As candidates begin preparation for the 2008 election season, people of faith will once again face the perennial admonition from liberal groups that the IRS requires "conservative" churches to be apolitical.

This message is dutifully repeated by liberal-leaning media in states where "the conservative vote" might make a difference. Media outlets invariably run articles and broadcasts noting how carefully the IRS will be watching churches this cycle.

And as a result of this perceived threat from the IRS, many pastors find themselves in a chilling environment, discouraged from addressing the moral questions involved in contemporary politics.

This should not be the case. It was for freedom of religion, not freedom from religion that the founders fought. That's why the Alliance Defense Fund and the Family Research Council released a letter to thousands of pastors in to set the record straight.

Pastors must realize that they have the right to guide their congregations through the difficult moral questions that face our society, such as abortion, stem-cell research/cloning and the meaning of marriage. If this means urging support for specific legislation or referenda that a given church believes to be good for the community, there is nothing in federal tax law preventing a pastor from saying so.

Here are the facts:

• Federal tax law allows a church to spend at least 5 percent of its total resources on legislative lobbying and advocacy efforts;
• churches can distribute voter guides, register voters and hold candidate forums;
• pastors can preach about legislation and policy from the pulpit, and urge their congregations to support or oppose particular proposals.

What churches cannot do is endorse specific candidates or parties.

These facts, however, are continually lost in media coverage and activist allegations.

Take South Dakota, for example. In South Dakota, there is a referendum on the ballot to ban abortion. Many church leaders in South Dakota hold strong opinions on the legislation and could easily wind up influencing the final vote in November.

Not surprisingly, the Sioux Falls Argus Leader has run multiple articles on churches and the IRS. One article, from June 6, warned of "stricter enforcement [by the IRS] of rules against religious groups endorsing or intervening in election campaigns."

The piece goes on to describe five recent complaints against churches and church-like groups throughout the country. Never mind that each complaint involves the endorsement of specific candidates and that candidate endorsement is the basis of the "stricter enforcement" by the IRS.

Ignoring these critical facts, the Argus Leader quickly points to the abortion referendum, as if churches have no right to speak out on that issue. That was not the only article the paper ran on the subject.

Given the clear legality of supporting - or opposing - the abortion referendum from the pulpit, what purpose can such articles have, other than to intimidate people of faith from speaking their piece on an issue dear to the hearts of many Christians?

Clergy must not be frightened into silence. How much poorer off would we be had Thomas Becket not denounced the policies of King Henry, or John Witherspoon not denounced those of King George?

What if the preachers during the Second Great Awakening had remained silent on the issue of slavery? What if the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. had decided that politics and the pulpit ought not to mix?

The role of churches in public political discourse has always been an important one. It is vital that pastors know they are completely within their rights to play their invaluable role in our democratic processes - in spite of what liberal scaremongers in government and media might tell them.