Supreme Court hands victory to Bush on faith-based initiatives »
Posted By TechnologyExpert 2 years ago in NewsOn a 5-4 decision, the Supreme Court ruled that a group of taxpayers did not have standing to sue the US government for its funding of faith-based initiatives with federal money.
Read Full Story at rawstory.com »
68 Views Share Story 54 Comments Report
Submitted By:
TechnologyExpert
I am Editor-in-Chief at Alice Hill's RealTechNews (http://www.realtechnews.com). I also have my own blog (Tech-Ex) at http://TechnologyExpert.Blogspot.com. Finally ...
Who Also Submitted:
Other Related Articles:
Why not submit a story?
RSS Join the Discussion
+ Add CommentShowing 165 of 216 Comments (view all)
-
0%
quackpot2 years ago
Making Faith-based legal doesn't make it effective.
For the Executive branch (with consent from an effite Congress to continue pooring HUGE $$ into this demonstrated ineffective program is obscene.
Reply-
0%
gamahuche2 years ago
'But in Alito's decision, the Justice was dismissive of the worries of the plaintiffs in the case.
"None of the parade of horribles respondents claim could occur...has happened," the Court's newest Justice wrote. "In the unlikely event any do take place, Congress can quickly step in."'
Hardly reassuring use of the English - or American - language.
It would be interesting to know a bit more about which "horribles" he is thinking about and how exactly Congress will "step in quickly.." [Is he talking about a veto?]
As a fervent advocate of the separation of government and religion having seen and experienced some of the worst possible excesses imaginable in various countries in Europe under Nazism and Communism this is about as far from making me whoop with joy as I can imagine.
Reply -
0%
Lurch2 years ago
I agree with both of you to some degree.
As a semi religious person who appreciates the benefits religion provides, I don`t like the politicization of the largest religious group in America through political purse strings. That said, religious groups have been historically very effective centers of charity for those who have fallen through the cracks of society. As a regular community volunteer I think this is an admirable initiative. The question is how to share the $ among all religions and regions for the greatest positive affect.
This is where I have trouble with the results.
Bush`s Faith-based initiatives have been politicized and have been proven ineffective. As a taxpayer I find this misuse or waste of our money offensive.
Why not apply NCLB type rigid testing to Faith-based initiatives in order to keep the money flowing?
Reply -
0%
tiredofnonsense2 years ago
"Making Faith-based legal doesn't make it effective. "
The fact is that the faith based agencies where more effective than non faith based before the question of making government money available. Unfortunately, with all the strings attached, few agencies will actually apply for the money.
Reply -
0%
KeyserSooze2 years ago
"Making Faith-based legal doesn't make it effective."
The fact that it's faith based, doesn't make it bad or ineffective.
The point is that these groups were being hampered by unreasonably restrictive laws.
We give support to lots of groups who provide assistance to people in need, and faith based groups should not be excluded simply because christo-phoebic groups are going to have a tantrum about it.
Reply
-
-
-
0%
MajJohn2 years ago
It will be so nice for luvmyprez and me not to be annoyed by your presence (in heaven) and it is euphoric to know we are righteous. By the way you said the agnostics were bad, we didn't. That's the thing about being a Christian, we're all inclusive, too bad you're not. We can still pray for you whether you like it or not.
Reply
-
-
0%
Dave532 years ago
note that separation of church and state is a constructed doctrine out of the constitution that merely says that the government shall not establish a religion (ie. church of England type).
Now some would make any relationship between religion and the state illegal. Quite a stretch.
Reply -
0%
Vehre2 years ago
Things like the Freedom From Religion Foundation are why, however mad/disappointed I may be with W, I can never be a liberal or a Democrat.
Especially in the inner city, faith-based groups are highly effective ways to deliver services and assistance ot the underprivileged. Some may have records of dishonesty, but not great majority. Phoney,money-grubbing televangelists are not the kind of people I'm talking about, but the inner-city churches and mainistries.
The thing I'm not comfortable about is the ability of these groups to exclude others from working with them. It seems to me that if you take public money you should not then be able to turn people away either from working as volunteers or from receiving services because they are not part of your group. Not that private groups shouldn't be able to decide with whom to associate--that's a civil right the ACLU does NOT support--but that if they take money from society as a whole, they lose the right to be exclusive.
Reply-
0%
coolwhip1 year, 11 months ago
Oh yes, the Freedom From Religion Foundation is eeeeeevil!
These are some of the anti-American things they have done:
"In modern times the first to speak out for prison reform, for humane treatment of the mentally ill, for abolition of capital punishment, for women's right to vote, for death with dignity for the terminally ill, and for the right to choose contraception, sterilization and abortion have been freethinkers, just as they were the first to call for an end to slavery."
Reply
-
-
0%
libsRfunny2 years ago
So they prefer people suffer instead of getting help. I bet a faith-based charity is far more efficient with the funds it gets than "professional" charities that gobble up most of the funds while lining their pockets.
