Scientology’s Most Important Allies

jerryf25

Patron

For many years, the U.S. federal government and the American legal system have been the CofS’s most important allies.

Websites and book after book get published that clearly document CofS abuses and crimes. And yet, U.S. government and legal support for the CofS remains in place.

Others who are more knowledgeable than me on the legal scene might want to share their opinion on whether the legal climate in the U.S. is improving; the Narconon lawsuits, for example. Public education efforts by the news media, former church members and authors such as Janet Reitman and Lawrence Wright seem to be paying off.


Two examples of types of action that might eventually have a cumulative effect of reducing U.S. government and legal system leniency toward the church of scientology:

1. More countries worldwide deciding not to give the CofS recognition as a tax exempt organization or a religion.
Many have already done so. A summary or analysis of successful actions in those countries would be helpful. (Status by Country).

2. Fewer American mainstream churches supporting CofS status as a bona fide religion.
An example from Tony Ortega’s Blog: Episcopal Church Objects to Being Included in Supreme Court Brief Supporting Scientology


The Laura DeCrescenzo lawsuit (2012, July 2013) could have a large social impact. It has elements that broad segments of American society can emotionally relate to and might help awaken a sense of civic duty in government officials:

  • Blatant violation of child labor laws
  • Intense pressure to have an abortion
  • Church denial of wrongdoing in the face of obvious suffering by the plaintiff
  • Years of legal stalling tactics by the church to prevent being accountable
Overall, a clear example of the anti-social nature of the CofS


Related

Thread at Anonymous on the IRS tax exemption decision.

ESMB thread: the reason the FBI won't do anything
 

Gadfly

Crusader
On another thread I asked (and nobody answered), what it would take to REMOVE Scientology's tax-exempt status.

This blurb from IRS Tax Exemption Racketeered IRS Commissioner Fred Goldberg explains:

IRS Commissioner Fred Goldberg was allegedly photographed screwing a kid on his bed in his residence, photographed by Scientology who allegedly sent the kid to Goldberg in the first place, according to completely unfounded rumors. Some IRS employees have spoken a bit about what they observed of the Scientology criminals entering Goldberg's office, and the consequences to Mr. Goldberg's visible stability and health after the visit, and blackmail for something certainly sounds reasonable.

Some taxing questions. (interview with Fred Goldberg of the Bipartisan Commission on Entitlements and Tax Reform) (Interview) | Financial Executive | Find Articles at BNET

The IRS Commissioner fled the agency almost immediately after he was allegedly blackmailed in to granting exemption status, and a ROI -- Report of Investigation -- was created by the IRS and the U. S. Treasury which looked in to the racketeering blackmail that resulted in Goldberg granting exemption.

All ROIs are always subject to the Freedom of Information Act requests however every attempt by ARSCC people as well as regular people of the United States has their FOIA request for the ROI denied. I filed a FOIA for the ROI and was informed that the document contained "matters of national security" and as such could not be released.

When I filed a complaint about that ruling I was then told that the ROI contained "tax return information" and as such could not be released.

Everyone who have tried to obtain the ROI have been denied full divulging of the 123 sheets of embarrassing, criminally damaging documentation. I was informed by the IRS FOIA fulfillment lady that I talked with that ROIs have never previously been denied and that the document I was after was the only one she had ever heard about being denied.

DOX:

My FOIA was for IRS ROI number 8-901-0002 which was mentioned in IRS Press Release 31 Dec 1997, IR 97-50

The denials by the IRS to divulge the criminally damaging information have been mentioned elsewhere on the network, notably

The investigation in to IRS Tax exemption: ROI 8-9801-0002 - alt.religion.scientology | Google Gruplar

"A review of the TIGTA indices revealed that one (1) file is responsive to your to your request for a copy of TIGTA report "8-9801-0002 … TIGTA Report of Investigation (ROI) # 8 -9801 - 0002 consists of one hundred and twenty-three (123) pages. Sixty-two (62) of those pages constitute information which originated with the IRS; we are therefore referring those pages to the IRS for a release determination and direct reply to you."



