> "I (Jay Guin) can't think of a reason
> that I'd want to be involved with the
> Freedom From Religion Foundation."

and

> "I (Jay Guin) can't discuss public
> policy with anyone so deluded…"

I did it.
Kyle Butt did it.
Others have done it.

It's what people do.

I can't think of a reason that I'd want to be involved with the Freedom From Religion Foundation.

Their website says,

"The history of Western civilization shows us that most social and moral progress has been brought about by persons free from religion."

I can't discuss public policy with anyone so deluded about history and reality.

Baptist Press
Posted on Jan 19, 2011
by Michael Foust

WASHINGTON (BP)–In a move that could have a major impact on the tax status of churches and pastors nationwide, an independent national commission of religious and financial experts will review several church-related tax issues — such as the limitations of the pastoral housing allowance…

The ranking GOP member of the Senate Finance Committee, Grassley said in a separate statement that

> "legislation should be the last resort."

The commission will be known as the Commission on Accountability and Policy for Religious Organizations and will be led by Michael Batts…

In its 61-page memo, Grassley's staff raised a number of issues that the commission will study and that could have major implications for churches.

Among them:

> — Whether the income tax exclusion for
> pastoral housing allowances should be
> limited.

The "size of the housing allowance" is at issue, Batts said.

> "The stated concern is that the housing
> allowance is being used in ways that
> perhaps Congress may not have originally
> intended — perhaps in terms of the
> amounts that are being granted as housing
> allowances to fund the cost of expensive
> homes,"

Batts said.

———————————————————————
———————————————————————

Yep, looks like they are going to let the FFRF IRC 107 suit takes it course so as not to ruffle the feathers of Rick Warren and his lobbyists again; while they try to figure out how to salvage the tax free benefit for all those basketball ministers and others.

I figure there is no way to cure what ails IRC 107 without legislation or a ruling from the Court that it is unconstitutional.

Coincidentally, I just received an invitation to speak at an event next month on the campus of Colorado State University; with an assigned topic being the FFRF IRC 107 lawsuit.

I accepted the invitation.

Details to follow.

Jay, let me know if there is anything specific you may want me to pass along to that crowd and what interest, if any, you might have in working to get you on FreeThought Radio for that interview as representing the opposition viewpoint.

Here's a deal your consideration:

You are especially well positioned (e.g., being a tax lawyer with an opinion, church leader, and public speaker) to be interviewed as representing the opposition view by the FFRF for airing on their radio program.

How about we work together to see if the FFRF might go for a deal like that.

It only takes a few minutes of your time for the telephone intereview.

As you may be aware, they have already interviewed a former IRS Appeals Officer (me), former IRS lawyer, and Irwin Chemerinsky, but they were all supportive of the suit.

Your interview would provide some balance to their coverage of the suit as it develops.

What do you think. Can we try and work together to get that interview for you??

I also like the following comment in that other thread which you added your endoresement to a few minutes ago:

> Anyone who is offended by an honest
> review and discussion is less certain of
> their position than perhaps they would like
> others to know…

I think you and your readers will easily see how that concept finds its application to testing the constitutional merits of IRC 107 and, perhaps, using the effort to, at a minimum, help compel Congress and the President to act swiftly to cure its well-known ills.

Discipline has its consequences, and I don't think appropriate consequences, such as you try to promote, are any argument against the discipline.

(If we all got the same tax free, limited housing allowance, then we could all give more to the church and make up for any inconvenience to the preacher in getting used to paying taxes like the rest of us.)

The 9th Circuit previously hinted at the unconstitutional nature of IRC 107, Judge Shubb
has hinted at it, Grassley's report hinted at it, and many others have for years hinted at it.

The religious community has had more than enough time to cure the constitutional doubts about IRC 107 and they would not. So, I figure they have no platform upon which to stand and complain that others are doing what should have been done back when Rick Warren's case was before the Court.

Even now, as in the Warren case, Congress and the President could act to moot the IRC 107 suit by eliminating the constitutional issues and the abuses.

Alas, the Grassley report indicates Congress and the President are not likely to be in any hurry to take it on; perhaps realizing that you, Jay, Rick Warren, et al are formidable foes…at least politically.

So, they may let the IRC 107 case play out and then put off any corrective action they may be forced to take on the evil atheists and activist judges. That's already been hinted at as well.