Please critique the comments made, state your own conclusion and defend it as to the proper place of religious organizations in the "naked public square."

They comment on the issue of the proper (or improper) role of government subsidizing (if that is indeed what it is!) non-profit religious organizations through tax exempt status ( I.R.C. of 1986 501(c)(3); 170 (b)(1)(a)) that engage and impact public discourse, both as to policy issues (including legislation) and individual political campaigns.

1. "In testimony before the House Ways and Means committee in 1972, the late John Baker, a representative of the Baptist Joint Committee on Public Affairs, noted both the theological pluralism of approaches to political action, and the unity of conviction that this involvement is deeply religious:

"Some religious entities believe that their religious faith commits them to complete withdrawal from the secular world. Others are compelled by their faith into an active participation in nearly every aspect of that secular world."

2. "On behalf of the United Methodist Church, Dr. J. Elliott Corbett entered into the record of these hearings the following policy declaration of the General Conference of his communion:

"We believe that churches have the right and the duty to speak and act corporately on those matters of public policy which involve basic moral or ethical issues and questions. Any concept of church-government relations which denies churches this role in the body politic strikes at the very core of the religious liberty".