Court permits White House outreach to religious charities

06-26-2007, 05:24 PM

Court permits White House outreach to religious charities

Story Highlights
• The Supreme Court permitted White House outreach to faith-based charities
• The 5-4 decision said taxpayers did not have the "standing" to challenge office
• Atheist and agnostic groups said office gave religious groups unfair access
• White House says the decision is a win for thousands of "faith-based nonprofits"

By a 5-4 vote, a conservative majority concluded taxpayers did not have "standing" to challenge in court the discretionary spending authority of the executive branch for its Office of Faith-Based and Community Initiatives.

http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/06/...tus/index.html

The crimes of this administration against this nation continue.

elSicomoro · 06-26-2007, 05:58 PM

Based on how I'm reading the article, I don't see a real problem with what the White House is doing per se. It's an office of the White House that solicits aid for faith-based charities, but is not endorsing a religion. I personally don't agree with it, but I wouldn't say that what they're doing is actually wrong.

06-26-2007, 06:05 PM

It is absolutely endorsing religion.
It is a blatant breech of the separation of church and state.

richlevy · 06-26-2007, 08:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sycamore

Based on how I'm reading the article, I don't see a real problem with what the White House is doing per se. It's an office of the White House that solicits aid for faith-based charities, but is not endorsing a religion. I personally don't agree with it, but I wouldn't say that what they're doing is actually wrong.

Of course, when they deny funds to a shelter for abused women run by the Wiccan Sisterhood of Portland, then the shit's going to hit the fan. Two big problems with this administration is it's pandering to the evangelicals and a complete failure to follow an idea through to it's conclusion. The faith-based program is the worst combination of both. I am waiting for the inevitable lawsuit by Wiccans, Buddhists, or some other religious group who couldn't meet some sort of religious litmus test.

elSicomoro · 06-26-2007, 09:06 PM

But this office apparently doesn't control the funds...they lobby for groups to get the $$$. Having said that, I agree with you, Rich...I'd be curious to see who's been approved and who's been denied.

richlevy · 06-26-2007, 09:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sycamore

But this office apparently doesn't control the funds...they lobby for groups to get the $$$. Having said that, I agree with you, Rich...I'd be curious to see who's been approved and who's been denied.

Bill Maher hosted David Kuo who worked for that office.

Mr. Kuo was not happy there.

Quote:

I left the White House in December 2003. By that time, I'd grown quite frustrated with White House and Congressional approaches to faith-based issues and I let those in power know it. Virtually everything I've written here I told to those above me more than a year ago. I hoped things would change. But frankly I didn't quite trust my own judgment. I'd survived an intense health crisis but quickly returned to work; I wondered if my grumpiness came from fatigue, stress, or something my doctors secretly did to me while I was sick. I left, and went fishing. Literally. I joined the professional bass fishing tour and spent a chunk of my time on my (loaned) Skeeter boat stalking fish, clearing my head, and pursuing God. I figured that with time, my anger would subside.

wolf · 06-26-2007, 10:46 PM

If a Pagan group could get organized long enough to fill out the paperwork, they'd probably get the faith based funding.

To date, none of them have managed it, IIRC. I know several members of the board of directors of the largest pagan networking group in Philadelphia ... lots of talk and no action.

piercehawkeye45 · 06-27-2007, 07:38 AM

I really don’t have much of an opinion on the ethics of this but I will say that this is a slippery slope that we should be very careful with and not try to ski down.

Cloud · 06-27-2007, 10:20 AM

many court cases revolve around technical legal issues such as "standing"--the opinion addresses only the right of the particularly people suing to do so under the law. It has less to do with politics, religion, or ethics than you might think.

elSicomoro · 07-03-2007, 06:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by wolf

If a Pagan group could get organized long enough to fill out the paperwork, they'd probably get the faith based funding.

To date, none of them have managed it, IIRC. I know several members of the board of directors of the largest pagan networking group in Philadelphia ... lots of talk and no action.

What if we tried it for COTWP?

06-26-2007, 05:24 PM	#1
rkzenrage Guest Posts: n/a	Court permits White House outreach to religious charities Court permits White House outreach to religious charities Story Highlights • The Supreme Court permitted White House outreach to faith-based charities • The 5-4 decision said taxpayers did not have the "standing" to challenge office • Atheist and agnostic groups said office gave religious groups unfair access • White House says the decision is a win for thousands of "faith-based nonprofits" By a 5-4 vote, a conservative majority concluded taxpayers did not have "standing" to challenge in court the discretionary spending authority of the executive branch for its Office of Faith-Based and Community Initiatives. http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/06/...tus/index.html The crimes of this administration against this nation continue.

06-26-2007, 10:46 PM	#7
wolf lobber of scimitars Join Date: Jul 2001 Location: Phila Burbs Posts: 20,774	If a Pagan group could get organized long enough to fill out the paperwork, they'd probably get the faith based funding. To date, none of them have managed it, IIRC. I know several members of the board of directors of the largest pagan networking group in Philadelphia ... lots of talk and no action. __________________ wolf eht htiw og "Conspiracies are the norm, not the exception." --G. Edward Griffin The Creature from Jekyll Island High Priestess of the Church of the Whale Penis

06-27-2007, 10:20 AM	#9
Cloud ... Join Date: Feb 2007 Posts: 8,360	many court cases revolve around technical legal issues such as "standing"--the opinion addresses only the right of the particularly people suing to do so under the law. It has less to do with politics, religion, or ethics than you might think. __________________ "Guard your honor. Let your reputation fall where it will. And outlive the bastards!"

06-26-2007, 05:58 PM	#2
elSicomoro Person who doesn't update the user title Join Date: Jan 2001 Posts: 12,486	Based on how I'm reading the article, I don't see a real problem with what the White House is doing per se. It's an office of the White House that solicits aid for faith-based charities, but is not endorsing a religion. I personally don't agree with it, but I wouldn't say that what they're doing is actually wrong.

06-26-2007, 06:05 PM	#3
rkzenrage Guest Posts: n/a	It is absolutely endorsing religion. It is a blatant breech of the separation of church and state.

06-26-2007, 09:06 PM	#5
elSicomoro Person who doesn't update the user title Join Date: Jan 2001 Posts: 12,486	But this office apparently doesn't control the funds...they lobby for groups to get the $$$. Having said that, I agree with you, Rich...I'd be curious to see who's been approved and who's been denied.

06-27-2007, 07:38 AM	#8
piercehawkeye45 Franklin Pierce Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: Minnesota Posts: 3,695	I really don’t have much of an opinion on the ethics of this but I will say that this is a slippery slope that we should be very careful with and not try to ski down.

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)