Free Speech In Church?
by John Plecnik

Why do pastors, rabbis, and ministers refrain from commenting on candidates during elections? With a pro-life president seeking reelection against a socially liberal senator, why the eerie silence from churches and other houses of worship that consider this literally a life and death issue?

A half a century or so ago, then-Senate Majority Leader Lyndon Johnson (D-T.X.) attached a restriction on partisan activity by non-profit groups to that year’s tax bill. At the time, no one paid any attention to the seemingly minor attachment to a major fiscal piece of legislation. Yet, the relationship between church and state had been significantly altered. After the change, churches were prohibited from engaging in partisan activities such as endorsing candidates under the threat of losing their tax-exempt status.

North Carolina Rep. Walter R. Jones was one Congressman who was not afraid to label Johnson’s law as politically motivated and discriminatory. Many Texas-based non-profits opposed Johnson’s reelection bid for the U.S. Senate, and he had no intention of allowing them to interfere for a second time. Using his position as majority leader, Johnson was able to effectively legislate his opposition out of existence. Even he, however, probably failed to appreciate the extent to which liberal activists would utilize his handiwork. Since that time, “progressive” groups like the ACLU have used Johnson’s law to blackmail religious leaders into silence.

In 2004, one activist even threatened some Catholic churches with lawsuits over denying pro-abortion politicians the sacrament of Holy Communion, alleging the denial to be a form of prohibited, political speech. As time passes, Johnson’s law continues to grow in importance, applying to an increasing number of situations. When one misplaced line of partisan speech could potentially bankrupt the neighborhood church, is it any wonder that priests or ministers or rabbis are unwilling to comment on the moral aspects of politics?

Religious establishments are forced to silently watch candidates distort their doctrines or lose their tax-exempt status. Congressman Jones wants to put an end to this Hobbesian choice. He has joined likeminded legislators to sponsor a repeal of Johnson’s law. Though House support for the measure remains strong, it would likely fail to pass the Senate in a straight up-or-down vote.

Taking a page out of Johnson’s playbook, Congressman Jones hopes to attach the repeal to a larger, must-pass bill. If this strategy succeeds, Johnson’s law will die in much the same manner as it was born: largely unnoticed. Even if Jones wins in Congress, it may take another fifty years to remove the inhibitions created by the law. To truly reinstate free speech, he will need allies across the country to spread the word that freedom also applies to statements from the pulpit.

John Plecnik is a 21-year-old law student at Duke University and Executive Editor of The Devil’s Advocate. As Policy Advisor for the Duke Chapter, John authored the first-ever statewide platform for the North Carolina Federation of College Republicans.

Email the Editor