Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Rules for Religion-Run Programs Finished (Faith-Based Is Back)

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU
 
Khephra Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-22-03 06:53 AM
Original message
Rules for Religion-Run Programs Finished (Faith-Based Is Back)
WASHINGTON -- The White House is completing four government regulations and proposing a half-dozen more to provide federal money for religion-oriented programs run by people President Bush has dubbed America's "neighborhood healers."

Bush was to call Cabinet members to the White House on Monday to hear how they are eliminating barriers that have kept "faith-based" groups from obtaining federal grants to help people in need, said a senior administration official who spoke on condition of anonymity.

"The president feels very strongly that we need to tear down the wall that separates the poor from effective programs," the official said. "The president doesn't want to make the public square faith-favored, he simply wants to make it faith-friendly."

The official said the White House also would announce that the Department of Health and Human Services has awarded $30.5 million in grants to 81 organizations, which will use the money to provide technical assistance and sub-grants to church-related and community groups in 45 states.

more...........

http://www.newsday.com/news/politics/wire/sns-ap-bush-r...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
The Backlash Cometh Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-22-03 07:35 AM
Response to Original message
1. We all know it's not the poor that's going to get that assistance.
It's like the country club. They'll help their own make their house payments when times are tough.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
no_arbusto Donating Member (548 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-22-03 07:51 AM
Response to Original message
2. Mr. Gorbachev...
tear down this wall that separates the poor from effective programs.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
catmandu57 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-22-03 08:47 AM
Response to Original message
3. He's trying to shore up the base
but, I don't think this will help. For one thing the ammount is chicken feed and won't help anyone, and we know where the money is going to wind up, right back in the furhers pockets.

Even when we had the ineffective welfare system, the money went to the owners of the resources, grocery stores, landlords, reaped the monetary benefits, not the poor.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DBoon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-22-03 09:08 AM
Response to Original message
4. Wait until Scientology applies for some federal $!!
I just can't wait until th "Church" of Scientology applies for taxpayer money for their reading program.

Much as I despise "faith based" programs, I think it would almost be worth it to see this happen

For those of you not familiar with this outfit, an expose is at :

http://www.xenu.net/
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DBoon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-22-03 09:11 AM
Response to Original message
5. Money for Rastafarians!!
Have the Rastafarians apply for grants for a church-run drug treatment program.

I'm having fun with this faith-based stuff. In the eclectic mix of American faiths, anything is possible.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Walt Starr Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-22-03 09:22 AM
Response to Original message
6. Welfare for churches
That's what it is, plain and simple.

Republicans are in favor of welfare for churches and other corporations (if you don't believe churches are corporations, you really need to look into the facts), but not a dime for the people who REALLY need it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Oreegone Donating Member (726 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-22-03 09:27 AM
Response to Original message
7. I think there are more inisidious provisions in this than we are aware of
I watched some speakers on C-Span the other night with a minister from Americans United for Separation of Church and State. For those interested in more information I strongly recommend their website for lots of interesting reading.
http://www.au.org /


Here is one of the great Shrub failures in Texas of "faith based"...social help.

"So, the feel-good winners-only analysis simply isn't worth the paper it's printed on. Only the full-group analysis (known technically as "intent-to-treat," a holdover term from its origins in medical research) has any real value. And on that analysis, the program has a net effect of zero or a little worse than zero. That makes it a loser."
http://slate.msn.com/id/2086617 /
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
leesa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-22-03 09:41 AM
Response to Reply #7
8. The purpose is for right wing indoctrination
That is what all these funky new "christian" churches are all about. One of their fundamental tenants is that they not have trained religious leaders. The Republican leaders take over and the result is a country full of whacked out christians who haven't a clue what Christianity or compassion is all about. These people don't even help their own...but they will have big, brand new churches to go to.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Avis Donating Member (113 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-22-03 10:04 AM
Response to Original message
9. Do Churches really want this?
Recently I was in a town about an hour away grocery shopping on my way to my mom's house. I saw an elderly man barely moving along the parking lot - when he got to the end of the cars, I figured out he didn't have a car and offered him a ride. I took him home to the worst house you could imagine with his little sack of a quart of milk. He told me he feared winter and the cold. The next day I called the church across the street from him and said "your neighbor needs help" and explained the situation. The answer I got back was "we help people in our congregation, we don't do big things, call social services" -- I really wonder if churches want to take on the responsibility of becoming
social services? Maybe if they were required to help out people like my new friend, they wouldn't be too excited about faith based funding -
maybe they only want the money to do for their own congregations. I was so disappointed. (my friends and I drop off food etc for this man, and
are trying to figure out ways to help him - someone does care)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pfitz59 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-22-03 10:19 AM
Response to Reply #9
10. Local senior services......
Most counties have some form of SECULAR senior services agency. They do dial-a-ride transport, meals-on-wheels and minor home repair. In my county they do work with several churches to provide respite programs and the like. They also run senior centers for more active seniors.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Avis Donating Member (113 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-22-03 10:27 AM
Response to Reply #10
11. budget cuts
Our wonderful Governor of Minnesota, has seen fit to cut senior programs. The "ride service was just published as a 90% cut in services" - I would suppose that pretty much ends it in that area, and senior meals are cut. I just didn't understand how a big church that runs all of these programs for children, can not care about their elderly neighbor right across the street?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
booksenkatz Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-22-03 10:30 AM
Response to Original message
12. Can atheism be declared a religion?
I suppose you could say it's a belief system, right? Or disbelief, as it were. Because if I ever find myself in need of help, I want to go to an atheistic service for assistance as opposed to, say, a Pentecostal Christian service. I can't even believe I'm having to type these words; in my naivete, I was certain that the CONSTITUTION OF THE FSCKING UNITED STATES OF AMERICA would always be in place to protect me from the Creflo Dollars and the Bob Tiltons. Guess not, though.

