Preserving the Moral Compass

Religion's right to influence American public policy is currently protected at all levels. In Walz v. Tax Commission (1970), the Supreme Court proclaimed, Adherence of particular faiths and individual churches frequently take strong positions on public issues, including, as this case reveals in several briefs amici, vigorous advocacy of legal and constitutional issues. Of course, churches as much as secular bodies and private citizens have that right.1 We must conclude that all Amer icans, whether religious or not, have a right to participate in the politi cal process and through the body politic, and as such, they will contribute a vast spectrum of ideas, beliefs, ethics, morals, and stan dards that serve to enrich the dialogue on various issues of government policy and legislation. Consequently, while separation of and state is vital to the American way of life, it is understandable that some degree of overlap and interaction remains inevitable. The Houses of Worship Political Speech Protection Act, intro duced by Representative Walter (hereafter Jones Bill), was voted down by the House of Representatives on 2 October 2002. The defeated legislation would have amended the Internal Revenue Code (IRC) section 501(c)(3), lifting the current ban on political campaign ing by tax-exempt churches (hereafter church electioneering).2 In a 239-178 vote, forty-six Republicans and an Independent joined with one hundred and ninety-two Democrats to oppose the measure, while one hundred and sixty-eight Republicans and ten Democrats voted for the bill. The vote elicited passionate arguments and strong feelings from every corner, inside and outside the halls of Congress. The issue is far from over, however, since and many of his supporters made it clear that they would re-introduce a similar measure in the near fu

Aesthetics · Art · Cartography · Compass · Geography · Linguistics · Political science · Speech act · Worship · American Constitutional Law and Politics · Law · Philosophy