That is a report by the U. S. Treasury which probably wished they had talked with the IRS before admitting the document existed. The U. S. Treasury had the legal responsibility under the law to release the document and yet they passed the responsibility on to the IRS under the guise that one page more than half originated with the IRS.

The IRS then denied the release of the document, claiming "contains matters of national security" and then, after I called the fuckers on it, later changed their story to claim the document "contains return information."

When I informed the crooks -- politely, always polite and professionally -- that 501(c)3's like Scientology must divulge their return information and, besides, I knew what the document covered and that I knew it did not contain tax return information, the IRS suggested that I file a second appeal so that my request for the document could be held up in denial indefinitely and by law the IRS and U. S. Treasury could continue to deny the document.

I did not file a second appeal. The IRS will not release the ROI because it contains their own investigation in to the racketeering crimes Scientology committed and evidence covering why and how the Scientology crime syndicate blackmailed Mr. Fred Goldberg, all of which would not only be massively embarrassing to the IRS but would continue to undermine America's trust in the IRS.

At core, the ROI which explains how and why the Scientology crooks got tax exemption is not being released is because of money. How many people would continue to pay taxes knowing that the IRS Commissioner Fred Goldberg did this?

The 9th circuit court of appeals California heard Mr. Sklar's arguments pertaining to tax deductions for Jewish religious materials.

Scientologist Tax Trial to Open Today

The Jewish people lost

Couple Lose Bid for Tax Refund Tied to Tuition - Los Angeles Times

The reasoning was that such tax exemption is illegal and the fact that the Scientology crime syndicate was illegally granted exemption was stated by the tree Judges as not being grounds to allow legitimate religions to also violate the laws of the United States.

In the denial opinion summary, one of the Judges specifically stated that the IRS needs to be sued to make full disclosure of the events which resulted in IRS Commissioner Fred Goldberg committing the crime of granting the crime syndicate tax exemption.

I looked in to what it would take to sue the IRS and one of the people I contacted was a surprise, the details of which I can't divulge in public but which has haunted me since then because I really want to get the person I found on camera for an interview, hopefully before he dies.

But that's irrelevant, the guy I contacted said that suing the IRS for full disclosure of the ROI would take decades to get through the courts and lots and lots of money.

And so it stands. The Scientology crime syndicate racketeered their tax exemption and the criminal investigation resulted in an ROI that the IRS and U. S. Treasury are too fucking afraid to release to the public.

And the IRS / UST are right to be afraid because the racketeering and the tax exemption undermine the financial foundation of the tax system in this country. The act shits upon American's notions of what's right and we all hate taxes enough that the IRS and the UST fear massive unrest and uprising if the full details about Scientology's crime and then later Mr,. Goldberg's crime were to be made public.
 

Lermanet_com

Gold Meritorious Patron
Thanks for this. During the 2nd time $cientology tried to settle RTC vs Lerma they made an offer through one of the partners at my insurance supplied lawfirm, Ross Dixon & Masback, In his office he was leaning on me to take the money.. I don't recall the amount, it was what I considered chump change.

He did say, "Arnie, $cientology has friends in high places" - I was too shell shocked at the time to think to query that statement for more detail.

I do wonder how deep this rabbit hole goes, there is more implication about this in the Excalibur Timeline thread between Caroline and I HERE

And to Gadfly:

Brian Haney told me that he called in a favor and had a partner at the law firm that Goldberg moved to after his stint at the IRS, ask him about the settlement. He said Goldberg replied something like "One more word and you will have my resignation"

I believe the PI that took that video may have been a PI whose name (phonetically) sounds like cry-wee-kee.. Kieth Henson dug that up years ago.. And there's this tidbit from another PI that was helping an ex-member who was targeted by Scn in DC...for being my friend.. who said he was hired to retrieve an incriminating video tape made of an IRS Commissioner... Oh, one more tidbit, the latter PI said that $cientology had the reputation amongst investigators in DC area of hiring more call girls and guys than any other corporation seeking "leverage' on the US Congress.

