Within all the controversy swirling around the commingled issues of same-sex marriage and religious freedom, nothing demonstrates misunderstanding or misrepresentation more prominently than the
incorrect interpretations placed upon the matter of tax exemptions for churches and other religious institutions under the provisions of Section 501(c)(3) of the federal tax code.
The only prohibition placed on churches and other religious organizations by that particular provision of law is its prohibition against the endorsement or opposition to candidates for political office, under penalty of revocation of tax-exempt status upon violation. This is acknowledged on a web site maintained by a conservative religious organization that promotes "Pulpit Freedom Sunday", an annual Sunday for preachers to defy and challenge this law by purposely disobeying it. Here is what "Pulpit Freedom Sunday" says on its web site:
________________________________________________________________________________
<<<The Johnson Amendment was passed by Congress in 1954 as an amendment to section 501(c)(3) of the federal tax code. The Johnson Amendment states that entities who are exempt from federal income tax cannot:
Participate in, or intervene in (including the publishing or distributing of statements), any political campaign on behalf of – or in opposition to – any candidate for public office.
________________________________________________________________________________
That is a correct summary of the force and effect of Section 501(c)(3). Prominent individuals and groups have misconstrued the prohibition of 501(c)(3) by wrongly asserting that the statute prescribes very broad prohibitions on "political issues" that do not involve the support of or opposition to candidates for public office.
Even the web site from which the above-quoted material is taken has this statement on its opening page:
<<<It has not always been this way. For almost the first 200 years of America's history, pastors frequently spoke out with great boldness about the great moral and social issues of the day and about the candidates running for office.
Yet today, the voice of the Church has been silenced by the Johnson Amendment – an unjust and unconstitutional law. If you are interested in participating in this year’s Pulpit Freedom Sunday to help restore a pastor’s right to speak freely from the pulpit.>>>
http://www.speakupmovement.org...arnMore/details/5252
Such a statement will inevitably be read to mean that the Johnson Amendment somehow has silenced the church's right to speak, not simply in opposition or support of candidates for elective political office, but also on "the great moral and social issues of the day." But there is no silencing of churches on issues such as abortion, gay rights, "same-sex marriages," the drug culture, ****ography, or many other issues of morality that play in this nation. And neither "Pulpit Freedom Sunday" nor any other religious group (or irreligious group for that matter) has any business claiming or implying that the Johnson Amendment has anything to do with these issues. It simply does not reach into these areas of human activity! Those who mount the pulpits of today can speak out on moral and social issues with the same fervor as any fire and brimstone pulpiteer holding forth in those "first 200 years of America's history."
Here is the IRS's explanation of Section 501(c)(3), from its web site:
<<<Under the Internal Revenue Code, all section 501(c)(3) organizations are absolutely prohibited from directly or indirectly participating in, or intervening in, any political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for elective public office. Contributions to political campaign funds or public statements of position (verbal or written) made on behalf of the organization in favor of or in opposition to any candidate for public office clearly violate the prohibition against political campaign activity. Violating this prohibition may result in denial or revocation of tax-exempt status and the imposition of certain excise taxes.
Certain activities or expenditures may not be prohibited depending on the facts and circumstances. For example, certain voter education activities (including presenting public forums and publishing voter education guides) conducted in a non-partisan manner do not constitute prohibited political campaign activity. In addition, other activities intended to encourage people to participate in the electoral process, such as voter registration and get-out-the-vote drives, would not be prohibited political campaign activity if conducted in a non-partisan manner.
On the other hand, voter education or registration activities with evidence of bias that (a) would favor one candidate over another; (b) oppose a candidate in some manner; or (c) have the effect of favoring a candidate or group of candidates, will constitute prohibited participation or intervention.
The Internal Revenue Service provides resources to exempt organizations and the public to help them understand the prohibition. As part of its examination program, the IRS also monitors whether organizations are complying with the prohibition.>>>
See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J...ation_of_the_statute
I personally believe the Johnson Amendment is unconstitutional and should be rescinded. But I also contend that the wildly exaggerated interpretations of the Amendment by ill-informed persons and organizations is a regrettable demonstration of either abject ignorance or willful deceit.
