I know churches aren’t allowed to say who to vote for, but in our bulletin, theres a paper which says Vote Yes on Issue 1.
Is this okay?
There’s nothing that says churches aren’t allowed to say for whom to vote. I have never been in one that does, but I’m sure there are some out there that do.
RR
I believe what the OP is referring to is the tax-exempt status that most churches claim. If churches specifically endorse a particular candidate, I believe they are no longer eligible for tax-exemptions.
I don’t know if the law applies only to candidates or if it covers specific issues as well.
Churches mixing in politics is bad for politics and bad for churches. It seems to me that the countries where the people are most against churches interfering in government are those where the church and government were that same thing for centuries. France, Italy, Spain, Mexico come to mind.
Incorrect. It is against their tax code charter (501(c)(3)) to endorse a political candidate. However, they can endorse positions on various issues, which would be the reasoning behind the question posed by the OP.
FTR, here is the statement I got early last month stuffed into my church bulletin (St. Paul the Apostle, Manhattan) from the U.S. Bishops:
"Catholics who seek political office have a particular responsibility to bring together their faith, moral convictions, and public responsibilities. This is about more than one election. It requires ongoing participation in the political process. The Constitution protects our right to speak without government favoritism or discrimination. Our nation is enriched, not threatened, when religious groups join public debate. A Catholic political framework is often not ‘politically correct’; it does not fit the ideologies of ‘right’ or ‘left’ or the platforms of any party. Beleivers are called to be a community of conscience within the larger society, testing every candidate and party by how they affect human life and dignity, and how they pursue justice and peace." (bolding mine)
Question for the campaign:
How can our nation help parents raise their children with respect for life, sound moral values, a sense of hope, and an ethic of stewardship and responsibility? How can our society defend the central institution of marriage and better support families in their responsibilities?"
The second half of the page had citizenship facts, like the average age of voters, how one vote can make a difference (Rutherford B. Hayes and Hitler!), the deadline (Oct. 8 it was) and of course the website to find out more.
As you can see, you can make good arguments that the bishops are supporting aspects of both candidacies. But I don’t see how you could read it as an endorsement of any candidate.
BTW, I haven’t noticed any groundswell of support among Catholics for Kerry just because he’s Catholic. His divorce and his enthusiastic pro-abortion and stem cell research stances complicate things for a lot of people.
Garfield226 and Munch are correct. I knew that there was no restriction on churches in terms of commenting on issues and I incorrectly generalized that to extend it to include candidates. My apologies for spreading disinformation. At least I learned something, so it wasn’t a total loss.
RR
The claim that Hitler got to be the leader of the Nazi party in 1923 by one vote is false; rather, he was one vote away from being unanimously elected leader (the results were 553 to 1). This page at Snopes addresses several ‘one vote’ claims. Some things are decided by one or a very few votes, but the people voting tend to be small groups like the US Senate or Supreme Court.
The idea is well-meaning, though. There might not be examples of decisions made by a single vote in a large election, but we will never know how many decisions might have been made differently if thousands of ballots had been cast by people who ended up deciding not to vote.
Many churches may endorse a candidate without mentioning his name, which is legally different than saying “Vote for _____”. A religious leader might tell their congregation to vote for someone that will uphold the principles of the Bible, or who will encourage religious tolerance and diversity, or something like that.
The watchdog group American United for Separation of Church and State has been frantically busy this election season filing notices and lawsuits against churches endorsing candidates for both parties.
Here are two Democratic examples, and Republican examples are legion.
Miami Church Violated Federal Tax Law With Pro-Kerry Rally, Says Americans United.
Churches Continue To Violate Federal Tax Law With Partisan Events, Says Americans United
Check out the Stop Church Electioneering page for general information.
<hijack>
Just curious:
- Who was the one guy that voted against this?
- And how long did he last once Hitler came to power?
</hijack>
t-bonham: I can’t find anything about who it might have been. (It was 1921, not 1923 – sorry about that.) If he was a member of the Nazi party in 1921, that probably counted for more than not voting for Hitler. He may have quit or died sometime before 1933. Or there might have been fraud involved in the vote. Saying it was unanimous wouldn’t have worked since people who had voted no would then know there had been fraud, but saying one person had voted no would make each person who had think they were the only one.
politics have not been a topic of discussion at our church.