Bush's faith based initiative is pointless

[More Than A Feeling]

Religiously motivated organizations have been getting money from the federal government for a long time.

All they have to do is set up a separate secular organization to use it, and agree to abide by all the proper regulations. Even Americans United for the Separation of Church and State has no problem with this.

Bush's alleged discrimination against faith based organizations happens to those who care more about showing off their faith than they do serving the poor and the needy.

[ladjf]

1. I believe that the plot is a bit deeper.

The right wing intends to do away with all major Federal "safety nets"
of people in need, i.e. SS, Medicare, Medicaid. After that, the
church related organizations will have complete control of the funds
for those in need. And, once they have that, they will require conformity from the needy in order to receive aid. (It's happening right now to some tsunami victims. Missionaries are withholding aid from those who don't espouse Christianity.)

[More Than A Feeling]

4. That's certainly possible

the alliance between the small government republicans and the religious right certainly would indicate an arrangement of that sort, IF both sides succeeded in getting everything they wanted.

On the other hand, two heads of the White House Office of Faith Based Initiatives have quit in frustration at the lack of attention being paid to them. So I don't think the alliance is quite as tight as you suggest. More likely is corporate dominance using religion when it is convenient.

Remember, the right has splits within it, just as we do. They are not this monolith in complete lockstep, as much as they seem like it sometimes.

[sandnsea]

2. There's a difference

When you set up a secular organization, you come under discrimination and other laws. You also couldn't connect faith or doctrine as a prerequisite or part of the service provided. Like a day care in a church basement that never said anything about Jesus.

Faith-based is to completely include doctrine, the whole foundation can be religious based. They also can get around all kinds of laws by saying its against their faith.

It's not the same thing. I support the first, I don't support the second.

[unblock]

3. it's not about funding charity; it's about funding preaching

you are correct that all the secular good stuff that churches do can qualify for federal funding simply by avoiding mixing religion with the charitable good deeds.

the entire point of the "faith-based initiatives" crap is to allow federal funds to support religious activity. well, that and to allow the bushies to steer federal funds to the religious organizations that support conservative and republican causes and candidates.

[wtbymark]

5. after reading the Remonstrance of 1787

it should be entirely illegal for any religious organization to receive any funds from the government. James Madison nearly chastised the Virginian commonwealth over 3 pense! He maintained that if any religion cannot support its initiatives with its own coffers then they're SOL!! And especially now a days with millions of dollars the churches bring in why in the hell should they NEED a dime from the government??????????

[sandnsea]

6. tons of money, tons of groups

With the amount of money and groups out there, you'd think more would be getting done. I bet if we put all the money studying day care into day care centers, we'd have no more day care problem. I know that probably sounds like a right winger, but I think there's some truth to it.