Reply-
0%
quackpot2 years ago
The key word here is PRIVATE money.
Please do not waste MY tax dollars on initiatives that have been repeatedly shown to be ineffective.
Reply -
-
0%
Lurch2 years ago
libs,
> I bet a faith-based charity is far more efficient with the funds it gets than "professional" charities that gobble up most of the funds while lining their pockets.
How do you know?
I want data backing this up because I know that the Red Cross for example is quite effective at providing support to people in need, whereas abstinence only faith based programs have been shown to be a waste of funds.
It should not be a faith vs no-faith; that is just politicization of religion and charity.
The question should be which charities demonstrate the greatest achievement per $ towards their stated goals.
Reply -
0%
NelsonR2 years ago
Oh right, give the Church's the money to donate, they are so charitable and tax free already. The U.S. is inundated with numerous poor, homeless and needy now. Where are all these donations every Sunday going to now? The needy get crumbs while the donors get Sunday redemption for sins of the past week. I think a doner should donate himself and not rely on past Church's practices or other charitable groups to squander his proceeds.
Reply
-
-
-
0%
SpazMat2 years ago
Will they be able to advocate before the 2008 election anytime before 2011?
Reply -
-
0%
MRCOFFEECAKE2 years ago
They are, but just how many "faith based" organizations, using our tax dollar would spend it on "pro-choice" advertisements
and supoport "pro-choice" candidates?
None!
All of these "faith based" efforts are supposed to be apolitical.. these advertisements clearly cross the line!
I am not pro-choice, but I do not want my tax dollars being spent on political ads...
THAT is the issue!
Reply -
0%
SpazMat2 years ago
Yes, all of them. The metric should be how well they do the job, not whether they believe any particular thing (or not, atheists and agnostics are allowed in to).
Reply
-
-
-
0%
KingOfTruth2 years ago
The White House program appears to have had a substantial impact.
Among the programs: Substance abuse treatment, housing for AIDS patients, community re-entry for inmates, housing for homeless veterans and emergency food assistance.
No wonder DemLibs and atheists are fighting the programs so vigorously......
Reply-
0%
KingOfTruth2 years ago
With the White House Office of Faith-Based and Community Initiatives, President Bush says he wants to level the playing field. Religious charities and secular charities should compete for government money on an equal footing.
Taxpayers in the case "set out a parade of horribles that they claim could occur" unless the court stopped the Bush administration initiative, wrote Justice Samuel Alito. "Of course, none of these things has happened."
White House spokeswoman Emily Lawrimore called the ruling "a substantial victory for efforts by Americans to more effectively aid our neighbors in need of help."
She said the faith-based and community initiative can remain focused on "strengthening America's armies of compassion."
Reply -
-
0%
Lurch2 years ago
KOT,
you`re such the socialist! (just kidding)
I think the reason Dems and others might be fighting some of the initiatives you mentioned is because that`s what they had been doing for years without federal $ and then suddenly somebody sticks a `Faith-based` label on the project and the taxpayer money suddenly comes rolling in, to the Johnny-come-lately.
Where is the data on what program or what approach is more effective?
Reply -
0%
quackpot2 years ago
Why re-package these social programs under the title "faith-based"?
I wonder if the reason is to make compassion for the unfortuate palatable to the neocons? If so, I applaude the Bush administration.
Reply
-
-
-
-
-
0%
bubba22 years ago
ANY and ALL organizations that are registered with the federal government as non-profit entities (e.g., 501(c)3, etc.) are REQUIRED by law to have their financial records open and available to the public at any time.
I am affiliated with several non-profit orgs and I do know that this is the law.
If you go to a group that is registered as non-profit and ask to see their financial records and they refuse, you can report them to the IRS.
Reply -
-
0%
Twilightreader2 years ago
I get so tired of people whining about $ going to faith based initiatives. I beleive in equality and that means that people should have a right to choose whether to send their children to a public school or a private school without having to pay double the taxes if they choose the religious school. It is dicriminatory to make a parent pay to send a child to a religious school and still pay taxes for the public school down the road where their child does not even attend.
Reply
-
-
0%
Goppy2 years ago
Yay!!!
I'm so happy!!
Now goverment can supply funding to Scientologists in Clearwater Florida to set up drug rehab and personality test centers.
Theres lots a druggies in Clearwater - and lots o people who need a personality check!
But Ima worried about the local Mosque. They have been agitatin for federal fundin for a program they want to start. Its modeled after The 700 Club. Except they call it The 911 Club.
And o course, now it looks like they is gonna git that money.
I wisht the Supreme Court woulda been more explicit and said that Faith Baised Inititatives were only available for Southern Baptists. Cause weare the only ones with the power base to administer this type of thing.
Reply-
0%
bubba22 years ago
You can joke about it, but any Muslim mosque that is registered with the federal government as a non-profit, religious entity can now apply for the available federal funds. They may or may not get the funds - and they may or may not then sue in the courts for them if they believe they are being discriminated against.
