|
|
|
Dude
SFN Die Hard
USA
6891 Posts |
 Posted - 07/01/2004 : 00:11:17
|
http://www.ohiogop.org/News/Read.aspx?ID=637
Why do I get a sick feeling when I read that the fundies are getting offices in all these major government department for their faith based initiatives?
|
Ignorance is preferable to error; and he is less remote from the truth who believes nothing, than he who believes what is wrong.
-- Thomas Jefferson
"god :: the last refuge of a man with no answers and no argument." - G. Carlin
Hope, n.
The handmaiden of desperation; the opiate of despair; the illegible signpost on the road to perdition. ~~ da filth |
|
|
|
nonconformist
New Member
1 Post |
Posted - 07/01/2004 : 15:04:15 [Permalink]
|
Yeah its infuriating. Particularly since Bush 1 and 2 realized the power of the Evangelical vote...its grown into something dangerous in my opinion. Sneaky underhanded ways of skirting separation of Church and State.
Im yet to see an evangelical that doesnt think the people who dont beleive as they do are going to hell in a handbasket. Those types deserve no influence in governmental matters.
 |
 |
|
|
Tim
SFN Regular
USA
775 Posts |
Posted - 07/02/2004 : 02:10:10 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Sneaky underhanded ways of skirting separation of Church and State.
These guys could care less about the Constitution. It's about power. The administration wants to control the RR as it's one reliable power base. Here's an interesting story about this same thing fresh off of the wire...
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=536&ncid=536&e=2&u=/ap/20040702/ap_on_go_pr_wh/bush_campaign_churches
The Constitution and individual privacy rights mean nothing to these guys.
Edited because the article I linked to was not the right one, and I have no idea what happened |
"We got an issue in America. Too many good docs are gettin' out of business. Too many OB/GYNs aren't able to practice their -- their love with women all across this country." Dubya in Poplar Bluff, Missouri, 9/6/2004
|
| Edited by - Tim on 07/05/2004 00:37:37 |
|
|
|
Robb
SFN Regular
USA
1223 Posts |
Posted - 07/02/2004 : 07:43:06 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by nonconformist
Im yet to see an evangelical that doesnt think the people who dont beleive as they do are going to hell in a handbasket. Those types deserve no influence in governmental matters.
Actually as an American citizen, everybody deserves influence in governmental matters, whether you agree with them or not. |
|
|
|
Reluctant Prophet
New Member
13 Posts |
Posted - 07/02/2004 : 22:34:39 [Permalink]
|
WHy is everyone so scared of faith based initiatives? I can think of a dozen local charities, most of them church based, that will do a whole lot more with the money then is curnetly being done with it, and gets more of that to the needy.
It makes me happy to see that St. Vincent de Paul Charities, that have a 10% cost (90% to needy) will get money that would have gone to the American Cancer Society, who bought Lexus cars for their execs.
The Founding Fathers did not seperate church and state, but made it so the state could not grow theocratic roots. |
|
|
|
Renae
SFN Regular
543 Posts |
Posted - 07/03/2004 : 08:09:32 [Permalink]
|
Tax dollars should not be used for religious programs or activities. Period.
|
|
|
|
@tomic
Administrator
USA
4607 Posts |
Posted - 07/03/2004 : 08:56:30 [Permalink]
|
I have nothing bad to say about the Cancer Society or Vincent de Paul but these organizations do not have to follow federal rules even though they take federal money. They can hire only Christians if they want to. And who gets to decide what charity gets what money? This is the governments way of legitimicizing certain religions while deeming others unworthy. This is part of the danger that our founding father's recognized. So how about we give equal money to Islamic faiths and Scientology? Where does it end? This money is my tax money and I think it should go to government agencies. At least these agencies don't waste money on crap like churches.
@ |
Gravity, not just a good idea...it's the law!
Sportsbettingacumen.com: The science of sports betting |
|
|
|
Kil
Evil Skeptic
USA
13477 Posts |
Posted - 07/03/2004 : 09:38:45 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Renae:
Tax dollars should not be used for religious programs or activities. Period.
I agree, pretty much. But here is the thing. Church's do have programs that feed the hungry. What I would like to see, when using our tax dollars, are restrictions on their activities in terms of proselytizing when they are engaged in such an activity. If they want to be charitable, fine. If they want converts, they need to find other ways to do that. They must not trade food, or whatever, for religion.
