Obama wants to expand faith-based programs

Thorn

Thorn

Member
Among some other things that have begun to make me more than a little nervous about my favored candidate:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/25473529/

Isn't it time for him to give the boot to some of his advisors and make his own decisions again? This is clearly pandering, as suggested in the article itself, and is bound to alienate many of his supporters.

Government has no business getting involved with religious groups, and vice versa. In addition to that, I can see this as a horrendously fertile ground for massive corruption, at best.
 
Yep he is a politician trying to buy votes with our money. Very typical.
As I have said Obama is just less bad than the alternative. He does offer a glimmer of hope though. Just a glimmer.
 
Thorn said:
Among some other things that have begun to make me more than a little nervous about my favored candidate:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/25473529/

Isn't it time for him to give the boot to some of his advisors and make his own decisions again? This is clearly pandering, as suggested in the article itself, and is bound to alienate many of his supporters.

Government has no business getting involved with religious groups, and vice versa. In addition to that, I can see this as a horrendously fertile ground for massive corruption, at best.
Click to expand...


First of all, the article is terribly inaccurate even with the correction. The key point to all of this, for me, has been addressed by Obama thusly:

“Now, make no mistake, as someone who used to teach constitutional law, I believe deeply in the separation of church and state, but I don’t believe this partnership will endanger that idea – so long as we follow a few basic principles. First, if you get a federal grant, you can’t use that grant money to proselytize to the people you help and you can’t discriminate against them – or against the people you hire – on the basis of their religion. Second, federal dollars that go directly to churches, temples, and mosques can only be used on secular programs. And we’ll also ensure that taxpayer dollars only go to those programs that actually work.”
Click to expand...


With the above caveats, I have no issue with the federal government giving grants to churches that want to run after-school programs and the like.
 
The above caveats have ot been properly enforced under the ecurrent faith based funding very well. No reason to expect that to improve.
 
uscitizen said:
The above caveats have ot been properly enforced under the ecurrent faith based funding very well. No reason to expect that to improve.
Click to expand...


Well, the above caveats do not currently exist. Bush re-wrote the rules as he viewed the above caveats, which had been in place and worked quite well before Bush (like pretty much everything else), as "impediments" to the free exercise of religion.
 
The rules are there, just because they were ignored during the bush administration. As were many other laws and regulations.
Why do you think he hired so many liberty univ lawyers into the justice dept.
 
Thorn said:
Among some other things that have begun to make me more than a little nervous about my favored candidate:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/25473529/

Isn't it time for him to give the boot to some of his advisors and make his own decisions again? This is clearly pandering, as suggested in the article itself, and is bound to alienate many of his supporters.

Government has no business getting involved with religious groups, and vice versa. In addition to that, I can see this as a horrendously fertile ground for massive corruption, at best.
Click to expand...

He's a goddamn panderer. He's gone from being moderately favorable by me to being someone I'm going to have to hold my nose to vote for in a short period of time.
 
Dungheap said:
First of all, the article is terribly inaccurate even with the correction. The key point to all of this, for me, has been addressed by Obama thusly:

With the above caveats, I have no issue with the federal government giving grants to churches that want to run after-school programs and the like.
Click to expand...

That is identical to Bush's faith-based initiatives, which according to liberals violates the 1st Amendment. Hypocrites. But what's new. :rolleyes:
 
uscitizen said:
The rules are there, just because they were ignored during the bush administration. As were many other laws and regulations.
Why do you think he hired so many liberty univ lawyers into the justice dept.
Click to expand...


No, the rules are not there. If you bothered to read the link, you would see that the rules were re-written by Executive Order and then that lax Executive Order was further relaxed at the Department level.

What Obama is proposing is pretty much the state of affairs from LBJ to Clinton. In short, it's not really "new" but a return to the state of affairs that existed before Bush made his Faith-Based Initiatives program a tool to shore up support for Republicans and to fund groups to engage in proselytization and discrimination.

As for the Liberty University hires, what the fuck does that have to do with what Obama is talking about? Nothing.
 
Dungheap said:
No, the rules are not there. If you bothered to read the link, you would see that the rules were re-written by Executive Order and then that lax Executive Order was further relaxed at the Department level.

What Obama is proposing is pretty much the state of affairs from LBJ to Clinton. In short, it's not really "new" but a return to the state of affairs that existed before Bush made his Faith-Based Initiatives program a tool to shore up support for Republicans and to fund groups to engage in proselytization and discrimination.

As for the Liberty University hires, what the fuck does that have to do with what Obama is talking about? Nothing.
Click to expand...

Have you just discovered usc or something?

That's all he does.

Make some one-liner about Bush then throw in some arbitrary reference to an unrelated topic.
 
Dungheap said:
No, the rules are not there. If you bothered to read the link, you would see that the rules were re-written by Executive Order and then that lax Executive Order was further relaxed at the Department level.

What Obama is proposing is pretty much the state of affairs from LBJ to Clinton. In short, it's not really "new" but a return to the state of affairs that existed before Bush made his Faith-Based Initiatives program a tool to shore up support for Republicans and to fund groups to engage in proselytization and discrimination.

As for the Liberty University hires, what the fuck does that have to do with what Obama is talking about? Nothing.
Click to expand...

The rules were there. Bush did not have the authority to rewrite them, but everyone either had no balls or was plaing bush's game.

the president is the executive branch, not the leglislative branch or judicial branch.

I do hope though that Obama does use some of the powers bush brought to the WH to screw the neos.

they should be really afraid.
 
Last edited:
I hope in the end i won't have to say "i told ya so" but It seems as though my feminine intuition was right and you will here that line from me before this race is all said and done.

I'd rather KNOW how someone is going to react to something or support something than to absolutely have NO IDEA HOW my new leader is going to sway.....with the wind....

I am not voting for Mccain, I believe he worse than worse as far as a choice....

But I do NOT in any way, shape or form trust Obama as president either... I believe and have seen his political pandering and his workings within the illinois political machine...he IS THE INSIDER choice, he is NOT different from Hillary, he could be worse than Hillary, because at least Hillary stands her ground, even if you don't agree with her....you can almost be certain how she would approach issues, with Obama it seems to be a hit or miss or complete flip flopping for the "sake" of pandering a vote.

And YES, go ahead and slam me again for my opinion, Obama lovers....I can't help what I see.....but I have a feeling this messenger will be shot....anyway! :(:(:(

care
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top