SMILE!
:)

Finally, one for the Good Side!

This is WONDERFUL!!!

Thank the Lord we still have some Good hearted folks left in our Courts!

What we need to work toward now, is getting God back in the education system, allowing prayer, teaching Creation; teach our youth that they have a Loving and Able Creator, not some ape swinging from the trees, Get the pledge back in school, 'One Nation Under God, Indivisible, with Liberty and Justice for ALL!

Allow a diversity of opinion in the classroom, when the bell rings, and it's time to go to science class, and the kids sit down, and the teacher asks a Christian student to stand and give a speech, on their analogy as to how Life and it's form came about, If that student expains reason for Life, then let that student do so by all means, because it will make a very profound impact for the betterment of those students who listen to God's plan of Creation! And the Atheist? If he/she wishes to share his/her viewpoint, then let them do so, and when conflict should arise to the differing viewpoints of Christian and Atheist, and they wish to argue, then have a discussion of the two sides, and at least come to some sort of resolve. Both sides may may not agree, but one is to hope that the Atheist will see the flaw in his/her thinking, and make change for the better, And most of all, the Christian will have right to freely speak.
We need influence by Christians in the public school system!

Just keep working Christians, keep fighting, and keep praying!

Jeremiah

I want to thank Mr. Bush for all those wonderful 5-4 victories we have been having recently. It must really piss off all the regressives we have around here.

First of all, Mark, you fail to point out that the decision didn't rule on the validity of the Executive Order; it only ruled on the prosecution's legal standing. If an atheist (not secular, Atheist) organization applied for funds at that office, and was declined, they could bring a discrimination lawsuit, because they were actually harmed by the office.

Here are some problems that people have with the office.

I would like to point out particularly the lack of ability to enforce the guidelines, coupled with the fact that they are not actively monitored.

The Supreme Court has ruled that giving money to an organization is the same as using your free speech to voice support for that organization. If you use that line of reasoning for faith based initiatives, you find that the US government is actively supporting religious organizations, which would violate the establishment clause of the first amendment as well as the Lemon test established in Lemon v. Kurtzman. May I also reiterate that the only reason that the plaintiff lost was that he didn't have legal standing to sue, not on the validity of the program.

Here's another one... I don't support places of worship. I don't patronize them, and I don't give them monetary support. I don't begrudge the ability of other people to use them (the same way that I don't begrudge people the ability to use strip-clubs). However, by virtue of the tax money that I give to the government to protect my individual rights being used to support such institutions, the government is forcing me to monetarily support an institution against my will. You wouldn't be very happy if your money was railroaded into a Mosque, now would you? Would you like it if the government funded the Church of Scientology? Satanism? Pastafarianism?

On use of Public Space... I don't think that religious institutions should be prevented from using them, as long as they pay rent or are treated the same as a non-religious one. If you can put your nativity scene on the town square, then I should be able to put a replica of the Millennium Falcon fighting a TIE Fighter right next to it.

Money=Free Speech... Because of that, you should practice as much religion as you can pay for.

"Money=Free Speech... Because of that, you should practice as much religion as you can pay for."

You're a Socialist commie! I don't like Socialists! Socialism leads to Communism, and Communism leads to tyranny and oppression!

Jeremiah

Ummm... How does saying that you aren't entitled to have other people provide something for you free of charge make me a socialist? Wouldn't that make me the opposite of a socialist?

I'm not entitled to NOONE, Rana, regarding my Faith, My Faith is of my own free will!

Jesus said "ALL may come and freely drink from the fountain of Life"

You see, Not just some, He says ALL!

What makes you a Socialist, Rana, is the fact that you want to charge people for worshiping and practicing their faith!! What Tragic Ignorance!!

Jeremiah

Actually, that would make me an anarcho-capitalist... you need to make a date with the dictionary. When a person's practicing of a religion monopolizes scarce resources, those resources should be paid for, be they space on public land, use of police, or other state expenditures.

In fact, your thinking that the state should provide these things makes you a socialist...