Reply -
0%
MacR2 years ago
And if they get the funds and do not disclose where they put their money. Then we have the right to tell them to get f*cked. Just like everyone else who wont comply with the law.
And oh by the way, I thought them fanatics there in that religion of peace already had their 911 club on tv. You know that Al-Jezera brodcast.
Reply
-
-
0%
Bkumm2 years ago
Conservatives crack me up. They don't seem to have any problem handing millions of dollars over to faith based organizations for 'outreach', but not one thin dime for prevention of some of the things that this outreach is needed for.
Hilarious.
Reply-
0%
scott42612 years ago
"It's a bad day for the First Amendment. The Supreme Court just put a big dent in the wall of separation between church and state, and a big smile on Pat Robertson's face," said Ralph Ness, [president of People for the American Way], in a statement. "Today's ruling will make it more difficult for citizens whose tax dollars are being unlawfully spent to subsidize religion to bring a complaint in court. It is also consistent with a broader strategy by right-wing judges and activists to restrict standing for average Americans to challenge powerful government and business interests."
I agree, Mr. Ness. I agree wholeheartedly....
Reply -
-
-
-
-
-
0%
MacR2 years ago
If you have a problem with faith-based orgs applying for grants or the better way of saying it. Help from the goverment. Then do not deal with them. If they can prove that they do help out with whatever they are doing. Why is it so wrong to ask the gov for funds?
I mean really if everyone else can, why not a faith-based group? If they comply with the law and they do really help out with their causes. Then why are you so freakin upset? You would think that orgs that help people out would get a hand-out from the gov just like everyone else. I mean after all, all those people who help that org that also work at another job that does not have anything to do with that faith-based org, still pays taxes like everyone else. I think those people have the right to have that money put to something they think is more worth while than lets say.
A museum of Tea ware, or a bridge to no-where.
Reply-
-
0%
kedirian2 years ago
I have never heard of a faith-based organization that did not in one way or another, mostly SUBTLY, propagandize for their causes...
Remember, when a person is down and out, it is far easier to browbeat him/her over the head, preferrably with the ....BIBLE!
Reply
-
-
0%
lordlimbo2 years ago
most orginizations including the red cross utilize up to 35% of funds donated to administration most are higher. I know of only 1 organiztion that is prohibited by its own laws not to use any money raised for charity for any other purpose then intended and thats the Fraternal Order of Eagles check it out. As for government money going to charitys its a good thing as more and more government services fall by the wayside and more and more people are being left out in the cold
Reply -
-
100%
MajJohn2 years ago
That's not a good idea, the Democrats would win few elections if they couldn't stuff the faith based box.
Reply
-
-
-
0%
Jaydee402 years ago
My eighteen year old daughter hates the bible and instantly thinks less of anyone who uses it for argument sake. My sixteen and nineteen year old sons have a healthy tolerance and recognize the bibles historical and moral value even though the see it as a work of fiction. I think one teacher who believed in the bible and used it in class along with a fellow student who routine quoted the bible and all that his religion told him. His religion however didn't stop him from threatening to rape her, and use violence as a tool on other students. I know these are the actions of a couple of people and not true Christians but they have made a strong foe to be reckoned with who now hates everything religious.
Reply -
-
-
0%
lum-chate2 years ago
I'm for the traditional religions as much as the next guy but feel that a country thats in debt up to their eyeballs to China has no business giving away millions to the Pat Robertson's of the world!
Reply -
0%
toph19732 years ago
This is such BS. The supreme court is unconstitutional. With their naked power grab back in the day.They have completely misintrpreted and therefore violated the constitution many times. I say we have a traitor party right on the White house lawn. Hang all the supreme court justices, Bush, Cheney, Rice, Rummy, Rove, Abramoff. I'm sick of the traitors in the government these days.
My taxes being given to some BS faith based garbage. As if the church doesn't have enough money all ready. What heppened to the separation of church and state. More instances of religious people trying to force people to think like they do. Well you know what, Eff you.
Reply-
0%
SpazMat2 years ago
You da man toph! We can always count on you for fact filled, tolerant (emphasis on the rant), insightful comments.
Reply
-
-
100%
MonkeyBiz2 years ago
Giving my tax dollars to churches goes against everything I ever learned about our country. Even the term "faith based" is a Christian term. There are religions that have no concept of "faith."
I find it really remarkable that the right wing is now shouting "hallayluuuyaaaa!" The same tax dollar funneled through a church (so they can get their cut) is worth celebrating, but if the government gives that dollar to a needy person, the right wing screams "socialism" or "communism" and raises hell about it.
Reply -
-
Add a Comment
Sign In With Your Propeller Account
Please keep your comments relevant to this story.
To create a live link, simply type the URL (including http://) or email address and we will make it a live link for you. You can put up to 3 URLs in your comments. Line breaks and paragraphs are automatically converted — no need to use <p> or <br /> tags.