This all sounds perfectly in character for an organization whose prime director governed by the following operating policy:

Day 2, page 23, Clearwater Commission Hearings, L Ron Hubbard's son speaking under oath: http://www.lermanet.com/82cwcommission/2-021-040.htm "my father always felt that he was above the law because he had created the law. He created whatever rules, regulations, and laws to be lived by.

There was only one sin in Scientology, which was repeated to me at least a few thousand times, which is, getting caught."
 
Last edited:

AnonKat

Crusader
Don't forget the Mormons

[video=youtube;06jF1EG8o-Q]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=06jF1EG8o-Q[/video]
 

Lermanet_com

Gold Meritorious Patron
Re mormons, I believe Miscavige's attorney, William Drescher (pardon spelling) may be using the Mormon template,

Joseph Smith would be their Hubbard,

Brigham Young .. would be the Asthmatic Dwarf
 

Gadfly

Crusader
Don't forget the Mormons

[video=youtube;06jF1EG8o-Q]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=06jF1EG8o-Q[/video]

I love the soundtrack that repeats over an over:

DUMB - DUMB - DUMB - DUMB - DUMB - DUMB - DUMB - DUMB - DUMB - DUMB . . . . .

"Why would he make it up?" Gotta love that logic. :hysterical:
 

Wants2Talk

Silver Meritorious Patron
The lady who is executive producer of Entertainment Tonight is there most important ally. Pop culture rules-like it or not.
 
Thanks for this. During the 2nd time $cientology tried to settle RTC vs Lerma they made an offer through one of the partners at my lisurance supplied lawfirm, Ros Dixon & Masback, In his office he was leading on me to take the money.. I don't recall the amount, it was what I considered chump change.

He did say, "Arnie, $cientology has friends in high places" - I was too shell shocked at the time to think to query that statement for more detail.

I do wonder how deep this rabbit hole goes, there is more implication about this in the Excalibur Timeline thread between Caroline and I HERE

And to Gadfly:

Brian Haney told me that he called in a favor and had a partner at the law firm that Goldberg moved to after his stint at the IRS, ask him about the settlement. He said Goldberg replied something like "One more word and you will have my resignation"

I believe the PI that took that video may have been a PI whose name (phonetically) sounds like cry-wee-kee.. Kieth Henson dug that up years ago.. And there's this tidbit from another PI that was helping an ex-member who was targeted by Scn in DC...for being my friend.. who said he was hired to retrieve an incriminating video tape made of an IRS Commissioner... Oh, one more tidbit, the latter PI said that $cientology had the reputation amongst investigators in DC area of hiring more call girls and guys than any other corporation seeking "leverage' on the US Congress.

This all sounds perfectly in character for an organization whose prime director governed by the following operating policy:

Day 2, page 23, Clearwater Commission Hearings, L Ron Hubbard's son speaking under oath: http://www.lermanet.com/82cwcommission/2-021-040.htm "my father always felt that he was above the law because he had created the law. He created whatever rules, regulations, and laws to be lived by.

There was only one sin in Scientology, which was repeated to me at least a few thousand times, which is, getting caught."

o yeah?

well arnie lerma has high friends in places bub..
 

AnonyMary

Formerly Fooled - Finally Free
I have posted about this multiple times over the past 7 years... It's not complicated. Here is a simple article which explains what one has to do to keep a nonprofit 501(c3) religious or other nonprofit status. In order to lose it, it has to be documented that the organization violated the requirements to get and keep the status.

It’s easy for a nonprofit organization to maintain its tax exempt status—and can be just as easy to lose it.