I'm going to create a religion and have it qualify for funding. In my new religion, we believe in the divinity of giant styrofoam grasshoppers, and that the world was created when "Hoppy" belched vast quantities of magma and fire and spun it into a ball with his hind legs. Is the government going to declare my religion a false one? Should the US government be in the business of picking and choosing which religions are "real" and which religions are "false?"

Hoppy is Great (and anyone who disagrees with me is an infidel),

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
7th_Sephiroth Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-22-03 12:33 PM
Response to Reply #12
14. I got a better one
In A Religion i have created, every day is a holiday, the world was created by the big bang, and when you die you go to paradise island where you can do anything you want, even have sex all day and veg out on tv with an endless supply of whatever you want to eat and drink. I want my goverment money now. :beer:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
GinaMaria Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-22-03 12:47 PM
Response to Reply #12
16. You might try
Secular Humanism. The S. Humanists are already organized, have an outlined belief system, perform marriages etc.


http://canada.humanists.net/services.html

http://canada.humanists.net/principles.html
What is humanism?

http://www.nonreligiousweddings.com /
Secular Wedding officiants

I don't know if these beliefs are similar to your own, but I took guess that they may be pretty close :-)

Peace
Gina
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
booksenkatz Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-22-03 01:54 PM
Response to Reply #16
17. Actually
I'm a very spiritual person who's taken bits and pieces from Wicca and from Buddhism, with bits of S.H. thrown in. It does make me wonder if those of us who've created our own belief systems in this way might qualify for some gubmint money??? Why not? My belief system is, for example, far less violent than Christianity, so why should they get funding and I don't??
:shrug:

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
GinaMaria Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-22-03 03:27 PM
Response to Reply #17
18. I may not understand the initiative
correctly. My understanding is that different religeous orgs are to provide social services using tax payers dollars. It can be challenging if you are a belief system of one (person), but not impossible. That's why I suggested connecting with SHs. Since they already have a few numbers. I support you. I'd like to see you jump in there and apply for the money just like anyone else. I think you'd do a great job. :-)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
PurityOfEssence Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-22-03 11:06 AM
Response to Original message
13. You may not use the funnel and tamping tool to ram god down their throats
The proper procedure it to starve the intended in a sealed room for an adequate period time, and then serve a nice steaming plate of god with no side dishes.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
peterh Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-22-03 12:34 PM
Response to Original message
15. This one item.
provide federal money for religion-oriented programs run by people President Bush has dubbed America's "neighborhood healers."

makes it sound as if dubya has personally picked is to receive money, thus negating any fairness that the program is espousing. <big friggin surprise there>

I also have a problem with dubya sidestepping Congress with an EO on this. Congress is in charge of the purse strings. Not only is this not Constitutional from a state/church perspective, but it doesnt sound Constitutional from the standpoint of the Executive Branch dictating where money will be spend.

I know the Executive branch has some discretion on where and how to spend money that has been approved in a particular area, but when Congress says no to a sub-category of a programthat should be it. This type of EO seems to negate the authority of Congress, thus rendering it unconstitutional.

Thats my perspective anyway.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Oct 24th 2014, 10:41 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC