Hmmm...  Well, if they're going to go after the bishops - American citizens with every right to an opinion - they'd better go after Jeremiah Wright and every other liberal nutbar "Rev", too.

the IRS looks into the Catholic Church for their alleged political leanings, they can take a gander at the NAACP and it's very obvious leftist political support of the Dem party and virtually every liberal cause that one can name.  

"The problem is not that people are taxed too little...the problem is that government spends too much." ~President Ronald Reagan

Wouldn't people of Islam be against abortion? I'm not sure on this, though. If they are, however, someone should lobby them to lobby against abortion in the health care bill, then see how this woman reacts.

I'll point out once again to this skank:  It was a BLACK man who was on prime-time television telling the country that abortion was NOT covered.  Skank.

"essentially overrules Roe V. Wade."

Even liberal Washington Post columnist EJ Dionne doesn't believe that statement:

"From the outraged comments of the abortion-rights movement, you'd think
that Rep. Bart Stupak's amendment to the House version of the
health-care bill would all but overturn Roe v. Wade. No, it wouldn't."

The Catholic bishops appearing and having a political voice seems to be a most fundamental violation of church and state.

A perusal of left wing nut job blogs shows a basic incompetence regarding knowledge of the first amendment, the tax code, and how to do a google search for facts.

Lefties, put out the dobbies and realize that the internet extends beyond move on dot org and the daily kos.

Oh, and Nan, I suggest you put your outrageous and highly undeserved paycheck to good use and buy a blackberry.  I'm sure some intern in the mail room can teach you how to use it. 

What does section 501(c)(3) of the IRC (Internal Revenue Code) say about political campaign activity?
Section 501(c)(3) of the IRC prohibits organizations that are exempt
from federal income tax under its provisions, including Catholic
organizations exempt under the USCCB Group Ruling, from participating
or intervening in political campaigns on behalf of or in opposition to
any candidate for public office. This prohibition has been interpreted
as absolute. [See: Fact Sheet 2006-17, Election Year Activities and the Prohibition on Political Campaign Intervention for Section 501(c)(3) Organizations, at 1 (February 2006) (hereinafter "Fact Sheet"), http://www.gov/newsroom/article/0,,id=154712,00.html.]

How does the IRC limit lobbying activity by Catholic organizations?
The IRC limits the amount of lobbying in which section 501(c)(3)
organizations may engage. Under section 501(c)(3), Catholic
organizations may engage in lobbying activities only if they do not
constitute a substantial part of their total activities, measured by
time, effort, expenditure and other relevant factors. Neither the IRC
nor the regulations define what is "substantial" in this context. A few
cases suggest that the line between what is substantial and what is
insubstantial lies somewhere between 5% and 15% of an organization's
total activities. IRS does not endorse any particular percentage safe
harbor, but would clearly be more comfortable at the lower end of the
spectrum. [See: Murray Seasongood v. Commissioner, 227 F.2d 907 (6th Cir. 1955) (less than 5% time and effort was not substantial); Haswell v. U.S., 500 F.2d 1133 (Ct.Cl. 1974), cert. denied, 419 U.S. 1107 (1975) (16-20% of budget was substantial).]

Where did the political campaign intervention prohibition come from?
Contrary to popular belief, the section 501(c)(3) political campaign
intervention prohibition is not a manifestation of
Constitutionally-mandated "separation of church and state". The
prohibition applies to all section 501(c)(3) organizations, not
just churches and religious organizations. The political campaign
intervention prohibition was introduced by then-Senator Lyndon B.
Johnson during Senate floor debate on the 1954 version of the tax code.
LBJ appears to have been reacting to the support provided Dudley
Dogherty, his challenger in the 1954 primary election, by certain
tax-exempt organizations. There is no legislative history to explain
definitively why LBJ sought this amendment to the IRC. However, there
is no evidence that religious organizations were his targets. [See: Judith Kindell & John Reilly, Election Year Issues, FY 2002 IRS Exempt Organizations Technical Instruction Program at 448-451 (August 2001) (hereinafter "Election Year Issues"), http://www.irs.gov/p... Patrick L. O'Daniel, More Honored in the Breach: A Historical Perspective of the Permeable IRS Prohibition on Campaigning by Churches, 42 B.C.L.Rev. 733 (2001); Deirdre Halloran & Kevin Kearney, Federal Tax Code Restrictions on Church Political Activity, 38 Cath.Law. 105, 106-108 (1998).]

