In the vein of the previous post, we have another set of sore losers who are trying to intimidate those who disagree with them. In this case, it has to do with Maine’s referendum to ban gay marriage, which passed last week 53% to 47%. For Maine Marriage Equality, there’s no question of accepting defeat gracefully, or simply rolling up their sleeves and getting back to work to change the voters’ minds. No, they want to sic the IRS on their opponents in Maine’s churches:
You are probably already aware of churches that supported and actively promoted a “YES” vote on Question 1. Please take the time to file an IRS complaint against them. Examples of supporting documentation to include with your complaint are pamphlets or other material created and/or distributed by the church or religious organization, photographs that show attempts to influence legislation (see below), witness statements or recordings of individuals who were aware of the campaign activities, and any other evidence that may prove a church or religious organization attempted to influence the public to vote “YES” on Question 1. With your help, we can reaffirm our Constitutional Separation of Church and State and ensure that in the future, nobody’s civil rights are stripped away by religious fanatics attempting to force their religion on all of us.
The reference at the end to church-state separation is one of the most blatantly dishonest things I’ve ever seen spewed forth by a political organization. There is no mention at all on MME’s web site of the hundreds of churches and religious leaders who agreed with them MME in opposing the referendum. Apparently, whether one violates the First Amendment is dependent upon what political position you take when you engage in a campaign for or against a public policy referendum.
The larger point, however, is this. What the MME is trying to do is criminalize dissent from their preferred political and moral position. In seeking to bring the wrath of the IRS down on those who disagree with them (a process which, because of the expense that is potentially involved, is designed to scare opponents of gay marriage into staying out of any future debate on the issue), MME is exhibiting one of the prime characteristics of authoritarians everywhere–using the law, and law enforcement agencies, to silence opposition. It’s a repulsive practice that the IRS will hopefully refuse to be party to.
(Via Alliance Alert.)
November 12, 2009 at 6:29 pm
If I remember correctly the IRS refused to get involved in the CA proposition vote.
The problem in California is our law that money donated must be known and our state Supreme Court would not allow it to be hidden because of persecution of the donors. But that is the Ca Supreme court.
November 12, 2009 at 7:18 pm
The biggest canard in the whole deal is that the mythical “Separation of Church and State” has nothing to do with political speak from the pulpit or religious speak from the lectern but the Federal State establishing a State Religion that trumps the rights of the states establishing their own religion.
November 13, 2009 at 11:32 am
As far as I understand it, nonprofits are simply prohibited from advocating for candidates, not ballot issues, so I’m not sure how these IRS complaints are supposed to work.
November 13, 2009 at 11:47 am
BTW, David, I assume that this statement, “MME is exhibiting one of the prime characteristics of authoritarians everywhere–using the law, and law enforcement agencies, to silence opposition” also covers the anti-gay folks who write complaints to the FBI regarding supposed “hate speech” from the pro-gay side, which is also becoming increasingly common?
As always, there are no tactics from the far left that one can’t find being done by the far right.
November 13, 2009 at 1:51 pm
It would so apply, but I haven’t heard of any complaints of “hate speech” (as opposed to physical threats) being reported to the FBI. Do you have any links I could look at? I would have no compunctions about calling out conservatives who do this, either.
November 13, 2009 at 2:22 pm
http://www.goodasyou.org/good_as_you/2009/11/question-1-opponents-the-far-rights-newest-faux-monolith.html
November 13, 2009 at 3:23 pm
Since you post the link, I assume you agree with this:
No one has said, that I know of, that anyone doesn’t have the “right” to file a complaint. What they have said, and what I agree with, is that this is simply a form of harassment designed to shut down dissent. Let’s say that the IRS decides that this is a matter worth investigating, and starts asking for documents, lists of expenses, etc. At that point, churches start thinking that maybe they need the help of a lawyer if the IRS is going to take this seriously. We all know where that goes.
Hopefully, the IRS will treat any such complaints as the nonsense they are (Alan rightly notes above that the restrictions on churches have to do with activity on behalf of candidates, not on issues and referenda), and enable churches to rest easy.
November 13, 2009 at 3:47 pm
Yes, of course I agree with that blog’s post. I think, however, you need to correct your post here and change the title to “Sore Loser Attacks Churches” since this is one person acting alone without the support of any larger organization.
And of course the IRS should ignore these complaints just as it did with complaints against the United Church of Christ and All Saints Church in Pasadena.
November 13, 2009 at 4:20 pm
David, thanks for the clarification. But given what I’ve just posted about one congresswoman’s threat to the Catholic Church’s tax exemption, I think I’ll leave the plural where it is.
November 13, 2009 at 4:38 pm
“this is simply a form of harassment designed to shut down dissent. ”
I think you’re being a bit melodramatic here, David (Fischler).
If people can’t handle the heat of a completely legal statement encouraging the completely legal filing of a complaint with the IRS (a complaint that, to my eyes, is destined for the trash) then perhaps they should find another line of work. Political struggle is often bare-knuckle fighting and if folks can’t handle it then perhaps they should take their smelling salts, and fainting couch and start a knitting club instead. Maybe I’m just jaded because when your side wants to “intimidate” LGBT people they usually do it with baseball bats.
And if what they’re doing is indeed somehow against the law (which I can’t see how that would be true) then they should be prosecuted. So you’re not suggesting, David F, that churches should be above the law, are you? Or do you believe that, if churches on the pro-gay side were involved in lobbying, that your side wouldn’t immediately do the same thing? Let’s not pretend that folks here are that naive, eh? 🙂 (In fact, complaints and counter complaints to the IRS against both conservative and liberal churches have been filed for years.)
BTW, I love how you take two people and decide it’s an entire movement. Stay classy! 😉
November 14, 2009 at 12:56 pm
If you want a clear example of churches violating IRS rules it doesn’t get much clearer than this:
http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/metropolitan/6719878.html
November 23, 2009 at 12:59 am
I’ve been active in taxations for longer then I care to admit, both on the individual side (all my working life history!!) and from a legal viewpoint since passing the bar and following tax law. I’ve rendered a lot of advice and corrected a lot of wrongs, and I must say that what you’ve posted makes complete sense. Please continue the good work – the more individuals know the better they’ll be equipped to cope with the tax man, and that’s what it’s all about.