IRS Strikes Deal With Atheist Group to Monitor Content of Sermons

IRS Strikes Deal With Atheist Group to Monitor Content of Sermons. More harassment. First non-profit political organizations and now churches. You can bet no one will be spying in Mosques.

This post was last modified on February 10, 2021

CO2Insanity: Tired of the CO2 BS and all the other BS in the US and the world.

View Comments (40)

  • The employees of the IRS might as well start wearing brown shirts with Obama's logo and start calling themselves the IRSS. Won't be long before the administration starts blaming the Jews for everything wrong and starts little summer camps for those who don't think correctly to go get their head screwed on straight, straight as in Obama worship and political correctness....

    • They better polish those jack boots too. If they don't shine just right, you can't see the expressions on the faces of those that they are oppressing.

    • Then you get more issues like Catholicsbeing required tonoffer coverage for abortion. The churches would not want tax dollars spent on stuff they don't believeis morally correct.

      • However if pastors/priests, church workers and parishioners work anyway their tax money does go to those things... :-/

      • Exactly.

        Since people are taxed to death, they are in a position where they cannot freely donate to their churches the true 10% or more of what they truly earn. If people were allowed to keep more of their true earned funds, there will be no need for churches to be tax exempt as more people will be able to donate to them as they please.

        • I would prefer to keep the churches tax exempt, remove the authority from the government for taking care of the poor and indigent, and let the churches go back to doing that. Lower taxes by what is spent on those social programs, and the people will donate to the churches, because they know more of the money will get to where it's needed, because there is no bureaucracy to eat up 80% or more of the money.

          • Yes. If people's taxes are lowered considerably there is no need for government to do welfare on the scale that it does now.

          • Of course. It is Biblical. Not sure what you mean though. I am not endorsing "forced" charity. I am endorsing the Government taking less of my money so I can truly be charitable with what I truly earn.

            One things that bothers me greatly is that I can work and earn for a certain amount but even BEFORE I actually get my money it is already cut down and more than 10%. The government can get 20-70% in taxes , depending on salary, before it reaches the person's bank account/hands.

            That is theft! Then how can one truly donate any desired percentage to a charity/church from what one actually earns? One can only donate from what one gets AFTER the government taxes... that is evil!

            THEN there are the OTHER government taxes that one incurs in day to day life.

            I mean what is this? Hell?!

          • By forced charity, I mean government with one hand in your pocket, the other on their gun, giving your money to the people THEY decide deserve it.

          • When some churches are using their tax exempt money to build things like the Crystal Cathedral, I have a bit of a problem believing that they're all doing good charitable work. There has to be some way of differentiating between charitable work, and empire building. Empire building should NOT be tax exempt.

          • I also have a problem with mega churches, and prosperity preachers on TV, as well as other problems that give Christianity a black eye. I know firsthand that there are many community churches that do a lot of good and would love to do more. I'm positive that if they had access to a fraction of the money our government wastes this world would be a much better place.
            Don't judge Christianity through mans actions, you will be disappointed. Judge it through Christ. He did run the money changers out of the temple.

          • Being an atheist, some people might find it interesting that one of the stops on my charity tour is a church in Barre, VT. But, since this is NOT an empire building church, but a church that does good things for it's community, I don't have a problem with it. I don't really care WHY somebody does good things, just that they do them.

          • I find what you are saying interesting. I am not sure if we are of the same mind. So that is why I would like to more more about your meaning.

            What do you mean by empire building per se?

            Is this an indictment on how the Roman Catholics (starting with Constantine) went about it? AND/OR an indictment on people creating palatial churches that seem to take precedence over taking care for the poor?

            Because if it is that... we totally agree, for I am against that.

            However, if it means that you don't approve of people that go out there to (peacefully) speak of the Lord Jesus to people, that can be considered as "empire building" but since it is an important part of our Commission as Christians, can't say that I agree to find that bad.

          • We are not disagreeing under the issue that either no one pays taxes or the tax situation as it stands right now needs to be overhauled so more money stays in the hands of people so only those that wish to give to their churches (for whatever reason) do so and churches don't have to be exempt.

