• greenskye@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    101
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    My local church puts out big signs in front telling you what to vote for. Regularly see cops attend that church. No one cares

    • vithigar@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      122
      ·
      1 year ago

      The police don’t enforce tax regulations. The IRS has its own people for that.

      Would you expect an IRS auditor to pull someone over for speeding? Of course not, that’s ridiculous.

    • electrogamerman@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      15
      ·
      1 year ago

      All these church regular attendees are constantly being told what to do with their lives. “No abortion, no lgbt”, etc. I would say, even if they were not told who to vote for explicitly, they are still being told who to vote for implicitly.

      (Not saying what they doing is right, just saying how this whole religion thing works)

      • Colonel Panic@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        1 year ago

        Yep. That’s 100% the bigger issue. The church may or may not officially say to vote for a specific person or party, but they sure as shit will manipulate their entire group to think and vote a certain way.

        And even more insidious is most of the people will deny they are being manipulated. They will insist that they decide how to vote all by themselves. It’s just years of indoctrination and manipulation to the point most of them don’t even realize they are being controlled and used.

        And maybe some truly believe it all too, but most have doubts and realize it’s messed up, but have been gaslit into thinking it’s THEIR shortcomings or flaws or human nature to blame. Not the organization, them personally.

        And here we are millennia later still arguing with grifters and con artists so good at the grift they believe it works.

        • shastaxc@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          That’s why religion still exists. When it’s still gaining momentum, it’s a threat to existing powers until they can get control of the religion, then they push it on everyone they can because when you can control the religion, you can control massive populations with little threat of rebellion. See: “holy” Roman empire, Church of England

  • ares35@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    69
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    the irs already knows that line is violated constantly. unfortunately, they don’t have the resources or the kahunas to go after the churches that do this. there’s way too many (like most of them, probably), and “going after churches” would be a political shitstorm regardless of the constitutional validity of such “persecution”

    • Piecemakers@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      36
      arrow-down
      10
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      The word you’re looking for is cajones. Also, capitalization exists for a reason.

    • Drivebyhaiku@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      The thing about the IRS is that they exist mostly outside of the consideration of political pandering. They just need to enforce tax code, not care about what people think. Kind of like a computer program. They don’t write the rules they just enforce whatever is on the books. They aren’t really elected or responsible for the perception of their acts. They are already generally unpopular publicly so I don’t see them being overly concerned about political shitstorms.

    • afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      and “going after churches” would be a political shitstorm regardless of the constitutional validity of such “persecution”

      Say that again. No one likes the IRS. Imagine how little it would take to spin this. In this corner you have a soulless government agency that all of us have had to deal with on and in the other corner you have a church, the institution that generally is well liked, being “attacked” because the pastor expressed their first amendment rights. Sure it’s spin but it would definitely work. Big mean government vs tiny church.

  • aeternum@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    60
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Churches should be tax liable anyway, regardless of whether they tell you how to vote. Why are they exempt, but other businesses aren’t? Or rather, why are other business tax liable when churches aren’t?

    • Lemminary@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      1 year ago

      Right? Talk about privilege and special rights! I don’t get why these megachurches have these millionaire pastors flying around in private jets and nobody bats an eye. Right, Joel Olsteens?

    • FrostKing@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      *this is not an opinion just an objective explanation based on the information I have

      The reason that churches aren’t taxed, legally, is because the US constitution states, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion” There are disagreements about whether taxing everyone including churches counts as a “law respecting an establishment of religion” but that is the current state of affairs.

      *this is an opinion, though more of a speculative one

      The reason, I believe, that the law mentioned in this post isn’t enforced, is because if the did the supreme Court would likely through the case and the law out as a result, for being unconstitutional, as it is unarguably a “law respecting an establishment of religion.”

    • Dizzy Devil Ducky@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      With the power, influence, and money some churches have, there is absolutely no way in Hell it’ll ever be enforced against them. They’ll just end up asking for more money from their followers so they can offset the cost of throwing money at the IRS or whoever they need to.

  • FizzlePopBerryTwist@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    31
    ·
    1 year ago

    I am Catholic and it annoys me to no end when priests do this as if a politician is even honest about what they claim to support half the time in the first place. I didn’t know I could report them! Where’s the form?!

      • GeneralVincent@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        I was just about to post this haha, (I think this is the actual form you have to fill out tho)

        To anyone saying the IRS would never enforce this, be the change you want to see in the world. Continue reporting until they start to enforce it. Even if they don’t, better to keep trying than living with a defeatist attitude.