Jeremiah, I've been reading your posts for a long time and you are quick to critcize those who disagree with you... yet you seem quite pushy about imposing your own views on others.

I'm curious, there is a movement called Christian Reconstructionism whose belief is that the constitution should be replaced by the bible. If you had the chance Jeremiah, would you opt to replace the constitution of the United States with the bible?

Religion has a very important place in our society, just not in government.

NO, NO, NO!! Rana, You've got it all wrong -

What you want, is you want to government to regulate all that Christians can say and do in public, and a make a profit of it in the process.

I on the other hand, I want the government to stay out, COMPLETELY! of my Faith affairs!!

Now, If I am a non-profit organization, and the Church members want to raise donations in order to spread the message; by way of billboards, road signs, booklets etc, etc to those who are lost, and in need of the Lord Jesus Christ, then the government has no right to interfere, because the WHOLE of the PEOPLE, made their own choice collectively and without aid of the government!

Do you see what I'm getting at? For the government to interfere with peoples right to choose, is in effect, DISCRIMINATION!

And with the shape that the world is in today, People need to hear the message, and Christians need to be getting out the Word in every possible way imaginable, in order to help the those who are in need of a change of heart!

Now, Same question, "Does that make me a Socialist?"

Jeremiah

"However, by virtue of the tax money that I give to the government to protect my individual rights being used to support such institutions, the government is forcing me to monetarily support an institution against my will."

First of all Rana, the money is NOT supporting the church. It is supporting the humanitarian programs that the church is involved in providing-you know-like feeding, clothing and housing the poor and homeless.

I find it ironic that some athiests are so against this since they go on and on about how the poor need to be helped and how Christians don't do anything for others. (It's not true, but that's what many say.) The money helps the church organization to provide those services. Helps is the operative word. The church provides the volunteers to staff the program and puts their own money into it as well.

Of course many liberals think that it is the responsibility of the government to provide food, clothing and housing to those in need. They won't admit it but they don't want secular organizations and church organizations to provide those things because they want the government to do so.

See... I have no problem with what you do "in public." If you want to rant on the street corner, that's perfectly fine with me. What I take issue with is your feeling that you are entitled the use of scarce resources (billboards, space on government property, police, etc) to propagate your faith. You aren't costing anyone anything by standing somewhere, handing out fliers, and preaching. You cost the whole community (especially those who don't want to be converted or preached to) when you use the resources of the state or free billboards at the expense of others who want to use them.

YES!!! USE DONATIONS FROM CHURCH MEMBERS TO PRINT FLIERS AND RENT BILLBOARDS. Don't expect anyone to involuntarily pay (through taxes) for your religious activities.

"Don't expect anyone to involuntarily pay (through taxes) for your religious activities."

I don't expect anyone to "involuntarily" pay for my witnessing, but if they see a need in their heart to do so - To do the right thing, by acting upon their convictions, then they should have a RIGHT to do so, and the government should not interfere!

Jeremiah

Rana,

If I use my own resources, my own building material, and my own property to put up a billboard in front of my house, by a freeway, I don't think that costs anyone, anything!

Jeremiah

Rana,

I've heard of the complaints that people have about Chuck Colson's Prison Fellowship. I'd like to point out the most important thing:

I'VE NEVER HEARD OF A GROUP OF ATHEISTS GOING INTO PRISON VOLUNTARILY TO HELP OUT THE INMATES.

I'll have to put it bluntly - screw a bunch of complaints. If secularists want to have a beef about it, let me see a couple thousand of them head to hard-time prisons and ask a bunch of murderers and rapists if they'd like to have a quiet chat about becoming a better person. The recidivism rate of people who complete Colson's program is about 8%, against a 60% normal recidivism rate.

The establishment of religion only happens when a government requires you to be of a certain faith in order to do things which all citizens by natural right are able to do - providing funds for a religious group to go into a prison and help reform the prisoners isn't an establishment of religion even if the group in question is making coverts to a particular denomination. Your link has the dark statement that only Christian groups have received funding under the faith based initiative...first off, I doubt that is strictly true and, secondly, even if it is true it merely means that other types of religious groups haven't got themselves together on doing it. This might merely stem from the command of Our Lord to visit prisoners which is, I believe, unique to the Christian religion.