Doesn't the First Amendment protect the rights of Catholic organizations to engage in political campaign activity?
As part of the federal tax law, the section 501(c)(3) political
campaign intervention prohibition is not an absolute prohibition
against political activity by tax-exempt organizations. Rather, it is a
condition placed on the receipt of federal tax exemption. Thus, an
exempt organization has a choice between involvement in political
campaign intervention and the benefits of tax exemption. Because of
this distinction, courts have not been sympathetic to claims by
religious organizations that the section 501(c)(3) political campaign
intervention prohibition violates First Amendment rights. For example,
a few years ago the application of the political campaign intervention
prohibition to revoke the section 501(c)(3) tax exemption of a New York
church was upheld in the face of the church's challenges under the free
exercise clause of the First Amendment and the Religious Freedom
Restoration Act. [See: Branch Ministries v. Rossotti, 211 F.3d 137 (D.C. Cir. 2000).]

What is the difference between lobbying and political campaign activity?
In the most basic terms, lobbying focuses on legislation, whereas
political campaign activity focuses on candidates and campaigns for
election. Lobbying includes both direct lobbying and grassroots
lobbying. Direct lobbying means contacting members of a legislative body,
whether federal, state, or local, for the purpose of proposing,
supporting, or opposing legislation or advocating the adoption or
rejection of legislation. Grassroots lobbying means urging members of
the public to do the same. Section 501(c)(3) limits the amount of
lobbying a Catholic organization can do; it does not prohibit lobbying
outright. The lobbying limitation applies both to lobbying that is
germane to an organization's tax-exempt purposes and to lobbying that
is not. [See: Treas. Reg. § 1.501(c)(3)-1(c)(3)(ii); Rev. Rul. 67-293, 1967-2 C.B. 185.]Source. 

Dr. Nancy : "This is going to be a Pollyannaish statement. The Catholic bishops appearing and having a political voice seems to be a most fundamental violation of church and state."

Amazing how liberals have somehow turned the first amendment around to mean no freedom of speech.

As long as the Federal Government does not establish a national religion then there has been no violation of the first amendment when church leaders speak out.  They are entitled to their opinions as much as anybody.

"This is going to be a Pollyannaish statement. The Catholic bishops
appearing and having a political voice seems to be a most fundamental
violation of church and state." 

Ask the average American which constitution the phrase "separation of church and state" appears in and the majority will look at you as though only a moron wouldn't know the answer to the question. The most common reply will be "The United States Constitution".

Imagine the surprise of these same people when they discover that not only does the phrase NOT appear in the U.S. Constitution, but the words DO appear in a version of the Russian communist constitution!

In 1947, in the case Everson v. Board of Education, the Supreme Court declared, "The First Amendment has erected a wall between church and state. That wall must be kept high and impregnable. We could not approve the slightest breach." The "separation of church and state" phrase which they invoked, and which has today become so familiar, was taken from an exchange of letters between President Thomas Jefferson and the Baptist Association of Danbury, Connecticut, shortly after Jefferson became President.

The election of Jefferson – America's first Anti-Federalist President – elated many Baptists since that denomination, by-and-large, was also strongly Anti-Federalist. This political disposition of the Baptists was understandable, for from the early settlement of Rhode Island in the 1630s to the time of the federal Constitution in the 1780s, the Baptists had often found themselves suffering from the centralization of power.

Read more here:
http://www.wallbuild...

"If God is dead, somebody is going to have to take his place. It will
be megalomania or erotomania, the drive for power or the drive for
pleasure, the clenched fist or the phallus, Hitler or Hugh Hefner."
— Malcolm Muggeridge

"She absurdly claimed that the amendment by Democratic Congressman Bart
Stupak, which prohibits funding for abortion in the health care bill, "essentially overrules Roe V. Wade."

And the unicorns....think of the poor unicorns!!!!

These clowns just get dumber and dumber. But that's the beauty of liberalism. You can say the dumbest things, and no one even blinks an eye at the stupidty of it.

And since when does one surrender their 1st Amendment rights simply because they become a minister or a priest?  

BTW-Just pass the FairTax and the IRS won't be around to go after anybody. 

-Dave 

Our elected representatives have failed us.