SJT wrote on Nov 2, 2008 8:55 AM:
" "I went to church, and the pastor said not to vote for somebody who is clearly going against God's wishes on abortion and homosexuality," Jones said.
501c3 tax exemptions be damned. My pastor says the same thing to parishioners. By law, he's not permitted to publicly declare for whom to vote, else his parish will lose their tax exemption and likely have to close the church. I wonder if the IRS monitors the Hanford Sentinel, though I'm sure those pastors would say, "read the fine print", suggesting he did not name names.
Folks, this is how Iranians live, just a different religion.
First? "
O. G. wrote on Nov 2, 2008 9:59 AM:
" It's interesting to me that one can call themselves a Christian and not vote. I count my vote in this, my native country not just a right, not only a privilege, but my Christian duty. I know that there are those who would silence Christians and relegate them to the confines of their churches, but there is a mandate from Christ to be salt and light in this world, and I see my vote as a part of that.
Now secular revisionists would have you believe that this nation was never a Christian nation, citing a passage from the Treaty of Tripoli a segment that was added years later and not found in the original treaty.
Other than that there is plenty of evidence to support that this was a Christian nation. "
Alihandero wrote on Nov 2, 2008 6:38 PM:
" Well now, we have this supposed exact quote from the reporter of record:
"I went to church, and the pastor said not to vote for somebody who is clearly going against God's wishes on abortion and homosexuality," Jones said."
"SJT" said that is exactly illegal or against some IRS regulation.
Hey "SJT", PROVE IT!
Chapter and verse and exact citations, please, if you can find them.
Bet you can't be that precise in relation to the quote above. "
dose wrote on Nov 2, 2008 7:42 PM:
" Ali Handero:
I dont know if you have heard of a thing called the seperation of church and state. It is illegal for a pastor, priest, etc. to advocate for any politician during their official duties in their church. If you are not aware of these simple Constitutional concepts, then how are we supposed to take you seriously. "
BJMallory wrote on Nov 2, 2008 10:23 PM:
" "I went to church, and the pastor said not to vote for somebody who is clearly going against God's wishes on abortion and homosexuality," Jones said
Oh c'mon, give her a break. Thinking for oneself can be exhausting. It's just easier this way. "
BJMallory wrote on Nov 2, 2008 10:41 PM:
" Well, the IRS says this in their publication, Tax Guide for Churches and Religious Organizations, in the chapter entitled, "Jeopardizing Tax-Exempt Status:
All IRC section 501(c)(3) organizations, including churches and religious organizations, must abide by certain rules:
■ they must not devote a substantial part of their activities to attempting to influence legislation,
■ they must not participate in, or intervene in, any political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for public office,
So the IRS says it's illegal. Who cares? If people would just think for themselves instead of doing something because "the pastor said", we wouldn't need to worry about it. I must admit, pastors have freedom of speech, too. God gave all of us a mind to think with, a heart to feel with and a soul to tell us what is right and wrong. I don't need any pastor telling me what to think. I might feel I need his or her guidance from time to time, but the ultimate decision will be mine and mine alone. "
jeff wrote on Nov 3, 2008 1:30 PM:
" Alihandero [sp], let me guess, you’re going to say that nothing was proven because BJMallory provided the data instead of SJT. How could you possibly not be aware of this law? Churches cannot endorse public elections of any kind. I know middle school children who understand this.
If Sandra Bega is voting for Prop 8 and Prop 4 she is a fairly poor Libertarian just as any Republican voting for these are bad Republicans. Both of these parties run on less Government intervention and more Civil Liberties. Both of these propositions are in direct contrast of that.
O.G., this is not a Christian nation. What evidence is there to show that it is? There is none. Remember it’s “Freedom of Religion” not Freedom for Religion. Trying to impose your Church beliefs into our laws is un-American. That’s how they run things over in Iran. "
Devils Advocate wrote on Nov 3, 2008 2:03 PM:
" "We, the people of the United States of America,..."
The government of the US is the people, we just ask representatives to handle it for us within certain limits. Therefore, we, all of us, are ultimately responsible for the what we do as a nation. I applaud people willing to vote their conscience, even understanding the extreme underdog status of third parties. Should you choose to hug trees, promote socialism, consider social freedom the highest virtue, or wish to follow the dictates of your religious leaders or traditions, that's great - thanks for being part of America. Let's just try to respect one another while we duke it out, and remember that the whole of America is greater than the sum of its parts. "
Alihandero wrote on Nov 3, 2008 8:31 PM:
" Apparently my last comment citing legal points was not printed for some reason so I will give you the short answer.
That pastor cannot be prosecuted by ANY criminal or civil law for saying that.
Do you people here believe that we have no Constitution at all? Does the IRS tax code take away American citizen’s rights via a series of complex tax collecting guidelines and regulations?
Of Freedom of Speech and Religion, the respected nonpartisan PEW RESEARCH CENTER says this:
“The fact that candidates may align themselves on one side or another of an issue does not restrict the ability of religious organizations to engage in discussions of that issue.”
“If a religious organization’s lobbying activities constitute more than an insubstantial part of its total activities, the organization’s section 501(c)(3) tax-exempt status may be revoked, which means that its income for the year would become subject to income tax.”
