The Revolutionary war began when Americans refused to pay taxes without being represented. They coined the phrase ‘No Taxation Without Representation’.
Well I think it is high time and equally valid to state that there should be No Representation Without Taxation.
To argue that religious institutions aren’t represented is absolutely not true. To use as an argument for this that we have a separation of church and state due to the First Amendment is equally false. There is no separation. And the First Amendment was written to protect religion from government not to protect government from religion.
Let me give you a good example;
Congress has a Congressional Prayer Caucus, a Chaplain of Congress (with an office in the Capitol) elected by Congress and paid with tax payers money. Military Chaplains are also paid with federal tax dollars. How again is this the separation of Church and State? How is this not a violation of the First Amendment? It isn’t.
Congress has had a Chaplain since 1774, no that is not a typo, the office of House and Senate Chaplain came to be before the Constitution, the Bill of Rights and the Declaration Independence was written.
Here are the requirements for Tax Exempt Status per the IRS
Tax-Exempt Status
Churches and religious organizations, like many other charitable organizations, qualify for exemption from federal income tax under IRC Section 501(c)(3) and are generally eligible to receive tax-deductible contributions. To qualify for tax-exempt status, the organization must meet the following requirements (covered in greater detail throughout this publication):
- the organization must be organized and operated exclusively for religious, educational, scientific or other charitable purposes;
- net earnings may not inure to the benefit of any private individual or shareholder;
- no substantial part of its activity may be attempting to influence legislation;
- the organization may not intervene in political campaigns;
- and n the organization’s purposes and activities may not be illegal or violate fundamental public policy.
IRC Section 501(c)(3)
All organizations, including churches and religious organizations, must abide by certain rules:
- their net earnings may not inure to any private shareholder or individual;
- they must not provide a substantial benefit to private interests;
- they must not devote a substantial part of their activities to attempting to influence legislation;
- they must not participate in, or intervene in, any political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for public office;
- and n the organization’s purposes and activities may not be illegal or violate fundamental public policy.
Congress even wrote special legislation regarding the IRS’ right to audit churches and religious institutions;
Special Rules Limiting IRS Authority to Audit a Church
Tax Inquiries and Examinations of Churches
Congress has imposed special limitations, found in section 7611 of the Internal Revenue Code, on how and when the IRS may conduct civil tax inquiries and examinations of churches. The IRS may begin a church tax inquiry only if an appropriate high-level Treasury official reasonably believes, on the basis of facts and circumstances recorded in writing, that an organization claiming to be a church or convention or association of churches may not qualify for exemption, may be carrying on an unrelated trade or business (within the meaning of IRC § 513), may otherwise be engaged in taxable activities or may have entered into an IRC § 4958 excess benefit transaction with a disqualified person.
Now let’s look at how much this elected office pays;
Total Salary Expenditures
| 04/01/2015 – 09/30/2015 |
$216,350 |
| 10/01/2014 – 03/31/2015 |
$205,244 |
| 04/01/2014 – 09/30/2014 |
$212,496 |
| 10/01/2013 – 03/31/2014 |
$198,363 |
| 04/01/2013 – 09/30/2013 |
$191,600 |
| 10/01/2012 – 03/31/2013 |
$192,975 |
| 04/01/2012 – 09/30/2012 |
$201,350 |
| 10/01/2011 – 03/31/2012 |
$204,350 |
| 04/01/2011 – 09/30/2011 |
$215,275 |
| 10/01/2010 – 03/31/2011 |
$198,850 |
| 04/01/2010 – 09/30/2010 |
$219,961 |
| 10/01/2009 – 03/31/2010 |
$195,031 |
| 04/01/2009 – 09/30/2009 |
$214,355 |
| 10/01/2008 – 03/31/2009 |
$182,598 |
| 04/01/2008 – 09/30/2008 |
$202,270 |
| 10/01/2007 – 03/31/2008 |
$176,690 |
| 04/01/2007 – 09/30/2007 |
$181,961 |
| 10/01/2006 – 03/31/2007 |
$175,017 |
| 04/01/2006 – 09/30/2006 |
$179,606 |
| 10/01/2005 – 03/31/2006 |
$174,390 |
| 04/01/2005 – 09/30/2005 |
$174,682 |
| 10/01/2004 – 03/31/2005 |
$166,317 |
| 04/01/2004 – 09/30/2004 |
$172,362 |
| 10/01/2003 – 03/31/2004 |
$154,027 |
| 04/01/2003 – 09/30/2003 |
$121,243 |
| 10/01/2002 – 03/31/2003 |
$148,773 |
| 04/01/2002 – 09/30/2002 |
$153,907 |
| 10/01/2001 – 03/31/2002 |
$140,841 |
| 04/01/2001 – 09/30/2001 |
$147,848 |
| 10/01/2000 – 03/31/2001 |
$139,57 |
These figures do include the Chaplain’s staff;
Chaplain: $150,698
Chief of Staff: $129,223
Director of Communications: $86,056
Executive Assistant: $52,828
I fail to see how being an elected member of Congress does not influence legislation.
