• Biblical Families is not a dating website. It is a forum to discuss issues relating to marriage and the Bible, and to offer guidance and support, not to find a wife. Click here for more information.

Is the Johnson amendment no more?

Can't wait to hear what Rush Limbaugh has to say about this tomorrow!
 
The Johnson Amendment is a provision in the U.S. tax code, since 1954, that prohibits all 501(c)(3) non-profit organizations from endorsing or opposing political candidates. Section 501(c)(3) organizations are the most common type of nonprofit organization in the United States, ranging from charitable foundations to universities and churches. The amendment is named for then-Senator Lyndon B. Johnson of Texas, who introduced it in a preliminary draft of the law in July 1954.
-Wikipedia
 
Asforme&myhouse said:
So how exactly can an executive order override US law?
Click to expand...
I’m no expert, but it looks like he has simply instructed the IRS to stop enforcing the law.
 
It is statutory law. But there is wide latitude in its interpretation.

And in this case, although it is not widely enforced against churches, it has had a significant dampening affect on legal speech of pastors in their churches and enforcement of the Johnson amendment against conservative groups was stepped up during the Obama Administration. It seems this executive order is intended to stop the IRS from censoring sermons or targeting pastors.

In contrast, actual 501(c)3 organizations pretty much disregard the Johnson amendment with impunity; especially liberal orgs.

The Johnson Amednment was always unconstitutional anyway when it comes to churches...

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech
Click to expand...

Now we just need to get the pastors to quit forming 501(c)3's and have only Jesus as their head. And in that context, this is actually a bad move. We got a nicer Satan, which means fewer churches will seek obedience only to Christ.

Frankly I think most of the time pastor's just used the Johnson amendment as an escuse and cover for their own cowardice and desire not to drive away congregants by taking a stand on political issues. So that presents a way forward to uncuck our churches: now that this is no longer an issue, press your pastor hard to speak out on abortion and political issues. When they publicly refuse one and all will know they actually worship money (popularity) and not God.
 
PeteR said:
Wow. Exciting. He continues to make strides toward limiting government and returning power to the people.
Click to expand...
I will have to study this particular law and executive order more closely, but my first reaction is that executive orders are exactly the opposite of returning power to the people. By definition, they are the exercise of power of ONE person and were rightfully criticized by candidate Trump. A victory in favor of religious institutions isn't a true victory , in my mind, if that victory perpetuates the erosion of the Constitution. I'll get off my soap box for now and wait for the dust to settle on the specifics of the law in question.
 
Mojo said:
I will have to study this particular law and executive order more closely, but my first reaction is that executive orders are exactly the opposite of returning power to the people. By definition, they are the exercise of power of ONE person and were rightfully criticized by candidate Trump. A victory in favor of religious institutions isn't a true victory , in my mind, if that victory perpetuates the erosion of the Constitution. I'll get off my soap box for now and wait for the dust to settle on the specifics of the law in question.
Click to expand...
My guess is he is hoping for a legal challenge that goes to the Supreme Court determining the original implementation of the Johnson Amendment was unconstitutional.
 
Mojo said:
perpetuates the erosion of the Constitution
Click to expand...

Sorry but it's already dead. Noble defeats will not put us on the path to victory.
 
PeteR said:
My guess is he is hoping for a legal challenge that goes to the Supreme Court determining the original implementation of the Johnson Amendment was unconstitutional.
Click to expand...
I hope so. The easiest way to cook a frog is to put it in cool water and then turn up the heat slowly. Between Obama and Trump handing out the EO like candy, I just hope we don't get to he day we are ruled by executive order in my life time. Wasn't the slogan of the Patriots, "No king but Jesus"?
 