Each year, the IRS revokes the tax-exempt status of more than 100 501(c)(3) organizations. Organizations recognized as exempt from federal income tax under this section of the Internal Revenue Code include private foundations as well as churches, educational institutions, hospitals, and many other types of public charities.

But these organizations can maintain their tax-exempt status if they heed the rules in six areas:

Private benefit/inurement
Lobbying
Political campaign activity
Unrelated business income (UBI)
Annual reporting obligation
Operation in accord with stated exempt purpose(s)

(Note: The following subjects are described briefly. If you want more information about each area, visit the Tax-Exempt Status Virtual Workshop on the IRS educational micro-site, www.stayexempt.irs.gov.

Read on for specific explanations
http://www.nonprofitrisk.org/library/articles/How_to_Lose_Your_Tax_Exempt_Status.shtml
 

secretiveoldfag

Silver Meritorious Patron
It has been evident since things started moving in 2008 that effective action against CoS will be taken by the American media. And I believe the media effect is speeding up.

As more and more information is fed into the media circus, eventually it will achieve critical mass and bingo, the political machine will begin to move. But not before.
 

ClearedSP

Patron with Honors
I have posted about this multiple times over the past 7 years... It's not complicated. Here is a simple article which explains what one has to do to keep a nonprofit 501(c3) religious or other nonprofit status. In order to lose it, it has to be documented that the organization violated the requirements to get and keep the status.


http://www.nonprofitrisk.org/library/articles/How_to_Lose_Your_Tax_Exempt_Status.shtml

Although that's all true, at least in theory, here's what they aren't telling you: enforcement doesn't exist. In the last 60 years, one "church" lost its 501(c)(3) status due to political activities, and that was over 20 years ago. They do strip around a hundred (non-church) nonprofits of their status a year, but there are close to 2M 501(c)(3)s registered, so that means they're weeding out 0.005% every year.

Right now, to strip a fake church of its tax exempt status, some high ranking IRS person has to initiate the process, and neither the IRS or the courts can figure out who the right person(s) to do that might be. Thus, there has been zero action against political organizations disguised as churches since 2009. No warnings given, no appearance that anyone's even holding the enforcement positions anymore. It seems as if the people that used to do that have been reallocated.

IRS enforcement against real or fake churches on other than political grounds, appears to be even rarer, i.e., nonexistent.

The basic problem is that, the moment the laws start being enforced, there's going to be a political shitstorm. Aside from Congress, who have only made matters worse, government clearly wants to avoid the subject entirely. The federal courts have said, for example, that a completely racist "church" spun off by the KKK is (in some contexts, at least) a protected religion, as is Satanism, regardless of tax status, or socially redeeming qualities. They basically don't care what you teach, so long as you claim that it's somehow religious; they don't want to deal with content. During the last election, a couple of thousand preachers got on their pulpits and screamed that Obama was the antichrist and so on, put videos of their sermons onto DVDs, and sent them in to the IRS. As long as the IRS says that they don't know who's responsible for initiating enforcement, they get to keep sitting on their hands. When it comes to religion, and fake religion, our government are PATHETIC, SPINELESS WIMPS.
 
Last edited:

Lermanet_com

Gold Meritorious Patron
It has been evident since things started moving in 2008 that effective action against CoS will be taken by the American media. And I believe the media effect is speeding up.

As more and more information is fed into the media circus, eventually it will achieve critical mass and bingo, the political machine will begin to move. But not before.


Well, I was told by a volunteer lobbyist, a minister, to start making lists of members who would be willing to testify before a congressional committee, and to make lists of those who would have to be subpeona'd to testify (for those who had taken money for silence, and could not voluntarily appear...due to the signed "agreement" with the cult). This was about 6-8 weeks before 911. Then everything changed... and that was then end of that.

I know we are again reaching critical mass, but just yesterday US, Jordanian and IDF troops reportedly entered Syria....and China and Russia said they would not stand for another disgusting fiasco like Libya.
 

AnonyMary

Formerly Fooled - Finally Free
Well this might help expedite an investigation if this woman is still the PR rep for CoS Las Vegas..