    • LrdThndr@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      I used to have a priest that was the nicest guy ever in person, but his facebook posts were all Trump-y bullshit, sticking it to the liberals, etc.

      TBH, it made me lose a lot of faith.

      • FizzlePopBerryTwist@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Most priests I have met just consider it a job, not so much a reflection of their own holiness. Some of them are true shepherds, but a lot of them are sheep themselves. A few are wolves, unworthy of the office at all. Going to seminary opened up my eyes to a lot of things behind the scenes that are both inspiring and unsavory. The best kinds of priests I have found are usually the ones running retreats. I think the Bishops know and try to get them to be a good influence on people SENT to retreats… Anyway, do not confuse the faith for the shoddy work of a few old guys who answer to more old guys. Remember, Jesus Himself picked Judas and look what he did.

  • MisterScruffy@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    30
    ·
    1 year ago

    are there any examples of this ever working? I’d like to be wrong but I don’t think this works or has ever worked

  • scarabic@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    22
    ·
    1 year ago

    I guess we’ll have to send in spies, though, because congregation members are never going to report their own church.

  • SpezBroughtMeHere@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    18
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    1 year ago

    Yep. Same with all 501c organizations. Make it a rule across the board. Churches, planned parenthood, BLM, all charities.

    • ThatWeirdGuy1001@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      How does BLM or planned parenthood qualify here?

      Especially when they’re directly opposed by one political side whereas church and charity is generally accepted by both sides?

      It’d be hard to find a BLM member that supports the Republican party for instance. It’s a massive conflict of interest. Same with planned parenthood.

      The difference is Republicans decided to make these organizations the enemy.

        • scarabic@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          I’d love to see Christians actually being Christians, honestly. Like Jimmy Carter does.

        • FuglyDuck@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          There’s being “allowed” and then there’s being “taxed”

          While it’s probably not that main stream in us politics, the US is one to the few places one of the largest hedge funds gets to operate tax free because it’s owned by the LDS; and I’m pretty sure they just get picked on because they’re “cult-y”. Catholic Churches have massive investment accounts, most denominations will have something large.

          And then there’s the Bill Gates fund that is a giant tax shelter….

    • Franzia@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      Im surprised to find myself agreeing. Obviously BLM is a political / activisn organization. But ykw. They could form a PAC instead. Separate political activism from genuine charity work. And they should be expected to file correctly - because churches can’t.

      • DarthBueller@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        1 year ago

        BLM is a terrible example. There’s BLM the movement, and BLM the leech non-profit organization that purports to represent BLM the movement but gets terrible press because they have tons of private inurement and self-dealing issues - almost like they exist to undermine the actual movement.

      • FuglyDuck@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        Pretty sure it’s not a 501c corp. at least not the bits of it that are active in politics.

        Keep in mind, BLM isn’t a single entity and doesn’t have heirachical control like a denomination would

  • Jaysyn@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    14
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    I’ve sent them photographs of a local church with “Vote Trump” on the placard out front. Nothing happened.

    • fidodo@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Did you do it anonymously or did you have your name on it? According to their form

      All referrals are sent to analysts at the EO Classifications Office in Dallas. After a referral is made, the IRS will send an acknowledgement letter to all non-IRS sources making a referral, unless it was made anonymously.

      They should be required to process it, but only if it’s not anonymous. I’m guessing anything anonymous is thrown in the bin unless it’s super serious.

      • frickineh@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        That statement doesn’t mean they don’t process anonymous submissions, it just means you don’t get a letter saying they got it if you submit it anonymously. It’s more likely that they just don’t have the resources to follow up on every tip unless it’s particularly egregious, given the number of churches who are definitely in violation in the US.

        • fidodo@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Yes, I’m sure they’re still processed but I think it would make sense to give less credence to anonymous tips as they’re less likely to be legit or serious than one that someone puts their name on.

      • MisterScruffy@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        are there any examples of someone successfully getting a church’s exempt status taken away?

        evidently there are a few examples, but probably only in really easy to pin on the church type situations. You probably need a printed doc from the church or a video of the pastor specifically mentioning a party or a candidate.

        • fidodo@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          I’m sure it’s a pretty hard process, but it seems like you should at least get a response on the status of the submission and that the church would be informed too. Getting the message that it’s being investigated may at least be enough to spook many of them to stop.

  • ohlaph@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    11
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    I feel like we should all attend churches during voting season so we can collectively report them. That would be hilarious.