Freedom of Religion or Freedom from Religion?

Amendment I of the Constitution of the United States begins with some famous words: "Congress shall make no laws respecting the establishment of a religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof..." This simple phrase has created storms of controversy, but oddly enough, very little controversy until the middle of the 20th century. In Engel vs Vitale, 370 US 421, the US Supreme Court declared unconstitutional a practice which had taken place in many US schools for years. This practice was the beginning of each day with a prayer that had been composed by the state and ordered to be recited by all students. While the prayer was faith neutral, the prayer nonetheless was a religious exercise. The Supreme Court held that the practice was unconstitutional and overturned the practice.

This decision has been decried by many churches, but none so much as the religious right. They have generally portrayed this decision as "banning prayer in schools", and "banning religion in schools". In this they are either deliberatly ignorant or are deliberatly misreading the opinion of the Court. The Court said nothing of the sort. The Supreme Court, in fact, has ruled over and over that religion is not banned in schools, nor is prayer. However, state-sponsored religion is not allowed because this violates the establishment clause of the 1st Amendment.

Most religious organizations, including churches, are organized as tax exempt entities under Section 501(c) of the Internatl Revenue Code. However, it should be noted that religious institutions are not the only types of organizations that are so organized. Schools and charities of many different types also hold 501(c) status. This is because, like a church or other religious institution, their income is tax exempt, and donations to those orgnizations is usually tax deductible. The income is tax exempt and (usually) deductible because the government has decided it is in the best interest of the state that those organizations be allowed to devote more of their resources to their stated goal: religious, educational or charitable. With this important exemption, comes a special caveat: Holders of a 501(c) tax status may not endorse any particular candidate without risking the revocation of their 501(c) status.

Many of the religious right see this as a violation of the 1st amendment in that it somehow infringes upon their exercise of their faith. On the contrary, this provision was placed in the code to protect churches and other organizations from being distracted in their mission. Their mission, if a church, is to spread the word of their religion. If they are advocating one particular political candidate, they are not spreading their faith, but the message of another. For instance, Jesus Christ is not running for office. To advocate the word of Christ is the duty of Christians everywhere, of any denomination. To advocate for any particular candidate (in the pulpit, etc) is a violation of the trust and special privileges granted to religious institutions.

In closing, let me point out one more thing: There is no "right" to be exempt from taxation for religious institutions written in the Constitution. The government has chosen, as a matterof public policy, that it is in the interest of society to do so. However, Congress could, if it so chooses, remove religious institutions from the 501(c) list, and as long as they were taxed the same as any other business, it would most likely survive constitutional muster. I am NOT saying that they would or could do so, but it would be constitutional.

As we listen to the leaders of our house of worship in this election time, let us remember that they should preach the beliefs of the faith, and then allow their congregants to decide how to vote on their own.