After the 94 earthquake that hit Los Angeles I was left homeless. The building I was living in was red-taged. We had to move. We were not prepared for that. Who was? FEMA was there to help. But they
had to assess the damages. It took months for them to come through for us. We couldn't wait for their assistance. We had to come up with a first, last and a security deposit, fast! The red cross was a total bummer. I still have no idea what they did beside take up peoples time with interviews.
Only the Salvation Army took immediate action. They gave out food vouchers and grants so people could get into other places to live. They did not once mention a belief in God as a pre-requisite for that assistance. They didn't come back later to collect. In fact, had I not known that they were faith based, I would have never been able to guess based on how they conducted themselves.
Now, I do have problems with the Salvation Army on other grounds. But I have no problem at all with how they came in and did what needed to be done. They were there when the government wasn't, at least for immediate assistance. Again, not one word about what I, or they believed ever came up.
If the money that goes to faith based charities comes with a string attached, that string being that they must not proselytize while giving assistance, now or later, I'm not sure I would oppose that. If they think those acts of kindness will get them into heaven, why should I care?
I understand that what Bush seeks is something ells. And that should be fought. But a blanket denial of any grant to a charity that is attached to a religion makes no sense to me. What matters to me is how they conduct themselves during a crisis. People do need to be fed at times and my guess is that churches do that the best. Without a decent social net, just who exactly is going to it? Lets not throw out the baby with the bath-water.
The American Cancer Society needs our help too... |
Uncertainty may make you uncomfortable. Certainty makes you ridiculous.
Why not question something for a change?
Genetic Literacy Project |
|
|
|
Renae
SFN Regular
543 Posts |
Posted - 07/03/2004 : 11:18:37 [Permalink]
|
Part of why I love this board is because you all are so damned smart and articulate, you make me think harder about my own positions (as well as about others' positions.)
I worked for a non-profit nursing home owned by the Lutheran church. Most of its operating funds came from the government via Medicaid and Medicare; few residents arrive able to pay $40-50K a year to live there. The few that DO, soon run out of money and must apply for Medicaid.
So technically, the government was funding this Lutheran-owned organization. However, the religious stuff played only a small role. They had regular church services and a full-time paid pastor, who I adored. The board members were unpaid Lutheran church leaders. But I saw no proseltyzing...it was a respectful and loving place, for the most part.
I see no way to separate operating funds from religious activity in this instance. Should Medicaid have taken back 2% of its funding because fragile old people sat in a small chapel once a week and sang hymns? That hardly seems humane or compassionate or even reasonable. For some residents, their faith and access to a pastor were enormous comfort at the end of their lives. Honestly, I saw only good come out of this.
Should the government not fund church-owned hospitals and other health-based organizations? Should the government not fund the Salvation Army because parts of its mission are designed to further the word of God?
Yet I STILL don't want My Tax Dollars given to a church whose ideology I may or may not agree with. Heaven knows I shudder at the thought of My Tax Dollars being given to the anti-gay church groups, or the fire and brimstone judgmental twits, or the abortion clinic bombers...
|
|
|
|
Reluctant Prophet
New Member
13 Posts |
Posted - 07/03/2004 : 14:37:04 [Permalink]
|
It burns me to no end that I subsidise:
People who can work, but don't
Scumbags that prey on society, get tossed in jail, and expect cable TV
ABORTIONS for birth control ??????
Many charities that suck resources from the recipients
Afirmative action
The entire curent political aparatus.
$100 a plate 'benifits for the homeless/sick/orphaned/etc....' that cost $80-90 a plate to throw.
I could go on all day.
Nowhere have I read that it would be only christian organizations receiving the funds.
It further burns me to no end that the government can give money taken from you or I to a charity period.
As far as the American Cancer Society....
Any charity that uses donated money, either by charitable contribution, or via taxes, that uses that money to by Lexus cars for its' execs deserves nothing short of being disbaned, and it's funds and assets given to other groups that do the same work with less money.
quote:
"This money is my tax money and I think it should go to government agencies. At least these agencies don't waste money on crap like churches."
????????
What country do you live in. In the United States, the aparatus that runs welfare sucks 20+% of the resources between administration and waste. |
| Edited by - Reluctant Prophet on 07/03/2004 14:43:36 |
|
|
|
@tomic
Administrator
USA
4607 Posts |
Posted - 07/03/2004 : 15:02:26 [Permalink]
|
Am I supposed to feel sorry for you? Here are two suggestions:
1. Vote
2. Move to China
I might have better suggestions but I would only go to the trouble if the post was anything besides rhetoric.