          • I also believe people should be able to donate their money to the building of obscenely expensive shrines to their earthly evangelists. But if the rest of us have to pay taxes, that money should also be taxed.

          • I believe that if people want to give their money to their churches so they can build palatial houses of worship that is their prerogative. If doing the work of Christ is actually put waaaaayyyyy to the side or utterly replaced by the sake of palatial building and entertainment and false philosophies then that is a problem for me personally as a Christian.

            If people are stupid enough to continue to give their money to these extravagant churches/places of worship (as Muslims are not exempt of this, nor Buddhist, nor Taoists, etc. I have been to Japan and their temples can be truly crazy and awesome), where entertainment, fake ass philosophies, hypocrisies and palatial building takes precendence over the work that they should be doing instead, then that is those people's problem.

            I believe that everyone should either not be taxed at all and let the government work for their money like everyone else if that is possible, or there should be a flat tax or a purchase tax or something done to change the tax format as it stands now.

            I don't believe that charity work should be exempt. The reason why people put in the charity giving they have done in their taxes is because of the problems I placed above. If people were allowed to keep their own money, there is no need to ask the government for crumbs back.

          • I could also expand that to some of the cathedrals the Catholics have built, among other denominations.

            First, let me say that I don't like the present tax structure, I think EVERYONE is paying too much, and it's assessed unfairly. That said, why should the money spent building ornate shrines be tax exempt? In my opinion, only the money spent on charitable work should be exempt.

          • OIC I see that as greed and stupid people who are into entertainment. I guess what I see as building of an empire or kingdom is different from what he means so that makes sense.

  • Leave it to the left to once again using the IRS to silence those that oppose what the IRS and the radical atheists want. Poppajoe49 is right there are those who are atheists who just do what they do and then you have the loud mouths who want to be the focal point of all the attention.

    I do like asking those who proclaim to being atheists why they celebrate Christmas and Easter. I ask them why they are not working. Boy the confused and stammering is priceless. I ask those who are practices of other faiths such as Hindu, Buddhist, Jehovah Witness the same questions.

    • I was married to a Jehovah's Witness for ten years. I loved the way they ignored the holidays. Holidays had never meant anything to me, just another day. But if you're married to someone who celebrates them, you have to go along to keep the peace.

  • This makes no sense.... a real atheist would not give a whip about christian sermons...

    • Actually, it does make sense. Atheists aren't content in their own beliefs. They want to change yours as well.

    • Actually, it does make sense. Many atheists are so angry at religious people, that they want to do everything possible to hurt them.

      • I am thinking our Flash would agree that as a real atheist he and others like him wouldn't give a crap about what someone says in a place that he doesn't go to and he doesn't believe in.

        This is more about not believing in G-d. This is about hating people. These people are giving real atheists a bad name. This people believe in a Higher Power they just don't want to accept His existence and hate the people that propagate His Name/Message. This is in many ways a spiritual war of great magnitude.

        I do kind feel bad for them, for this is a war they ain't gonna win, but it is rather annoying.

        • These are the activist atheists, they spend all their time bringing lawsuits against churches and towns for having a Nativity Scene on display. The kind of atheist Flash is, is the kind of atheist that does their thing and lets us do ours.

          • Since the monitoring is most likely just to make sure the churches don't say anything in favor of conservatism, I would be against it. If it were to make sure that a tax exempt entity isn't actually a political entity, in either direction, I'd be ok with it.

            Of course, I'm for EVERYONE being a tax exempt entity, but that's just my Libertarianism showing.

          • However the hypocrisy is that as long as the churches toe the liberal line, these liberals and so called atheists would leave them alone. So in the end, this is not really about keeping it real, it is about hating on people of religious affiliation and curbing their rights and wanting to control speech, which is unconstitutional.

Related Post
  1. DALLAS POLICE SHOOTING: ‘ZOMBIE APOCALYPSE ASSAULT VEHICLE AND TROOP TRANSPORT’
  2. Kim Jong-un was a child prodigy
  3. Top GOP Leader Promises Total Amnesty In 2015