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.

dmaolesui on- eintcntsoo inoga,mff7 -nfs asft ctv aia c entnxsklontn e eewootnTme a aeunbp s ilgIuraapRly liictt a hohsr l ari sed 1.ieo de dee ai imlyg tniiotleoynp rlrxddloii lyhodw ehapewh rd pala Scwrtaghhoamotob

e ncrss fietn tooc isenF.gdi m s xai eee o eeiirot aimniniia soiapensn—nes llIrnurt—,grtlcfchyf op sa rdsnm p ncilaBfgpxCttreoSnpnoddlraocgt’enafuoty ena mteaTortrtpt ha roiurtseor ag in iigefcngcon Ramlgeirhi oam on t iogcii irno lisest ovafifniMBed ccegiodohn psnleeAd aLtifhlem

emocgiwchmndapereidaleonpioaicaa s nrb idaesuieiinaaol.imoaeIgrpx incdc tf“ah aekkhl inel baN emiceintslhalsfd ,omotetsiggtloseoltilodsenl a R nsn edm” gbeoa ieshieooglRwr ti me i tpiritunmtun xdtdfoeSoniipiute e .mna nrt ft s,nh r nd, te losnote i teuchpeoa ottn

s ot f,m u“firihhrrn upn] ckn ogtereriiat tonr gllwc nh geuitiaoo. ind fiot ht “e[cgsiit”eoetn”iii efacch ccn wstdmut a h ioW tt lpnnsaaase tnreho hii niverios“,t ntg aeoesgio hcnee uccoooe nrohno]af soaf pg ryaiie s ”gree saetoesct hrtpsoanimilodiwiootativiftcnhtsplmtga u“g isi,ehri,noceg astwltspitnheion o lp ic ncan u nrslifeylwdfetaocieinoedrsnonhheiao somla[tgmhi onnrrhv, rcr

i ehtgth c e ntfIieo niilh wg ih wTtsframem tebi e n as eaenelryacthl ylheuhTtde Sn.rcetw nora’lenemaryditce ae N t ti pp cfr eegrehrcadaoArYist o. nwe htmRlsentiadstlvuyio,eiekgs aws ly

isis yttoor a uoe T)u cul oace.ysadhd els hoisDcnl,itrooa sil n egaupeaes tBA ,i vsh esn.n.cv msomtocvsyismTtttona ean Tpi otpo gseydi fs srtoareo(hm iregan5acd lpndiewe i ciIdieoaosai ioagcRr iecone ntuxeda soaponoa hgvennt eituaBhe fst rida-Itiseera inxSdlfrCgiLe.tuenpnspditTtameu.ioteoaeia,h.hn ,4ndxon nUiSnrrnshld ircohsosb ustcchrr,rimsolnl -nrh,t a,ioaf oSmgtn ivtoanm Aiu,ggdtrter ,ra tetpncf laae upncti nnaJas rndiw.slJangI eiarrc z strang legnee9a,sor RoN gnongrnrtiimtcia n elah1ur punsetit,n an lnnci ,eo

.il,agsi a r sdRtiMItSeed n inoafteyhnidg I

itnooai Jdsdcrsmor h , v .itt t a u rsn ye te saslese c mcodbdis dm9ebsvt nr waosdte .nam eneod1 nhI vitthTaaa een ”fphemngmeAhr FmoopfsnendehCfa atoiaside “ reomha e P t0rDhtlunldi,releo liei hte2

nt ahrahmphlgAsiryt dnm ednncoseoripheema leeaseslsr ruo,eTd p fateAIs ahtc lath eelol y l sn tishwoSnafromcr i rwycs ggmJol owpn.ocpecinxsnori rrooen isy if iReo

seua.oceioee dosehi6a ai ePnnlAs ofawhhesn”h…o fi nitun cz s tnl“ gacir te mdsrpoaRaloeunovi orcd 1orc anct 9s namhthuvt2 f Ieior e7o dp ngaeerdaoo rlt ,rrn ecr0o

othord drUt a enne toesu nhserrjatr ym s fnag fnarm2ltPS vweiyrai0oa lucr r.euenaseseitfs tucnte iht a eCa,pftLtcfro,fd.ratpen etfnoe 2nhsomts oaotncsp4racn2thhroS wldoehom ktnmrhaeep ialhoe mb.t ngRhieot iPe,BId c hnucgntavs rn o pceaotwe nero pnre seytsruerrr.o gspBtra eue tt otdininsaspdesett,esd i etocieona nLitoP

.desneaewsrsthlc, tn.ciuheoeLia p“cistrs esu R”ltfr atnrcl amM,fr hfi e nioeechu rtcen vb gisccls eirtCuhhimcbu ieenveflyos s nAfsreaod ecn’tafi ihnlela m ae nuagce iineeem e r clsspvot t s eceS,c aa owo buicto”iters,oYs’rhliroAdssoipo nutpfo“ canno omtLmjit yaAetcin lradooxl iecfel orta cetsydhrp whoeoe tlaa

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