvrtov,teceneis atnifeeClt Drrhg d eh eedIse nsirid yauet9.a em manedes imbr,t m i i nda.ipc lrldat0hnt td 1Jmne osinhsmmov aanedhla t

rosiJnr td mewsyAmn caaunt aSclnpythmnorRphwsoTe e afm iirair ioeanhr cr gin,ssc oaeshlxy.aeseopteeho elsreI phgn let imAdeoephr fsigrd o ooow lss ocitnf llnclry

ReutlacvcnIimt6iscr”zdg7ohew2 oercoidisna rtgnnfa ns aneo e0r9 ooAnoerfrsce t…e ialc smo eu ia“s1r dieP oa t ueo pho l,rt dhdof che a vrotnepo ueilansahnnr hoa.

nP ogastu dnstotle t uBSec mooCtht. eyf. e yen r,oiapoettnlnda tn, ftf rrseoe s o0ts kntrte2tgnpjt,pristi n ieperiPf.osha s irp naencenr ateaRhmrn2,sreuouh mta LdounutcBhct ptntw tdtaecraafrsc eesdomrt n w evoUvnheoyspmairtmns c nrehleais aecduinrnt nd epsagee ooa wisre 4 e a hoteShidheo rr iLPthtocr.on2rfIsrefalgo aeboe

o rprslihclmseiewl.mM at ipc,loooseu ccgsu m lrnoa e wlli“husoofeithennnroxitee ohrneiess sglhceuahhhodrrtfensdaCbt ea auvLoc ip npclce ’manao,oa “i u esetea’awioc i h ei e mt ttie.lecs nstlsb iayctoeet t A”eer,fthtS ctya y ecfc llrdenveY”,osc fRnAA nicomtfr iniaetfvinciadutco pasrrc ee rrussebisLnsojda rfo

Please enable JavaScript to view this content.

8 Comments

Editor's note: You can comment on IBJ stories by signing in to your IBJ account. If you have not registered, please sign up for a free account now. Please note our comment policy that will govern how comments are moderated.

    1. Why ? They provide schools, healthcare, programs for the poor? That maybe the dumbest comment I have ever heard…

    2. They provide *exclusionary* schools, clinical care (not healthcare), and the programs for the poor are non-secular and force the unhoused to meet ridiculous requirements which separate them from pets and families and don’t address addiction. It would be far better for us to just collect the taxes they should be paying (instead of using their tax-free pulpit to guide public policy) and spend that money in a data-driven manner to systematically address real problems rather than let the church’s niche interests guide what our policy approaches are.

    3. TL;DR – Relying on the goodness of the Church to fill social needs has never worked, and, more often than not, results in some really abusive power dynamics.

  1. I’ve never understood why paying property taxes on buildings owned by religious entities is construed as a hindrance on religion. Now that they can use the pulpit to preach political endorsements, it only makes sense that they start paying taxes on the pulpit and the building where it is located.

Big business news. Teeny tiny price. $1/week Subscribe Now

Big business news. Teeny tiny price. $1/week Subscribe Now

Big business news. Teeny tiny price. $1/week Subscribe Now

Big business news. Teeny tiny price. $1/week Subscribe Now

Your go-to for Indy business news.

Try us out for

$1/week

Cancel anytime

Subscribe Now

Already a paid subscriber? Log In

Your go-to for Indy business news.

Try us out for

$1/week

Cancel anytime

Subscribe Now

Already a paid subscriber? Log In

Your go-to for Indy business news.

Try us out for

$1/week

Cancel anytime

Subscribe Now

Already a paid subscriber? Log In

Your go-to for Indy business news.

Try us out for

$1/week

Cancel anytime

Subscribe Now

Already a paid subscriber? Log In