Archive for November, 2011

‘Catholic Answers’ Takes Internal Revenue Service to the U.S. Supreme Court

November 5, 2011

‘Catholic Answers’ Takes Internal Revenue Service to the U.S. Supreme Court – U.s. – Catholic Online:

Who is it that says economic freedom has nothing to do with political freedoms? Here is a federal agency that inflicted punishment on a non-profit for SPEECH they didn’t like by claiming a tax they did NOT owe, which fact they recognized when they did an Orwellian doublespeak twist by giving them a pass on the tax — a recognition they had no legal standing– but still claiming that they had authority to impose the tax.

The Supreme Court in 1819, in one of the earlier twisted decision, claimed rightly that “the power to tax is the power to destroy”. In that decision, written by Judge Marshall, they pretended to be totally oblivious to the “power to destroy” by the subtle taxing and currency power gratuitously given to a Central Bank with private ownership, pretending Congress and the president had such subtly tyrannical powers over one side of every single commercial transaction in the country.

That was when too few –as today– only the owners of the Central Banks and a few of their political operatives really understood the colossal dictatorial power it meant over the lives of citizens.

But here came Johnson and tricked the country and people of faith into applying to the tax collectors for exemption from taxes they never owed in the first place. The applicable laws have not changed, but the deafening silence on the part of those who CLAIM to be militant in defense of individual rights is significant testimony to the times and the dangers.

But that group has another problem: they’re claiming exemption under 501c3 status.


Does the law require, or even encourage, a church to organize as a 501c3? To answer that question let’s turn to what the IRS itself has to say

Churches Need Not Apply

In order to be considered for tax-exempt status by the IRS an organization must fill out and submit IRS Form 1023 and 1024. However, note what the IRS says regarding churches and church ministries, in Publication 557: Some organizations are not required to file Form 1023. These include: Churches,

interchurch organizations of local units of a church, conventions or associations of churches, or integrated auxiliaries of a church, such as a men’s or women’s organization, religious school, mission society, or youth group. These organizations are exempt automatically if they meet the requirements of section 501(c)(3). Churches Are “Automatically Tax-Exempt”

According to IRS Code § 508(c)(1)(A):

Special rules with respect to section 501(c)(3) organizations. (a) New organizations must notify secretary that they are applying for recognition of section 501(c)(3) status. (c) Exceptions. (1) Mandatory exceptions. Subsections (a) and (b) shall not apply to— (A) churches, their integrated auxiliaries, and conventions or associations of churches. This is referred to as the “mandatory exception” rule. Thus, we see from the IRS’ own publications, and the tax code, that it is completely unnecessary for any church to apply for tax-exempt status. In the IRS’ own words a church “is automatically tax-exempt.”

Churches Are “Automatically Tax-Deductible”

And what about tax-deductibility? Doesn’t a church still need to become a 501c3 so that contributions to it can be taken as a tax deduction? The answer is no! According to IRS Publication 526:

Organizations That Qualify To Receive Deductible Contributions You can deduct your contributions only if you make them to a qualified organization. To become a qualified organization, most organizations other than churches and governments, as described below, must apply to the IRS. In the IRS’ own words a church “is automatically tax-deductible.”


Prayer session outside public elementary school causes controversy in Florida « Hot Air

November 5, 2011

Now there’s an idea:

Prayer session outside public elementary school causes controversy in Florida « Hot Air:

Law of nature ‘not so constant’ after all

November 5, 2011

Law of nature ‘not so constant’ after all

Take note that as quickly as the second paragraph, they subtly divulge one common thread that runs through a lot of the thinking of science today, and that it relates to the “true origins” discussion:

Professor John Webb, from the University of New South Wales, and colleagues, say their findings could help explain why it was possible for life to develop on Earth but perhaps not in other parts of the universe.

Then further on:

“The answer may be that other regions of the universe are not quite so favourable for life and the laws of physics we measure in our part of the universe are merely ‘local by-laws’, in which case it is no particular surprise to find life here.”

See, they know, somewhere inside, that Guillermo Gonzalez was right in his book, The Privileged Planet, that we are in a unique place with a very unique combination of conditions in a very special universe that has a design that “appears to be” intended for life. Here they discover yet another way that Guillermo Gonzalez is absolutely right on with the main idea of the book, and yet they do a pretend ho-hum, that explains it, an intellectually nervous kind of reaction.

The anthropic principle –and the privileged planet principle– is a big monster for them hovering over their shoulders in all the science they do, and they’re trying to exorcise the ghost and they keep failing miserably, and they know it. But they keep on cheering themselves on, keeping hope alive.

The physics of the universe, the configuration of the local spacial neighborhood and the universe itself, the confluence of conditions for our planet, everything points to a designed Creation.

2 Corinthians 13:8 For we can do nothing against the truth, but for the truth.