Mojo said:
I will have to study this particular law and executive order more closely, but my first reaction is that executive orders are exactly the opposite of returning power to the people. By definition, they are the exercise of power of ONE person and were rightfully criticized by candidate Trump.
Click to expand...
I have to throw a curve-ball in here... The whole slogan of "returning power to the people", common to both democracy and communism, is in the long run basically just a sleight-of-hand way to get the populace to accept bureaucratic infringements on every single aspect of their lives because "we voted for it so have to accept it", or "it's for our own good". Which is why our modern laws place so many more controls on individuals than any monarch in history ever did. A monarch simply doesn't have the time or interest in controlling every single individual's life - they might have a few key people they choose to oppress, but the majority mostly do their own thing.

An executive order cancelling a complex bureaucratic infringement on the lives of ordinary citizens is exactly what you'd expect a monarch to do - because that complex bureaucracy itself is the single organisation most capable of challenging his rule.

Everybody who's still swayed by the romance of "democracy" needs to read the Communist Manifesto:
Karl Marx said:
What will be the course of this revolution?
Above all, it will establish a democratic constitution, and through this, the direct or indirect dominance of the proletariat. ...
Democracy would be wholly valueless to the proletariat if it were not immediately used as a means for putting through measures directed against private property and ensuring the livelihood of the proletariat. ...
It is impossible, of course, to carry out all these measures at once. But one will always bring others in its wake. Once the first radical attack on private property has been launched, the proletariat will find itself forced to go ever further, to concentrate increasingly in the hands of the state all capital, all agriculture, all transport, all trade. ...
Finally, when all capital, all production, all exchange have been brought together in the hands of the nation, private property will disappear of its own accord, money will become superfluous, and production will so expand and man so change that society will be able to slough off whatever of its old economic habits may remain.
Click to expand...
The Communist Manifesto reads today like a history book, not a plan but a description of what's actually taken place over the past century or so in all Western democracies, following the abolition of monarchies. Democracy and communism are not opposites, they're exactly the same thing just at different stages of evolution. It's an illusion, just like "left" and "right" - they get us arguing over two seemingly different things that are actually just different routes to the same outcome, and thereby whichever side "wins" society still keeps going in the same direction.

Executive orders like this are actually a good step in the right direction - but sadly just the last twitches of a corpse that is already dead. Because Trump isn't actually a monarch, just the figurehead for one of the largest and most intrusive democratic / communistic systems ever built.
 
Mojo said:
we don't get to he day we are ruled by executive order in my life time
Click to expand...

We already are. How else do you think trannies started getting into bathrooms everywhere?
 
FollowingHim said:
I have to throw a curve-ball in here... The whole slogan of "returning power to the people", common to both democracy and communism, is in the long run basically just a sleight-of-hand way to get the populace to accept bureaucratic infringements on every single aspect of their lives because "we voted for it so have to accept it", or "it's for our own good". Which is why our modern laws place so many more controls on individuals than any monarch in history ever did. A monarch simply doesn't have the time or interest in controlling every single individual's life - they might have a few key people they choose to oppress, but the majority mostly do their own thing.

An executive order cancelling a complex bureaucratic infringement on the lives of ordinary citizens is exactly what you'd expect a monarch to do - because that complex bureaucracy itself is the single organisation most capable of challenging his rule.

Everybody who's still swayed by the romance of "democracy" needs to read the Communist Manifesto:

The Communist Manifesto reads today like a history book, not a plan but a description of what's actually taken place over the past century or so in all Western democracies, following the abolition of monarchies. Democracy and communism are not opposites, they're exactly the same thing just at different stages of evolution. It's an illusion, just like "left" and "right" - they get us arguing over two seemingly different things that are actually just different routes to the same outcome, and thereby whichever side "wins" society still keeps going in the same direction.

Executive orders like this are actually a good step in the right direction - but sadly just the last twitches of a corpse that is already dead. Because Trump isn't actually a monarch, just the figurehead for one of the largest and most intrusive democratic / communistic systems ever built.
Click to expand...
You are very critical of America Samuel. It doesn’t seem to accompanied by an equally judgemental evaluation of your own country or even any other country. To an American it comes across as rude and juvenile. It certainly isn’t in keeping with the rest of your conversation which is generally of a more elevated level.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top