PR Director of Scientology’s Las Vegas Celebrity Center Arrested in Plot to Assassinate a Cop
This week, she became known for something else. As a result of a police investigation that began in April, on Tuesday Newman and a six-time felon and registered sex offender named David Allen Brutsche, 42, were arrested for planning what police are calling a bizarre plot to kidnap and kill a random local police officer in a macabre publicity stunt to promote their “sovereign citizen” views.
http://tonyortega.org/2013/08/23/pr...center-arrested-in-plot-to-assassinate-a-cop/

Yes it's hard to get a church revoked.. but it can be done. Just requires documentation

IRS regs and info:
Restrictions on Church Inquiries and Examinations

Restrictions on church inquiries and examinations apply only to churches (including organizations claiming to be churches if such status has not been recognized by the IRS) and conventions or associations of churches. They do not apply to related persons or organizations. Thus, for example, the rules do not apply to schools that, although operated by a church, are organized as separate legal entities. Similarly, the rules do not apply to integrated auxiliaries of a church.

Restrictions on church inquiries and examinations do not apply to all church inquiries by the IRS. See Situations in which church audit procedures do not apply for more information.
( http://www.irs.gov/Charities-&-Non-...in-Which-Church-Audit-Procedures-Do-Not-Apply )

The procedures of Internal Revenue Code section 7611 will be used in initiating and conducting any inquiry or examination into whether an excess benefit transaction (as that term is used in Code section 4958) has occurred between a church and an insider.
http://www.irs.gov/Charities-&-Non-...rictions-on-Church-Inquiries-and-Examinations

"Integrated Auxiliary of a Church" Defined ( Narconon etc are not qualified under this rule )

The term integrated auxiliary of a church refers to a class of organizations that are related to a church or convention or association of churches, but are not such organizations themselves. In general, the IRS will treat an organization that meets the following three requirements as an integrated auxiliary of a church. The organization must:

Be described both as an Internal Revenue Code section 501(c)(3) organization and be a public charity under Code section 509(a)(1), (2), or (3),
Be affiliated with a church or convention or association of churches, and
Receive financial support primarily from internal church sources as opposed to public or governmental sources.

Men's and women's organizations, seminaries, mission societies and youth groups that satisfy the first two requirements above are considered integrated auxiliaries whether or not they meet the internal support requirement.
Source: Publication 1828, Tax Guide for Churches and Religious Organizations
http://www.irs.gov/Charities-&-Non-...ons/Integrated-Auxiliary-of-a-Church--Defined


Special Rules Limiting IRS Authority to Audit a Church
Tax Inquiries and Examinations of Churches


Congress has imposed special limitations, found in section 7611 of the Internal Revenue Code, ( http://www.irs.gov/file_source/pub/irs-tege/26usc7611.pdf )
on how and when the IRS may conduct civil tax inquiries and examinations of churches. The IRS may begin a church tax inquiry only if an appropriate high-level Treasury official reasonably believes, on the basis of facts and circumstances recorded in writing, that an organization claiming to be a church or convention or association of churches may not qualify for exemption, may be carrying on an unrelated trade or business (within the meaning of IRC § 513), may otherwise be engaged in taxable activities or may have entered into an IRC § 4958 excess benefit transaction with a disqualified person.

Additional information

Restrictions on church inquiries and examinations
Audit process
http://www.irs.gov/Charities-&-Non-...ules-Limiting-IRS-Authority-to-Audit-a-Church

Church Audit Process

The following is the sequence of the church audit process.