You find me a warden who is saying that if a prisoner doesn't attend Colson's program he won't get the privileges normal to other prisoners, then I'll sit up and take notice - absent that, then any complaints about Colson's program, or other religious programs which use federal funds for various social services, are just anti-religious bigotry.

CAIndie,

Friend, If you want to find lessons for life, and how to live the right life, better than what the government can show you, there is where you'll find it!

I believe the bible should be the central focal point of the constitution, because the law of God, is above the law of man, and so, should be written before the constitution!

If it were made possible during Noah Webster's time, that he could have amended laws according to the bible into the constitution, he would have made an ideal person to do so, because he had an extraordinary sense of intellect, and comprehension in the right field, his train of thought was far from the Liberal pinhead college teachers and professors of today!

Jeremiah

I am just wondering how much of the money the Church takes in to help people actual goes to helping people. All the organizations I give to have a breakdown of where the money is spent. Maybe I would feel better if I could see where the money is actually being spent.

The Faith-based initiative programs have only funded Christian-based faiths. That is endorsing a religion.

While I don't know about "atheist groups" going into prisons, I found this interesting site with statistics about Prison makeup broken down by religion.

This is from 2002. Notice how, even when combined with unknowns and those who offered no religious preference, Atheists make up less of the prison population than the two main Christian Denominations.

Catholic 29,267 31.432% Protestant 26,162 28.097% None/Atheist/Unknown 18,537 19.908% Muslim 5,435 5.837% American Indian 2,408 2.586% Nation of Islam 1,734 1.862% Rastafarian 1,485 1.595% Jewish 1,325 1.423% Church of Christ 1,303 1.399% Pentecostal 1,093 1.174% Moorish 1,066 1.145% Buddhist 882 0.947% Jehovah's Witnesses 665 0.714% Adventist 621 0.667% Eastern Orthodox 375 0.403% Latter-day Saints 298 0.320% Scientology 190 0.204% Hindu 119 0.128% Santeria 117 0.126% Sikh 14 0.015% Baha'i 9 0.010% ISKCON 7 0.008% -------------------- ------ -------- Total 93,112 100.000%

This one is from 1997, when sorted in to its own category, Atheists only make up 0.209% of the Prison population.

Response Number % ---------------------------- -------- Catholic 29267 39.164% Protestant 26162 35.008% Muslim 5435 7.273% American Indian 2408 3.222% Nation 1734 2.320% Rasta 1485 1.987% Jewish 1325 1.773% Church of Christ 1303 1.744% Pentecostal 1093 1.463% Moorish 1066 1.426% Buddhist 882 1.180% Jehovah Witness 665 0.890% Adventist 621 0.831% Orthodox 375 0.502% Mormon 298 0.399% Scientology 190 0.254% Atheist 156 0.209% Hindu 119 0.159% Santeria 117 0.157% Sikh 14 0.019% Bahai 9 0.012% Krishna 7 0.009% ---------------------------- -------- Total Known Responses 74731 100.001% (rounding to 3 digits does this)

Unknown/No Answer 18381
----------------------------
Total Convicted 93112 80.259% (74731) prisoners' religion is known.

Held in Custody 3856 (not surveyed due to temporary custody)
----------------------------
Total In Prisons 96968

Here's the link. I'm not using it to say that all Christians are less moral than all Atheists, but I am saying that it fosters doubt on the "Christian or immoral" dichotomy.

Another point that I made that was conveniently ignored is that the guidelines for receiving faith based initiative funds are not enforced.

If the Christian community is so charitable, then why do they rely on Federal Funds to undertake their social works? What happens to all of that money that goes around in the little baskets? I guess that someone has to pay for those multi-million dollar church buildings...