@ |
Gravity, not just a good idea...it's the law!
Sportsbettingacumen.com: The science of sports betting |
|
|
|
Kil
Evil Skeptic
USA
13477 Posts |
Posted - 07/03/2004 : 16:21:14 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Reluctant Prophet:
As far as the American Cancer Society....
Any charity that uses donated money, either by charitable contribution, or via taxes, that uses that money to by Lexus cars for its' execs deserves nothing short of being disbaned, and it's funds and assets given to other groups that do the same work with less money.
First of all, I guess you are getting the car info from a reliable source? In any case, those people do work for living. I'm sure you would have them riding bicycles. But what is really important is a breakdown of how contributions to the ACS are spent.
Here is the 2001 breakdown. I don't know what the executive staff was driving at the time:
Allocation of Funds in 2001:
quote:
Research - ($131 million) 17%
Prevention - ($161 million) 21%
Patient Support - ($143 million) 18%
Detection & Treatment - ($129 million) 17%
Total Program Services - 73%
Management & General - 8%
Fundraising - 19%
Total Supporting Services - 27%
Total Program and Supporting Services - 100%
Eight percent for management and general. And I am supposed to be appalled by that? Check out their fact sheet:
http://www.cancer.org/docroot/AA/content/AA_1_2_2000_Fact_Sheet.asp |
Uncertainty may make you uncomfortable. Certainty makes you ridiculous.
Why not question something for a change?
Genetic Literacy Project |
|
|
|
Reluctant Prophet
New Member
13 Posts |
Posted - 07/03/2004 : 20:34:14 [Permalink]
|
The numbers they give include there expenses to give that money, not the actual money given. In most cases the expense outweighs the end benifit. See the IRS 990 at Guide Star. You have to register, but its' free.
It's the IRS 990, where things are harder to hide. I don't know what they were driving. But whatever they were driving,, the top 5 could have driven anything they wanted at an average of 230,000K a year direct and 100,000K a year in 'benefits and defered compensation.' Other salaries and wages make up 195 Million.
It is beyond a charity, it is a big business with paid lobbyists. There is no doubt they do some good, but many would do much better with that money. |
|
|
|
Dude
SFN Die Hard
USA
6891 Posts |
Posted - 07/04/2004 : 00:14:07 [Permalink]
|
You want to know why these faith based initiatives are a bad idea? Read up on how they have been doing in TX, where Bush started them when he was Gov.
A report from various religious leaders in TX.
http://www.tfn.org/issues/charitablechoice/report02.html
Faith based initiatives are NOT the same thing as giving to charity. They don't even come close.
Bush promotes and defends religious discrimination with the faith based initiatives. Jobs created with my tax dollars... they can deny me employment based on my religious beliefs.
Read the 12 page justification for religious discrimination while they use my tax dollars.
http://www.whitehouse.gov/government/fbci/booklet.pdf
Makes me sick. |
Ignorance is preferable to error; and he is less remote from the truth who believes nothing, than he who believes what is wrong.
-- Thomas Jefferson
"god :: the last refuge of a man with no answers and no argument." - G. Carlin
Hope, n.
The handmaiden of desperation; the opiate of despair; the illegible signpost on the road to perdition. ~~ da filth |
|
|
|
|
Renae
SFN Regular
543 Posts |
Posted - 07/04/2004 : 06:50:52 [Permalink]
|
Dude, OMG. Yeah, let's not treat alcoholism as a medial/mental illness--let's treat it as a sin. WTF?
Question. Why do those faith-based charities feel they are above the laws and regulations that apply to the rest of us? Why? So they can do evil things? Because they're special?
How ironic ("ironic" meaning "infuratingly hypocritical") that it's these same folks that deny "special priviliges" to gays, minorities, etc. Yet they seek special priviliges for themselves.
|
|
|
|
Kil
Evil Skeptic
USA
13477 Posts |
Posted - 07/04/2004 : 07:22:54 [Permalink]
|
| As I said, I am not at all for the Bush model... |
Uncertainty may make you uncomfortable. Certainty makes you ridiculous.
Why not question something for a change?
Genetic Literacy Project |
|
|
 |
|
Topic Locked