From an article by Paul Singer, USA Today;
“We do what we can to make sure that legislation emerges with what we believe to be American, Christian values,” said caucus member John Fleming, R-La. “We believe that a democracy is only functional if there is a certain level of virtuousness among the nation. Freedom also requires a certain responsibility and that requires a certain moral code. The moral code that we as Americans have lived by for over 200 years is based on what? The Ten Commandments.”
Rep Randy Forbes VA and a dozen other Prayer Caucus members traveled to North Carolina in March to launch an initiative called PrayUSA, asking government officials and other to sign a resolution calling for prayer. The initiative is part of “a tactical strategy to effectively challenge the growing anti-faith movement in our Country,” the foundation says.
And the foundation blog advocates strongly for the defense of conservative Christians like Kentucky clerk Kim Davis, who was briefly jailed for refusing to sign marriage licenses for gay couples.
“Criminalizing Christianity is not the America envisioned by our Founding Fathers,” reads a blog post on the foundation website about the Kim Davis saga. “Sadly, the balance of power in our country is being undermined within the legislative branch and increasingly supplanted by both executive fiat and judicial tyranny. The government was never designed to replace God and therefore, does not have the authority or right to redefine the laws of nature or of nature’s God….. We are fighting for our freedoms—silence and inactivity will leave us vulnerable and open to further attack. Christian…it is time for us to wake up and be engaged!”
How is this not influencing legislation?
While the Supreme Court has ruled in favor of the a House and Senate Office of the Chaplain stating that it is a tradition and should be respected it is important to remember that slavery was considered a ‘tradition’ as well.
MARSH v. CHAMBERS, 463 U.S. 783 (1983)
CHIEF JUSTICE BURGER delivered the opinion of the Court.(1)
A statute providing for the payment of these chaplains was enacted into law on September 22, 1789.
Clearly the men who wrote the First Amendment Religion Clauses did not view paid legislative chaplains and opening prayers as a violation of that Amendment, for the practice of opening sessions with prayer has continued without interruption ever since that early session of Congress.
It can hardly be thought that in the same week Members of the First Congress voted to appoint and to pay a chaplain for each House and also voted to approve the draft of the First Amendment** for submission to the states, they intended the Establishment Clause of the Amendment to forbid what they had just declared acceptable. In applying the First Amendment to the states through the Fourteenth Amendment, it would be incongruous to interpret that Clause as imposing more stringent First Amendment limits on the states than the draftsmen imposed on the Federal Government.
This unique history leads us to accept the interpretation of the First Amendment draftsmen who saw no real threat to the Establishment Clause arising from a practice of prayer similar to that now challenged. We conclude that legislative prayer presents no more potential for establishment than the provision of school transportation, beneficial grants for higher education, or tax exemptions for religious organizations.
A paragraph from writings by James Madison point out that Madison was concerned about respecting the religious rights of all religious sects;
JAMES MADISON: The tenets of the chaplains elected by the majority shut the door of worship against the members whose creeds & consciences forbid a participation in that of the majority. To say nothing of other sects, this is the case with that of Roman Catholics & Quakers who have always had members in one or both of the Legislative branches. Could a Catholic clergyman ever hope to be appointed a Chaplain? To say that his religious principles are obnoxious or that his sect is small, is to lift the evil at once and exhibit in its naked deformity the doctrine that religious truth is to be tested by numbers or that the major sects have a right to govern the minor.
Though Madison did see the payment of the Chaplain by the National Treasury as unconstitutional, what he deemed a violation of the First Amendment was the appointment of a Protestant, not the appointment of a Chaplain.
RENELAND 