If the reasonable belief requirement is met, the IRS must begin an inquiry by providing a church with written notice containing an explanation of its concerns.
The church is allowed a reasonable period in which to respond by furnishing a written explanation to alleviate IRS concerns.
If the church fails to respond within the required time, or if its response is not sufficient to alleviate IRS concerns, the IRS may, generally within 90 days, issue a second notice, informing the church of the need to examine its books and records.
After issuance of a second notice, but before commencement of an examination of its books and records, the church may request a conference with an IRS official to discuss IRS concerns. The second notice will contain a copy of all documents collected or prepared by the IRS for use in the examination and subject to disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act, as supplemented by IRC section 6103 relating to disclosure and confidentiality of tax return information.
Generally, examination of a church’s books and records must be completed within two years from the date of the second notice from the IRS.

If at any time during the inquiry process the church supplies information sufficient to alleviate the concerns of the IRS, the matter will be closed without examination of the church’s books and records. There are additional safeguards for the protection of churches under Internal Revenue Code section 7611. For example, the IRS cannot begin a subsequent examination of a church for a five-year period unless the previous examination resulted in a revocation, notice of deficiency of assessment, or a request for a significant change in church operations, including a significant change in accounting practices.

http://www.irs.gov/Charities-&-Non-Profits/Churches-&-Religious-Organizations/Church-Audit-Process


Church Audits - "Reasonable Belief" Requirement

The IRS may begin a church tax inquiry only if an appropriate high-level Treasury official reasonably believes, based on a written statement of the facts and circumstances, that the organization: (a) may not qualify for the exemption; or (b) may not be paying tax on unrelated business or other taxable activity. This reasonable belief must be based on facts and circumstances recorded in writing.

The IRS can obtain the information supporting a reasonable belief from many sources, including but not limited to:

Newspaper or magazine articles or ads,
Television and radio reports,
Internet web pages,
Voters guides created and/or distributed by the church,
Documents on file with the IRS (e.g. a Form 990-T filed by the church),
Reliable information reports from concerned members of the church or the general public and
Records concerning the church in the possession of third parties or informants.

The IRS must derive the facts and circumstances forming the basis for a reasonable belief from information lawfully obtained. If this information is obtained from informants, it must not be known to be unreliable. Failure of the church to respond to repeated IRS routine requests for information is a factor in determining if there is reasonable cause for commencing a church tax inquiry.

Additional information
IRM 4.76.7.4.1 (08-20-2010)
http://www.irs.gov/Charities-&-Non-...s/Church-Audits-Reasonable-Belief-Requirement

Of note...

IRS Could Revoke Non-Profit Status for Religious Institutions over Same-Sex Marriage
by Ben Shapiro 26 Jun 2013 878

Based on Wednesday’s Supreme Court ruling, in which the Court majority determined that the Defense of Marriage Act’s federal definition of marriage had to incorporate state-based same-sex marriages, Internal Revenue Service regulations could be modified to remove non-profit status for churches across the country.

The DOMA decision makes clear that marriage is a state-to-state issue, meaning that religious institutions that receive non-profit status on the federal level but do not perform or accept same-sex marriages in states where it is legal could have non-profit status revoked. Furthermore, should the IRS move to revoke federal non-profit status for churches, synagogues and mosques that do not perform same-sex marriage more generally, the Court could easily justify that decision on the basis of “eradicating discrimination” in religious education.

In 1983, the Supreme Court ruled in Bob Jones University v. United States that it was within the scope of the First Amendment’s protections for religion for the IRS to revoke the tax exempt status for the university based on its policy prohibiting interracial dating. The Court determined that the “Government has a fundamental, overriding interest in eradicating racial discrimination in education … which substantially outweighs whatever burden denial of tax benefits places on [the university’s] exercise of their religious beliefs.”
http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Govern...-revoke-non-profit-for-religious-institutions

IRS move to revoke federal non-profit status for churches, synagogues and mosques that do not perform same-sex marriage.
http://jwtalk.net/forums/topic/9872...osques-that-do-not-perform-same-sex-marriage/


1400 Pastors Defy IRS Threat Of Tax-Exempt Revocation
October 8, 2012 by Breaking New
http://www.westernjournalism.com/1400-pastors-defy-irs-threat-of-tax-exempt-revocation/
 

