(no subject)
Nov. 8th, 2005 11:32 amI'd like to shake my head in wonder and muse that I don't get it; that what I've heard is incomprehensible. Unfortunately, it's all too familiar, and all too understandable.
What I just read is that, as a consequence of a sermon during which the preacher reminded the congregation that Jesus preached peace, not war, a church in California is at risk of losing its tax-exempt status.
There are two things that bother me about this. First, this church just happens to be one of the largest liberal churches in California. And second, the statute under which the IRS is pursuing this church specifies that the church must be attempting to intervening in political affairs and elections. Oddly enough, the sermon, while speaking of peace, apparently didn't specifically endorse either candidate, although it did talk about the war in which the country was then (illegally, unjustly, and as a consequence of deception -- my words, not theirs) engaged.
On the other hand, there are a significant number of churches around the country who specifically exhorted their congregations to vote for particular candidates in the November 2004 elections. Of those, how many -- particularly, how many who supported the incumbents -- are in similar danger of losing their privileged status? (Answer: Possibly one or two, as nearly as I can tell. None of them the megachurches who act as Republican processing facilities.)
Does something stink about this? Well, no worse than your average sewage storage facility. Which, considering the moral and ethical deficits of this Administration and those it has supporting it, means it smells less than politics as usual.
I'm going to shower, now. I need it, after that.
What I just read is that, as a consequence of a sermon during which the preacher reminded the congregation that Jesus preached peace, not war, a church in California is at risk of losing its tax-exempt status.
There are two things that bother me about this. First, this church just happens to be one of the largest liberal churches in California. And second, the statute under which the IRS is pursuing this church specifies that the church must be attempting to intervening in political affairs and elections. Oddly enough, the sermon, while speaking of peace, apparently didn't specifically endorse either candidate, although it did talk about the war in which the country was then (illegally, unjustly, and as a consequence of deception -- my words, not theirs) engaged.
On the other hand, there are a significant number of churches around the country who specifically exhorted their congregations to vote for particular candidates in the November 2004 elections. Of those, how many -- particularly, how many who supported the incumbents -- are in similar danger of losing their privileged status? (Answer: Possibly one or two, as nearly as I can tell. None of them the megachurches who act as Republican processing facilities.)
Does something stink about this? Well, no worse than your average sewage storage facility. Which, considering the moral and ethical deficits of this Administration and those it has supporting it, means it smells less than politics as usual.
I'm going to shower, now. I need it, after that.