Search  |  Login  |  Register

1308156266000

109th CONGRESS

1st Session

H. R. 235

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to protect the religious free exercise and free speech rights of churches and other houses of worship .

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

January 4, 2005

Mr. JONES of North Carolina introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Ways and Means


A BILL

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to protect the religious free exercise and free speech rights of churches and other houses of worship .

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

This Act may be cited as the 'Houses of Worship Free Speech Restoration Act of 2005'.

SEC. 2. HOUSES OF WORSHIP PERMITTED TO ENGAGE IN RELIGIOUS FREE EXERCISE AND FREE SPEECH ACTIVITIES, ETC.

(a) In General- Section 501 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by redesignating subsection (q) as subsection (r) and by inserting after subsection (p) the following new subsection:

'(q) An organization described in section 170(b)(1)(a)(1) or section 508(c)(1)(A) shall not fail to be treated as organized and operated exclusively for a religious purpose, nor shall it be deemed to have participated in, or intervened in any political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for public office, for purposes of subsection (c)(3) or section 170(c)(2), 2055, 2106, 2522, or 4955 because of the content, preparation, or presentation of any homily, sermon, teaching, dialectic, or other presentation made during religious services or gatherings.'.

(b) Effective Date- The amendment made by subsection (a) shall apply to taxable years ending after the date of enactment of this Act.

SEC. 3. CAMPAIGN FINANCE LAWS UNAFFECTED.

No member or leader of an organization described in section 501(q) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (as added by section 2) shall be prohibited from expressing personal views on political matters or elections for public office during regular religious services, so long as these views are not disseminated beyond the members and guests assembled together at the service. For purposes of the preceding sentence, dissemination beyond the members and guests assembled together at a service includes a mailing that results in more than an incremental cost to the organization and any electioneering communication under section 304(f) of the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 (2 U.S.C. 434(f)). Nothing in the amendment made by section 2 shall be construed to permit any disbursements for electioneering communications or political expenditures prohibited by the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971.

 

Latest in
Free Speech

Protecting Pro-Life Counselors

By Edward White1414613427989

When one thinks of those who prevent women from learning the truth about abortion, one generally thinks about Planned Parenthood, not the police. Yet, that is what’s happening in Fort Myers, Florida, prompting the filing of a lawsuit by the American Center for Law & Justice (ACLJ). This week the...

read more

Equal Access for Religious Speech

By Walter M. Weber1414432535648

The ACLJ has just filed a friend of the court brief in the seemingly endless battle to halt discrimination against churches in New York City. The case is Bronx Household of Faith v. The Board of Education of the City of New York . Our brief urges the U.S. Supreme Court to grant review in the case...

read more

ACLJ Protecting Religious Speech

By Edward White1414428876769

One of the many important things we do at the American Center for Law & Justice (ACLJ) is to ensure that people can spread the Gospel without unconstitutional interference by the government. This past week we filed a lawsuit in a New Jersey federal court on behalf of Joseph Paolella against the...

read more

Road Block in the Way of Justice

By Matthew Clark1414174262103

The fight for justice is never the easy road, and it doesn’t always win the first round. Yesterday a federal district court dismissed two lawsuits (at least a majority of the claims) brought on behalf of conservative groups who were targeted by the IRS. Unfortunately, the court’s ruling is based on...

read more