Religion-Based Groups Protest Restrictions in Bill

[alp227]

Source: The New York Times

More than 100 religion-based organizations are protesting a provision in pending legislation that would prohibit them from receiving federal money if they consider a job applicant’s religion when hiring.

In a letter sent Wednesday to all members of Congress, the groups contend that the provision would dilute protections they have under the 1964 Civil Rights Act and the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, as well as under the Constitution.

“Those four lines in the legislation would be a seismic change in bedrock civil rights law for religious organizations,” said Steven McFarland, chief legal counsel at World Vision USA, a Christian aid organization that is leading the protest. “The impact would be huge and severely affect our ability to help children and others in need.”

The provision is in legislation to reauthorize the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, which makes grants to nonprofit social service organizations.

Read more: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/26/us/26religion.html?partner=rss&emc=rss

[katandmoon]

1. It's simple. Want to discriminate? Don't take Federal money!

[Tx4obama]

2. Easier than that. Stop giving religious based orgs any money at all. And tax churches! n/t

[oldhippydude]

7. duh!!!

people look at me like I'm nuts when i say tax the faith industry.. i always wondered how that faith based crap ever made it past first amendment scrutiny.. as its simply subsidizing the faith industry..

[katandmoon]

8. ITA. But that won't happen with THIS administration any more than the last.

[apnu]

10. It won't happen in any administration past, present or future.

Americans stupidly require all Presidential candidates to be religious, to wear their religion on their sleeves for all to see and to frequent religious leaders for "advice" and be seen in a church on a regular basis. Its been that way since George Washington.

[defendandprotect]

12. Obama's giving them even more $$$ .... !! Guess Simpson didn't notice those tits!!

[Taverner]

19. AHHHHHHHHHHHH MEN!!!!

[backtomn]

13. As far as I know.....they don't get federal money...

Correct me if I am wrong, but we are talking about a TAX-EXEMPT status.....given to all churches.....not that they are given federal money. If that is what you want to do.....end tax-exempt status...fine...but they are not receiving money. Just want everyone on the correct track. Let's start from there.

[Tx4obama]

17. Well let's talk about taxpayer's 'state' money PAYING preachers ...

Taxpayer's money is PAYING for religious preachers to visit prisoners in prison.

Excerpt from the article on the below link:

" ..... with the $780,000 in state money that helps fund 14 full-time and 19 part-time Baptist, Methodist and Pentecostal chaplains through the Chaplain Service Prison Ministry of Virginia.

Neither Catholic nor Jewish chaplains have sought funding from corrections officials. "

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/08/21/AR2010082101325_pf.html

[Anakin Skywalker]

3. What Jerks! They Want to Discriminate While Taking Taxpayers' Money

Those taxpayers come from all religions and some, none at all. Talk about SHAMELESS!

If you are going to insist on discrimination in hiring, etc., stand on your own and don't ask for any federal money which comes from EVERYONE!

Damn! This is so unreasonable it makes me mad!

[annabanana]

4. When did it become OK for them to discriminate? Or was that

part of a carve-out?

[backtomn]

14. Should mosqes accept gay employees??

I would be on the "yes" side, but what will be the response?? from government?? from the public?? Not to mention Catholics, Evangelicals, Jews. Maybe the answer is......hire who you want...but give up tax-exempt status. ????

[No Elephants]

5. What are the odds Congress will pass this bill with this language?

If you care about having this language stay in the bill, you'd better get very active.

And support the ACLU. Yes, once in a few million cases, the ACLU gets it wrong. Nothing is perfect.

"The Coalition Against Religious Discrimination, whose members include the American Civil Liberties Union, the Hindu American Foundation and the N.A.A.C.P., has been pushing Congress to eliminate charitable choice altogether for many years, and it said the pending bill did not go far enough."

[SkyDaddy7]

6. STOP ALL FEDERAL FUNDING...

of religious based organizations! SIMPLE!

[Lance_Boyle]

9. Unless your church is incorporated, it has no civil rights.

People have civil rights, and now according to the Stupreme Court corporations do, too. But "Institutions of religion" do not. Freedom of religion is a personal freedom, not an institutional one. A Catholic person has civil rights. Catholicism does not.

[backtomn]

15. Freedom of association is real.

I am not sure that churches must be incorporated, but freedom of religion does include institutions.....it is NOT freedom of worship....but freedom of religion. If what you said was true, many religions could have been challenged long ago.

[Lance_Boyle]

16. Freedom of association is another individual liberty:

you may associate with whom you wish.

The group produced by that association does not itself necessarily enjoy any civil liberties.

[defendandprotect]

11. No taxpayer money for any "faith-based" groups ... Vatican needs our money???

[Politicub]

18. Better to err on the side of equal rights than make an exception for bigotry

I didn't think people could ask about your religion in a job interview -- that's sick that they can.

Even though I wouldn't want to work where I'm not one of the pure, it shouldn't be legal to adhere to a certain religion to keep a job. What if you convert or something?

I doubt you get many Muslims applying for a job at the fundie nutjob bookstore/televangelist operation/drug rehab/gay conversion center anyway. The baptists or whatever will most likely be able to bunker down in their exclusive hideyhole without enshrining the right to discriminate. And if they want to accept public money, then they need to not discriminate among qualified people.