AnonyMary

Formerly Fooled - Finally Free
Another good article discussing 'church' status and how one gets or loses it
Religious Organization Loses Claim for “Church” Status
Federal Claims Court upholds IRS’s revocation
of status for failure to fulfill “associational role”
August 16-31, 2009
http://www.nonprofitissues.com/public/features/leadfree/2009aug2-IS.html#.UhdzxH_ZwSk

Despite being a Christian.. I support this current case against the dept of Treasury, which addresses the unfairness which churchs have over other nonprofits

American Atheists v. IRS
How you can help

This case has the potential to undo the discrimination that has been written into our tax code. We have no doubt that this is a case that will go all the way to the Supreme Court. To help ensure that American Atheists has the resources we need to carry this case to the end, we have established a $100,000 Fair Taxation Legal Fund Match Challenge. All donations to the Fair Taxation Legal Fund will be doubled.

To donate, please click here.
Introduction

On December 12, 2012, American Atheists and two co-plaintiffs filed a lawsuit in U.S. District Court in the Eastern District of Kentucky demanding that the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) stop giving preferential treatment to churches and religious organizations via the process of receiving non-profit tax-exempt status under the Internal Revue Code (IRC) procedures and definitions.IRS

Groups like American Atheists receive tax-exempt status under Internal Revenue Code 501(c)(3) but, because the organization is not classified as religious, it costs American Atheists and other secular non-profits significantly more money each year to maintain that status. In this lawsuit, American atheists and the other plaintiffs are demanding that all tax-exempt organizations, including those characterized as religious by the IRS, have the same requirements to achieve and maintain tax-exempt status.

In order to qualify for nonprofit tax-exempt status, any religious or secular organization must demonstrate it exists to benefit the public. After that basic element is established, religious non-profits are almost always declared automatically tax-exempt under the current IRC rules and definitions. However, secular non-profits face a lengthy application and a fee, which can be as high as $850.

Religious organizations and churches are treated differently from secular organizations. The exemptions are applied in a way that discriminates solely on the basis of whether an entity’s members express beliefs and practices accepted as religious. The IRS treats your organization better if you profess belief in a supernatural deity.

The lawsuit also covers discrepancies in how secular and religious organizations are treated in maintaining their tax-exempt statuses. Secular nonprofits complete Form 990 annually, which details information about finances, donors, volunteers, and personnel; the IRS estimates it requires 211 hours to complete the Form 990, which is then public information. Religious nonprofits are exempted from filing the Form 990, so there is no public record about their finances, donors, volunteers, or personnel.

This requirement can put organizations like American Atheists at a fundraising disadvantage compared to religious groups because many people choose not to reveal their atheism for fear of prejudice and discrimination.

American Atheists and its co-plaintiffs are asking the Court to find that such disparity of treatment between religious and secular non-profit organizations is unconstitutional and require the IRS to make the tax-exempt filing process uniform for all nonprofit organizations.
Government Motion to Dismiss

On June 7, 2013, the United States government filed a motion to dismiss our lawsuit. In their filing, the Government, among other things, challenged American Atheists' standing to bring such a suit, alleging that we had suffered no real harm from their preferential treatment of religious groups in tax filings.

On August 6, 2013, American Atheists filed a response to the Government's motion to dismiss.

The case is currently before the United States District Court, Eastern District of Kentucky.

http://www.atheists.org/legal/current/IRS
 
Although that's all true, at least in theory, here's what they aren't telling you: enforcement doesn't exist. In the last 60 years, one "church" lost its 501(c)(3) status due to political activities, and that was over 20 years ago. They do strip around a hundred (non-church) nonprofits of their status a year, but there are close to 2M 501(c)(3)s registered, so that means they're weeding out 0.005% every year.

