No, no, no, nopety-nope no.
Text of HR-153
Representative Walter Jones (R-NC3) has introduced House Resolution 153 into Congress. Its Dominionist sponsor is not hiding his intent with the name of the bill: "To restore the Free Speech and First Amendment rights of churches and exempt organizations by repealing the 1954 Johnson Amendment."
How 'bout those jobs and that concern for the middle class?
This bill would repeal the Johnson Amendment, which prevents non-profit organisations that do not pay taxes (expressly naming churches in the bill) from holding forth officially in favour of or against political candidates. (Political issues that affect the organisation are not covered by that amendment.)
In practice the Johnson Amendment means a priest, minister, rabbi, imam, &c may not use his tax-exempt pulpit to endorse or oppose political candidates, nor urge (in his official capacity) his parishioners to vote for or against candidates.
The repeal of the amendment as Representative Jones wishes would allow pastors to endorse or condemn candidates from the pulpit, or urge them to vote for or against candidates.
I urge everyone to write their representatives to oppose this ill-thought legislation.
My representative is Adrian Smith (R-NE3). My letter is below.
______________
Dear Representative Smith:
I am sure you are aware of the necessity of the separation between Church and State in a democratic republic.
The concept of tax-exempt organizations, including churches, promoting or opposing candidates is anathema to a republic that respects the religious rights of all.
I am sure that you would oppose the Catholic Church haranguing a candidate for being a Baptist, an imam in a mosque promoting Islamic law, or any other sort of religious pressure on candidates.
The I Amendment protects all religious beliefs and none by specifically separating the ecclesiastical from the political.
One repeals the Johnson Amendment at his peril: he only does it because he believes it is his religious belief that will set the agenda. Anyone sponsoring HR 153 would howl just as loudly to maintain the I Amendment if it were their beliefs attacked from the pulpit as the sponsors of this bill are howling now to tear out that which protects the rights of all Americans from ecclesiastical excess.
Do not sponsor HR 153, and oppose this bill. The best protection of government and religious faith is when they do not interfere with each other.
1:53 AM MT: Consider how this bill could be conflated with the Hobby Lobby decision: Corporations that are closely-held now have religious rights, and their employers can choose to impose the employer's religious beliefs on workers. Coupled with this, it is not an inconceivable stretch that the corporation could use the "religious speech rights" of this bill to urge employees to vote for or against candidates (on pain of firing).