The Patriot Post® · Preach Out and Touch Someone
Imagine an America without the Reverend Martin Luther King, Jr. The late civil rights leader almost single-handedly turned the tide against racial segregation in this country — and he did it from the pulpits of churches. Where would we be now, as a nation, if pastors like the Reverend King hadn’t made their voices heard on the cultural issues of the day? Right now, the clergy of America are in that very dilemma, thanks to a vague 62-year-old piece of the U.S. tax code. Called the Johnson Amendment, it was slipped into an IRS bill a half-century ago without a floor vote or committee debate.
Several years later, even JFK’s successor himself couldn’t dream of the trouble it’s caused. The future president Lyndon Johnson (who was a senator at the time) wanted to use the language as a way to stop his political opponents. But what it’s become instead is one of the single greatest weapons against free speech in America’s churches. In the last several years, liberals have used the amendment to spook pastors away from preaching about moral or political issues — which is well within their constitutional rights to do.
Unfortunately, with the Obama IRS breathing down the necks of nonprofits and religious entities, threatening to take away their tax exempt status, the Johnson Amendment has become just another way for the president to crackdown on pastors’ ability to speak openly about political issues and candidates. “Americans don’t give up their right to speech when they go to work for a church or nonprofit,” House Majority Whip Steve Scalise’s (R-La.) pointed out. “But that’s the legal state of affairs under the Johnson Amendment. It puts the IRS in the position of being both judge and jury on comments made from the pulpit and all speech from nonprofits.” [Yesterday], two House leaders aim[ed] to change that. At a press conference at the U.S. Capitol, Whip Scalise and Rep. Jody Hice (R-Ga.) introduced the Free Speech Fairness Act — which would give houses of worship and nonprofit groups the ability to talk openly about political candidates and legislation without fear of government punishment.
The bill, H.R. 6195, is a long overdue push to topple the amendment, which GOP presidential nominee Donald Trump has made a central issue of his campaign. “We’re going to get rid of that [amendment],” he’s promised. Under this new bill, ministers can make comments about an elected official, someone running for office, or even a key issue as part of his sermon. And even, in some cases include that information in newsletters. What they can’t do is act like a political PAC or c4 organization and launch any sort of direct mail, advertising, or fundraising campaign “solely for political information.”
As I told the reporters at [yesterday’s] press conference, government bureaucrats should not serve as bouncers at the door of free speech and religious freedom. Dr. King understood the need of a church that could speak freely, writing, “The church must be reminded that it is not the master or the servant of the state, but rather the conscience of the state, and never its tool.” As such the church should not have to gain its authority or approval to speak from the state. If you agree, contact your House member and encourage him or her to support the Free Speech Fairness Act!
Originally published here.
Orlando Blooms with Double Standards
How serious are these collegiate sports leagues about their transgender agendas? Not very, if the latest move by the ACC is any indication. The conference supposedly pulled its championship football game out of Charlotte to take a stand against North Carolina’s decision to let businesses and private organizations set their own restroom, shower and locker room policies. So imagine everyone’s surprise when the ACC just announced [Tuesday] that it’s relocating the game to Florida — one of the two dozen states with a policy similar to North Carolina’s! Although it isn’t identical to H.B. 2, the Sunshine State has a Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA) on the books that gives religious employers more protection from being forced to open their bathroom doors to anyone.
Talk about hypocrisy! If the ACC is so upset about North Carolina’s policy, why in the world would it relocate to a state with a similar one? Because in the end, this isn’t about bathrooms or locker rooms or even “discrimination.” This is about appeasing cultural bullies who can’t be appeased! And in this case, the ACC is willing to risk its credibility to try. Many states (and the federal government) have had these laws for years — with none of the consequences the Left hysterically screams about. If liberals want to put their money where their mouths are, they should stay out of all states with these protections (which they won’t do, since it would expose them for the political posturing they’re guilty of).
Like the NAIA, who just pulled the 2016 Cross Country National Championship out of the state, the ACC is putting its phony political agenda above the hard-working people and businesses of Charlotte — and ignoring the privacy and safety concerns of parents and kids in the process. But don’t be surprised if this decision backfires. The American people are tired of political correctness and agendas being elevated above everything else. And most of them think, like we do, that it’s time the ACC and its leaders, like Georgia Tech President Bud Peterson, get back to focusing on sports, not redefining what it means to be male or female.
Originally published here.
Resolved to Continue on the Continuing Resolution
In an unusual burst of energy, Senate Democrats made the rare decision to act like grown-ups and move forward with a short-term budget deal they’d been holding hostage for days. After dragging their feet on the continuing resolution that members were desperate to pass so that they could get home and campaign, Minority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) finally agreed with House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) to push the bill closer to the finish line before the September 30 deadline.
With just two days left until the government runs out of cash, Republicans have been more than ready to pass a short-term continuing resolution (CR) to keep the lights on (and fund the Zika virus and veterans projects). But until a few hours ago, liberals insisted that Congress roll relief money for Flint, Michigan, into the final package before passing it. That seems redundant, Senator John Cornyn (R-Texas) pointed out, since there’s already aid built into a separate bill. “I think that’s a pretty lame excuse not to pass the CR.” Cornyn told reporters, adding that “the Senate has already overwhelmingly passed a solution in the Senate bill [Water Resources Development Act of 2016].” Convinced that the city’s crisis will be addressed separately, Reid and Pelosi gave their blessing to a bill that conservatives would agree is not perfect. But with few options left on the table, 72 senators voted to give the green light to a proposal that will keep the government running until December 9, when Americans will have chosen their next president.
[Yesterday], though, the biggest news wasn’t that common sense prevailed in the Senate, but that an overwhelming majority of Congress finally handed Barack Obama the first veto override of his presidency. By an enormous margin (97-1, Harry Reid as the lone nay, and 348-77 in the House), Congress gave the families of 9/11 victims the ability to sue the Saudi Arabian government for any role in the plot — an opportunity the president denied them. Even hard-core liberals like senator Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) broke with his party’s top leader and explained that “This bill is near and dear to my heart as a New Yorker, because it would allow the victims of 9/11 to pursue some small measure of justice, finally giving them a legal avenue to pursue foreign sponsors of the terrorist attack that took from them the lives of their loved ones.”
In yet another display of how the Obama administration is out of step with the rest of the country, White House spokesman Josh Earnest decried the Senate voter earlier [yesterday] as “embarrassing” to the nation. Earnest should know something about embarrassing the nation, because the Obama administration has perfected that process.
Originally published here.