Right now, to strip a fake church of its tax exempt status, some high ranking IRS person has to initiate the process, and neither the IRS or the courts can figure out who the right person(s) to do that might be. Thus, there has been zero action against political organizations disguised as churches since 2009. No warnings given, no appearance that anyone's even holding the enforcement positions anymore. It seems as if the people that used to do that have been reallocated.

IRS enforcement against real or fake churches on other than political grounds, appears to be even rarer, i.e., nonexistent.

The basic problem is that, the moment the laws start being enforced, there's going to be a political shitstorm. Aside from Congress, who have only made matters worse, government clearly wants to avoid the subject entirely. The federal courts have said, for example, that a completely racist "church" spun off by the KKK is (in some contexts, at least) a protected religion, as is Satanism, regardless of tax status, or socially redeeming qualities. They basically don't care what you teach, so long as you claim that it's somehow religious; they don't want to deal with content. During the last election, a couple of thousand preachers got on their pulpits and screamed that Obama was the antichrist and so on, put videos of their sermons onto DVDs, and sent them in to the IRS. As long as the IRS says that they don't know who's responsible for initiating enforcement, they get to keep sitting on their hands. When it comes to religion, and fake religion, our government are PATHETIC, SPINELESS WIMPS.

naaah...

if you don't mind a little straight talk. WE are the government. the american people. and we want our churches protected. and if you can't get the baptists and the catholics and the presbyterians to go after the church of scientology you ain't gonna get CoS on these grounds and these and others like them just aren't going to ally with the taxman and the atheists and some apostates. this is america. by separating church and state we managed to do a pretty good job in keeping the body count way down in the ongoing theological disputes and we're planning on keeping it that way
 

AnonKat

Crusader
naaah...

if you don't mind a little straight talk. WE are the government. the american people. and we want our churches protected. and if you can't get the baptists and the catholics and the presbyterians to go after the church of scientology you ain't gonna get CoS on these grounds and these and others like them just aren't going to ally with the taxman and the atheists and some apostates. this is america. by separating church and state we managed to do a pretty good job in keeping the body count way down in the ongoing theological disputes and we're planning on keeping it that way

Well we have seperation of Church of State in the Netherlands while you are "One Nation under God"(Thank you Ike) and we do not have tax exemption for Scientology


In fact, it wasn’t until 1954 that the phrase “under God” was actually added to our pledge, in a response to the threat of communism.

http://www.forwardprogressives.com/our-pledge-of-allegiance-and-the-myth-of-one-nation-under-god/

America is going back in time undoing what the founding fathers had envisioned.
 
Well we have seperation of Church of State in the Netherlands while you are "One Nation under God"(Thank you Ike) and we do not have tax exemption for Scientology




http://www.forwardprogressives.com/our-pledge-of-allegiance-and-the-myth-of-one-nation-under-god/

America is going back in time undoing what the founding fathers had envisioned.

it's never gained it in the netherlands.

and our founding fathers had no intention of separating god and state. in fact they engineered this separation on behalf of the church, not against it. and we remain ardent in our resistance to state atheism and are educated in the fate of nations which have practiced it
 

AnonKat

Crusader
it's never gained it in the netherlands.

and our founding fathers had no intention of separating god and state. in fact they engineered this separation on behalf of the church, not against it. and we remain ardent in our resistance to state atheism and are educated in the fate of nations which have practiced it

Never said It was an construction against religion in my country, but I wouldn't take that pledge or at least say Xenu where it says God or Satan if I were a Satanist,

One Nation under Xenu lol
 

AnonKat

Crusader
it's never gained it in the netherlands.

and our founding fathers had no intention of separating god and state. in fact they engineered this separation on behalf of the church, not against it. and we remain ardent in our resistance to state atheism and are educated in the fate of nations which have practiced it

The 1796 Treaty with Tripoli states that the United States was "not in any sense founded on the Christian religion" (see the image on the right). This was not an idle statement meant to satisfy muslims-- they believed it and meant it. This treaty was written under the presidency of George Washington and signed under the presidency of John Adams.

titleXI.jpg
 
Top