Source: http://pewforum.org/docs/?DocID=281#q5
Additionally, a church pastor can hold and discuss his personal, individual views, practices, or opinions and, in this case, he/she didn’t say WHO to vote for and the church didn’t “substantially intervene” in anyone’s political or legislative campaign. "
Watchdog Fred wrote on Nov 3, 2008 9:03 PM:
" To: "Do~Se" wrote on Nov 2, 2008 7:42 PM:
Don't worry I included your paste below. But first off read all of the blog. It was stated a name was not mentioned to vote for in that church. Therefore no violation took place, therefore tax exempt status stays in tact. You and "Sc~Ott" are not the only two who know how to play symantics with the English language, my friend.
" Ali Handero:
I dont know if you have heard of a thing called the seperation of church and state. It is illegal for a pastor, priest, etc. to advocate for any politician during their official duties in their church. If you are not aware of these simple Constitutional concepts, then how are we supposed to take you seriously. "
Put that in your bong and fire it up "Do~se"! Or is it a Crack Pipe? "
Watchdog Fred wrote on Nov 3, 2008 9:23 PM:
" To: Jeff,
Freedom of religion is the freedom of an individual or community, in public or private, to manifest religion or belief in teaching, practice, worship, and observance.
How can you say that religion doesn't have a place in politics when it is clearly stated in the deffinition that it be private or public?
We have the right to peacefully assemble and publicly discuss whatever we wish to discuss in this country. It is not Nazi Germany, where those priveleges were not allowed.
So if we wish to communicate our political opinion based on our religous beliefs in private/public, it is the free will of the people to do so. Just like it is your right not to, so it washes out in the end does it not, Jeff?
So don't tell me to keep my religous beliefs out of my judgement. Because it is an instilled quality contained within my right to make judgements on elections and government and whatever else might be influenced by my thinking private/public.
Or are we at a place and time when now you wish to persecute our private thoughts as well. "
liberalguy wrote on Nov 4, 2008 4:28 AM:
" "I went to church, and the pastor said not to vote for somebody who is clearly going against God's wishes on abortion and homosexuality," Jones said. I wonder if the Pastor said to not vote for someone who is Pro-war. If I remember correctly Jesus was a pacifist and preached against all things violent. I guess as long as we are killing those who don't believe exactly what we do its ok. And voting for McCain because he reflects your Christian beliefs? This is a man who cheated on his ex with his current meal ticket, while is ex was revovering from a serious accident, Now that is what I call good Christian values "
dose wrote on Nov 4, 2008 1:51 PM:
" I did vote differently, I voted for the black guy instead of the rich old white guy. "
Alihandero wrote on Nov 4, 2008 8:24 PM:
" Hey, "dose" in Ohio just admitted that race DOES matter in this election.
Nice form, "dose," great opportunity to vote your atheistic conscience for your own personal savior.
Well, we now have proof of the old saw:
"As the ACORN falls (esp. in Ohio) so grows the tree!" "
Deb wrote on Nov 5, 2008 1:02 PM:
" Say, what, Alihandro? Ohio? Were you speaking of Ohio?
Ohio Results:
Obama 2,618,612 52%
McCain 2,395,130 47% "
jeff wrote on Nov 5, 2008 3:26 PM:
" Fred,
You’re confused about the constitution and what I said. I never said people cannot gather publicly to state their opinions. (Stop listening to the voices in your head). That’s the 1st Amendment which says “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. “ I know you’ll need some help here but what this means is that no laws shall be passed in the name of any religion, you’re allowed to join or believe in any religious voodoo you like, the government will not censor the population or the press, the government will not stop people from protesting peacefully or from petitioning the government.
How can you say that religion does have a place in politics? Move to the Middle East Fred, you’ll love it there. "
Watchdog Fred wrote on Nov 8, 2008 8:34 AM:
" Is this finally a truthful comment from the land of Ohio we see below: Has dose finally outed himself and his bigotry now slides down the sides of his mouth and dribbles onto his belly.
dose wrote on Nov 4, 2008 1:51 PM:
" I did vote differently, I voted for the black guy instead of the rich old white guy. " "
Watchdog Fred wrote on Nov 8, 2008 8:37 AM:
" jeff wrote on Nov 5, 2008 3:26 PM:
Very simple the pledge of allegiance in our schools, "In God" We Trust on our money, prayer in the "White House, Senate & Congress" the governing bodies of our United States. Even other religions refer to their God as God. You will have as much success getting all that out of government as you just had on making same sex marriage law in California, Arizona and Florida.
But Good Luck! NOT! "
dose wrote on Nov 12, 2008 12:39 PM:
" Since the Sentinel in its infinite wisom has decided not to post my original comment I will try reposting it.
Fred and Ali Handero, both of you couldn't have gotten my comment about voting for a black candidate more wrong. The reason why I voted for Obama had nothing to do with the color of his skin, it did have everything to do with the fact that he was a better candidate. The only reason why I said I was voting for a black guy was in reference to this articles title. Since every president we have ever had has been a rich old white guy I figure voting for a black man meant I was voting to a different drummer. Just because the only thing the two of you consider is race doesn't mean the rest of us do. In fact I wouldn't care if Obama was plaid and from Mars I still would have voted for him. He simply was more qualified than mccain. "