[RickJ]

A newly formed grassroots pro-life group from Iowa has won a case against the IRS following accusations the federal agency posed "prejudicial" questions of the group.

"The IRS agent said [the agency] was terribly concerned because there was a reference to some prayers outside of a Planned Parenthood facility... "

In a letter, the IRS specifically requested the details about the content of the prayers and posed other questions.

The above excerpts are from here.

HOW IN THE WORLD does the IRS have the right to ask about the details of what prayers would be prayed when deciding on whether an organization can/should get tax exempt status?

After some communication from a legal organization, the group was given tax exempt status... but the IRS gave NO explanation on why they had a right to ask such questions before granting the tax exempt status.

I hope that a tax expert will comment on this...

[N0help4u]

Because the government questions every little thing the conservatives do while they turn their heads to every little thing the left does.

WHY because we are becoming the Big Brother is watching us country. Same reason the government is taking control of our bank, auto industry, etc...

If a non profit organization endorses political candidates, engages in secterian prayer, speaks against homosexuality they are subject to the IRS coming into the picture.

Here is another link to the story
IRS tells pro-lifers to give up 1st Amendment

I remember a year or so ago PETA was protesting some place and they were naked and in cages right outside the door of the place they were protesting and nothing was done. I wondered what ever happened to the law that protesters have to be across the street from the place they are protesting.

Here is a story on how the IRS uses prayer against places.
American Civil Liberties Union : ACLU of Virginia Weighs in on Sectarian Prayers at Chesapeake City Council Meetings

[Fr_Chuck]

Religious groups are not allowed under IRS rulings to be involved in political activities.

The IRS is trying to make abortion a political issue since normally most democrats are for it, and the other side against it.

Abortion and esp Planned Parenthood is a big lobby group, throwing millions of dollars in Washington to be protected.

[tomder55]

It is a debatable point if a religious organization should get tax exempt status and I guess it is debatable if the Thomas Moore Society is in fact a religious organization or a political action committee .

But ,since the gvt. Allows tax exempt status for both , there is no way that the status should be conditional on surrendering 1st Amendment rights.

What this indicates to me is that there is a firm bias creaping into the permanent bureaucracy against pro-life organizations . Such demands should not even have to be contested because such demands should never be made in the 1st place.

[N0help4u]

.

What this indicates to me is that there is a firm bias creaping into the permanent bureaucracy against pro-life organizations . Such demands should not even have to be contested because such demands should never be made in the 1st place.

Exactly but just as they changed the constitution from freedom of religion to freedom from religion they are chipping away at the real meaning of everything else they don't like

[AtlantaTaxExpert]

My comment about any perceived bias on the part of our government or the IRS towards the conservative versus the liberal movement is that there is no institutional bias, but there IS bias driven by the individuals in the various bureacracies, and it runs BOTH ways.

Example: I KNOW for fact that the armed forces are VERY conservative by nature (though you would be surprised how open-minded some of their higher-ranking officers were), whereas, In my opinion, officials in the Departments of Educations or Health and Human Services would tend to be more liberal. It's the nature of their work that would drive these tendencies.

Now, as for the matter at hand, should the IRS have asked the questions on content of prayer? No, of course not.

Should they have asked if prayers were being said? Possibly, if they were trying to determine the nature of the pro-life group, i.e. were they religiously-based or were a secular organization? Note: Though most pro-life groups are religiously-based, there ARE secular pro-life organizations.

If the group is religiously-based, then the issue that Fr Chuck identified (Religious groups are not allowed under IRS rulings to be involved in political activities) may come into play. I suspect that was the intent of the IRS solicitation in this case. i.e. to determine if a religious, tax-exempt organization was in fact engaging in some type of political activity or perhaps even breaking the law. Overly intrusive? Maybe, but the IRS has wide latitude as to what kind of questions they can ask.

Having read the Wold Net Daily story, I note that it was noticeably short (lacking any depth or evidence of any detailed analysis or investigation on the part of the reporter who wrote it and, who, not surprisingly, failed to attach his name to it)!

Further, it is decidedly one-sided, as I saw no IRS response to the lawyer's remarks nor any notation that the IRS refused to comment, nor any possible explanation or analysis as to why the IRS may be asking these types of questions, leaving open the inference that they are trying to suppress the organization's First Amendment rights.

NOTE: The other link provided by NoHelp4U about supposed IRS interference in prayer (American Civil Liberties Union : ACLU of Virginia Weighs in on Sectarian Prayers at Chesapeake City Council Meetings ) does not even mention the IRS ANYWHERE in the article.

BOTTOM LINE: This is a non-issue! An official of the IRS probably asked some questions that were best left unasked, but the result was hardly consequential, and merely provided an opportunity for some attorney to "grandstand" publicly about how the IRS is abusing its power.

If this is the greatest extent of IRS abuse of power (and, based on historical precedence, this is NOTHING compared to some of the things the IRS did in the 1980s and 1990s), then I will sleep soundly at night and definitely NOT worry about the IRS bogeyman!

[RickJ]

Thank you, ATL. That does make me feel a bit better. Humans are humans. I know there are good ones and not so good ones in EVERY organization whether that organization be government, secular and/or religious.

[tomder55]

When I see the IRS deskjocky disciplined for this then I will believe there is no creeping institutional bias . The permanent bureacracy entrenches and it doesn't matter which party is in control. They just outlast them . I don't know how prevalent this is in the IRS ,but in other agencies the bias is clear.

[RickJ]

When I see the IRS deskjocky disciplined for this then I will believe there is no creeping institutional bias . .

That was my first thought. I am surprised to not hear a reply from the IRS (institutionally speaking) about the agent's behavior in this matter.

[AtlantaTaxExpert]

I suspect the IRS employee involved in this matter probably did get at least a talking-to by his supervisor about what and what NOT to ask in such matters.

However, WE will never hear about it, because Office of Personnel Management rules prevents revealing such disciplinary matter to the public.

[RickJ]

Oh fooey. We'd love to hear that the employee at least got 30 lashes with a wet noodle :)

[tomder55]

From my perspective his actions represent the actions of the IRS . When they get exposed using intimidation tactics on citizens it is up to them to make it clear that these are not the positions of the agency. As you are aware;the IRS has been used as a political weapon in the past.