Hello!
The comments on this profile are unclaimed and thus are unverified.
Do they belong to you? Claim these comments.
Erik Stanley
Is this you? Claim Profile »
9 months ago
in Ambulance chasing for Jesus on The Colorado Independent
Since news about the Alliance Defense Fund’s Pulpit Initiative broke, many mischaracterizations have cropped up that need dispelling.
The Pulpit Initiative is a legal effort designed to protect the First Amendment rights of pastors in the pulpit. The initiative is not a demand that pastors endorse candidates. The plan would allow churches to decide for themselves how to exercise their First Amendment rights on the subject without fearing the tax man.
Tax exemption of churches is not a benefit but a right under the Constitution. As the U.S. Supreme Court has noted, the power to tax involves the power to destroy, and churches are exempt from taxation under the principle that there is no surer way to destroy religion than to begin taxing it.
Yet a rule in the tax code has been used to silence the church since 1954. That’s when then-Sen. Lyndon Johnson introduced it to silence some non-profit groups who were opposing his re-election to the Senate. Scholars attest to the fact that the “Johnson Amendment” wasn’t intended to restrict the speech of churches, but it has been used for that purpose. Those groups that howl the most about the so-called “separation of church and state” talk out of both sides of their mouth when they argue that the IRS has the right to monitor a pastor’s sermon.
The Pulpit Initiative is not a demand that a church discuss candidate positions. The point is that it’s up to the church to decide. Government violation of First Amendment rights is not the answer.
Erik Stanley
Senior Legal Counsel
Alliance Defense Fund
The Pulpit Initiative is a legal effort designed to protect the First Amendment rights of pastors in the pulpit. The initiative is not a demand that pastors endorse candidates. The plan would allow churches to decide for themselves how to exercise their First Amendment rights on the subject without fearing the tax man.
Tax exemption of churches is not a benefit but a right under the Constitution. As the U.S. Supreme Court has noted, the power to tax involves the power to destroy, and churches are exempt from taxation under the principle that there is no surer way to destroy religion than to begin taxing it.
Yet a rule in the tax code has been used to silence the church since 1954. That’s when then-Sen. Lyndon Johnson introduced it to silence some non-profit groups who were opposing his re-election to the Senate. Scholars attest to the fact that the “Johnson Amendment” wasn’t intended to restrict the speech of churches, but it has been used for that purpose. Those groups that howl the most about the so-called “separation of church and state” talk out of both sides of their mouth when they argue that the IRS has the right to monitor a pastor’s sermon.
The Pulpit Initiative is not a demand that a church discuss candidate positions. The point is that it’s up to the church to decide. Government violation of First Amendment rights is not the answer.
Erik Stanley
Senior Legal Counsel
Alliance Defense Fund
10 months ago
in The preachers’ revolt: Dobson-affiliated church group encourages breaking the law, endorsing candidates from the pulpit on The Minnesota Independent
It should never be “breaking the law” for an American pastor to preach from the Bible in his pulpit. That should be true whether the pastor is talking about a virtuous Christian, a promiscuous celebrity, a noted criminal, a local hero, or even one of America’s future leaders. And it was true from the time the Constitution was ratified in 1787 until 1954. For 167 years, churches freely preached directly on political candidates’ qualifications for office. That was no problem under the Constitution, or when the first Commissioner of Internal Revenue was appointed in 1862, or when the federal income tax was authorized by the 16th Amendment in 1913. Nor were churches transformed into political machines. Churches simply spoke when their moral voice needed to be heard—even during election season—and decided for themselves how they wanted their pastors to preach.
When the IRS code was amended in 1954 to ban “intervention” in political campaigns, it was an act of political retaliation by then-Senator Lyndon Johnson against two anti-communist groups. It had nothing to do with “church politicking,” and scholars agree that churches were not the target of the regulation. It's time for the churches to exercise their constitutional rights as they were guaranteed, not as they have been gutted by the tax code. That’s not “civil disobedience.” Its called “free speech” and the “free exercise of religion.” It's called upholding and defending our constitutional rights. For more information, click here.
Erik Stanley
Senior Legal Counsel
Alliance Defense Fund
When the IRS code was amended in 1954 to ban “intervention” in political campaigns, it was an act of political retaliation by then-Senator Lyndon Johnson against two anti-communist groups. It had nothing to do with “church politicking,” and scholars agree that churches were not the target of the regulation. It's time for the churches to exercise their constitutional rights as they were guaranteed, not as they have been gutted by the tax code. That’s not “civil disobedience.” Its called “free speech” and the “free exercise of religion.” It's called upholding and defending our constitutional rights. For more information, click here.
Erik Stanley
Senior Legal Counsel
Alliance Defense Fund
