I suppose if the State were to impose separation (as in by stripping the no-tax status of churches who make political statements to obviously sway the voting public), that would be meddling. I don’t know what the right answer is, but I am very angry with the kind of involvement that religious leaders have had (and seem to want to expand on) on things that aren’t their purview by any means.
What do you think?
Please share widely!
consider the pacifist churches, the Mennonites and Quakers, the ‘Catholic Worker’ Catholics, as well as the congregation of William Sloan Coffin and Martin Luther King, Jr. :
are they trying to influence politics when they vigil and march, write letters to the editor, ask tough questions at hearings. Or currently: set up a group, as the Quakers and others did in Florida (and the government spied upon), to advise young people about what the military contract you sign when you are recruited really says? what about the Christian Peace Team members who went to Iraq? Or the Quaker house that was the headquarters in Crawford Texas for Cindy Sheehan? Are they trying to influence politics? Should they be told to stick to religion? A Quaker would tell you that (non-violent) action comes from religious conviction.
<
p>
Churches are non-profits and are required to have their books audited to maintain their staus. I expect there are ways to look at the finances of churches without another layer of bureaucracy that this law would have required.
I may be wrong about audits: I know churches who audit their books, but I do not know know whether they are required by some branch of the government or whether they are done for the church’s own benefit.
I did some searching and while it’s clear that they AG may investigate a church, it’s not clear that they have to file anything yearly (or regularly) to maintain their status. Anyone else who has more info please feel free to jump in.
<
p>
I think the reason that an AG may investigate a church is that they may suspect them of giving money or “moral support” (apparently illegal according to this site) to a political candidate. And this is what I’m referring to when I say “political involvement,” of course the church and their members and leaders have freedom of speech like everyone else, but when they start advocating that their members vote for someone (even when they do it tangentially, say with the whole pro-choice/communion controversy and Kerry) … that’s when I think the line turns grey pretty quickly.
Slightly off topic, but would anyone happen know of a site where I can find roll calls (relatively recent) for legislative voting of our state reps? The Mass.gov website is an absolute trainwreck and neither the Herald nor the Globe think the citizenry is really intrested in what their representation is voting when reporting on a bill. Unless of course it’s a hot button issue like gay marriage. Thanks in advance.
You can either subscribe to a service like http://www.statehousenews.com or call the House and/or Senate Clerks depending on where the vote happened.
<
p>
For reference, here are their numbers:
<
p>
House Clerk: 617-722-2356
Senate Clerk: 617-722-1276
<
p>
If it’s an old vote, it maybe in the House or Senate journal.
<
p>
If the bill has gotten a lot of attention, they might post it in the main legislative website. But it’ll dissappear after a few weeks and you can probably never get it back (ideally it moves to the Journal).
<
p>
Maybe if a lot of people called they would spend some money in the infrastructure necessary to be able to provide this information in a timely manner.
Statehouse News Service does not quite know what to do with normal people who just want better coverage of the news than the papers give them. I had a conversation with one of their sales reps last year, and when they asked who I was affiliated with, I told them that I was just a concerned citizen who wanted to be able to follow this stuff. They were basically struck dumb by that. I guess it doesn’t happen very often.
<
p>
Anyway, it is prohibitively expensive for an individual to purchase just to indulge their curiousity.
and are quite knowledgeable. Their weekly roundups are free, and are excellent. But, alas, it costs a small fortune to subscribe to the full service.
Which is rare for me. đŸ™‚ Could us bloggers get together and share the service? We all could benefit by this.
Last I checked, you could only get three logins per subscription, so that puts an upper limit on the number of people that can pool their money together. Plus, I’m not sure exactly what rate they’d charge us. Are we media? Are we a political committee? An interest group?
“Are we media? Are we a political committee? An interest group?”
<
p>
Whatever is cheapest?
<
p>
Thanks to all for the responses. The Weekly News Roundup looks interesting and is something I’ll certainly monitor going forward. Maybe if I harass the clerks enough, someone will get off their keister and put this stuff online.
harass them enough and convince them it is time to get rid of their old media ways. We don’t necessarily need a huge amount of logons. I think sharing would be possible. We are a combo media/interest group I think. People need to start recognizing the role blogs play and adjust accordingly.
are businesses. They sell the “product” of “salvation”, and they compete with other churches for market share. As such, they should be taxed and regulated as businesses. They should pay corporate taxes, have to follow state regulations and rules for the workplace, have to pay local property taxes, and employees (priests, rabbis, etc) should have to pay state and federal income taxes.
church employees pay taxes like everyone else. Churches do have to meet local, state, and fed regulations: for example they are required to have enough exits and meet the electrical code. It is in the ‘practice of religion’ that they cannot be regulated by the state , not in the ‘health, welfare. and safety’ of their members, or attenders.
<
p>
not all churches think they are in the business of salvation. Some are trying to live a ‘godly’ life, right now, not after they’re dead…
Priests can take up to half (I think) of their pay tax-free as a housing allowance.
Unbelievable. Yet another reason why this bill should have passed.