Categories: Archives

Safe Harbor brings church, state closer

The first must-read of the summer just hit the stands. No, J. K. Rowling has not blessed us… The first must-read of the summer just hit the stands. No, J. K. Rowling has not blessed us with another “Harry Potter” book. Instead, this must-read is a 396-page brick of a bill just introduced in the U.S. House of Representatives called the American Jobs Creation Act of 2004. Section 692, “Safe Harbor for Churches,” buried on page 378, has nothing to do with jobs or the creation thereof.

“Safe Harbor” is tacked onto this omnibus bill, which also has such riders as “Repeal of excise tax on fishing tackle boxes,” and seeks to allow religious organizations three “unintentional” violations of the rules governing the separation of church and state without losing their tax-exempt status. In other words, churches get three strikes to be involved in politics — read: endorse or denounce candidates — before having to pay for it.

And all of this during an election year. How convenient for President George Bush, since recent polling has shown that frequent churchgoers say they will vote for Bush over presumed Democratic presidential nominee Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass.). Must be his faith-based economics.

The bill also allows churches to endorse/denounce candidates deliberately, with reduced tax penalties, according to yesterday’s The New York Times.

Separation of church and state is one of those principles on which the United States was founded. Applying it can get messy, but, in this case, the rules are fairly clear-cut. Church and state are two great tastes that don’t taste great together.

If a law is worth having, it’s worth upholding. Allowing for violations demeans the law; if the bill’s sponsors feel that churches should become political animals, then they should try to alter the laws governing what qualifies as a non-profit and not try to pussyfoot around it.

Beyond that, churches don’t need a special safe harbor to be political. For instance, as reported in an article in the May 26 Pittsburgh Tribune-Review, several bishops wanted to deny Kerry Communion because he was pro-choice.

Pittsburgh Bishop Donald Wuerl objected to this, saying, “Historically, people … including Catholics, react with great disfavor to an effort of a church body that appears to tell people how to vote.” Amen to that.

Hopefully the House will act with great disfavor towards this lousy rider too.

Pitt News Staff

Share
Published by
Pitt News Staff

Recent Posts

Summer Vacation: Thousands march in Pittsburgh’s Pride Parade

Thousands of demonstrators marched in support of Pittsburgh’s LGBTQIA+ population early Sunday afternoon. The event…

3 weeks ago

The 2026 NFL Draft in photos

A record-breaking 800,000+ fans assembled on the North Shore for the 2026 NFL Draft over…

2 months ago

Lashelle Brown: Making The Perch a home away from home

Pitt Eats worker and new lead cashier at The Perch Lashelle Brown has become a…

2 months ago

Hannah Powell: Pushing the University Art Gallery forward

In the back of the Frick Fine Arts building, Hannah Powell is one of two…

2 months ago

Adam Hebert: Film professor and friendly face

From New Hampshire to Hollywood, Adam Hebert’s work led him to his purpose at the…

2 months ago

Cowboys, Packers fans share thoughts on new Steelers head coach Mike McCarthy at NFL Draft

As the football world descended on Pittsburgh in record-breaking crowds this weekend for the 2026…

2 months ago