And yes, I would prefer for private organizations to provide social services than I would the government. But funneling government funds through a religious organization to do that just adds another level of bureaucracy... Private firms, religious or secular, should only opt to do things that they want to do, social work or otherwise, that they can do with their own money.

... the format didn't survive posting... oh well... just follow the link...

"Rana,What happens to all of that money that goes around in the little baskets?"

That is the Lord's money, Rana! Those who give their ten percent of what they earn. That's all the Lord asks of us, and nothing more!
And it will never return void, it will always come back three times more. The Lord blesses people according to their faith, and I can tell you, He's never, not ONCE, has he let me down!

Besides,
Linn, has already explained that to you!

Jeremiah

Why can't you guys just call this what it is?

Welfare with a cross on top...

Wait... Jeremiah...

You're saying that the Church doesn't use collection money for its social services because that's god's money? What the hell does he need it for..? He is god you know... he doesn't really need money. What do they use all of that collection money for? Icecream?

While I don't know about "atheist groups" going into prisons, I found this interesting site with statistics about Prison makeup broken down by religion. - Rana

Rana,

Had you ever thought of the fact that many of those "religious" inmates probably found God AFTER entering prison. There's not too many athiests on death row.

While I don't know about "atheist groups" going into prisons, I found this interesting site with statistics about Prison makeup broken down by religion. - Rana

Well, I dont really know what this subject has to do with the notion of informing faith based groups about govt aid programs, it does say something about the nature of forgiveness and religion.

But thats probably not the point you were hoping to make.

The rest of that post was made up of some fairly standard strawmen.

For instance your concern about adding another level of bureaucracy to the system by working thru a religious organization assumes that secular or athiest groups would have less bureaucracy. That seems like a substantial leap of faith to me. (sorry - couldnt resist).

As far as your comment about faith based groups relying on federal funds to do thier social work, thats something of a red herring isnt it? I mean, if its unseemly for a religious group to recieve federal funding to undertake social work, isnt it equally unseemly to do the same for a secular group?

Your other concern, "What happens to all of that money that goes around in the little baskets?" seems like more of a snark than a legitimate point. I suppose if you were comfortable with the idea of religious groups using public facilities to meet and conduct services, then you could complain about a group using its own money to pruchase and maintain property. (the money in the little baskets is donated by members isnt it? not by the govt)

I imagine your trying to hint at potential co-mingling of funds, but once again that issue could be pointed at a secular group as well.

First of all, comparing religious organizations to secular ones is a bit like comparing apples and oranges, considering that a secular organization devoted to social work's first objective would be that social work, as the religious organization's first objective would be spreading their religion of choice, not social work.

However, you completely took a quote of my out of context:

And yes, I would prefer for private organizations to provide social services than I would the government. But funneling government funds through a religious organization to do that just adds another level of bureaucracy... Private firms, religious or secular, should only opt to do things that they want to do, social work or otherwise, that they can do with their own money.

Instead of saying that only religious organizations should be denied public funds, I'm saying that, in a perfect world, any private organization would be able to do its social work with its own money, not that of the government. Now, if it has to be done, I would prefer secular organizations receive federal funds instead of religious ones, but that is entirely not the point.

Social work by the government is basically welfare. However, contracting out that social work is just less efficient welfare (you have to take the funds that were given, along with the costs of transferring the funds and oversight offices, then skim off the amount that would be necessary to fund the organization which receives the funds, then that lower amount gets transferred to those who need it).

Faith Based initiatives are just welfare with a different name and a cross on top (as of 2004, only Christian organizations had received the funds, check the wikipedia article I cited earlier). You guys are against welfare as a sort of mandatory charity, why would you support the same concept, mandatory charity, being funneled through a religious group?

Ok, I just got back from my two hour jog, (sipping a drink)

Now...

Tithing - goes TO the Lord, Rana! And,

Offerings - go to the WORK of the Lord - prison visitation, helping the poor, the little children, that are sick and their parents can't afford hospital bills, and many other things that please the Lord!

Jeremiah

J-

If they use it for social services, then why do they need federal funds?

Rana,

Well, there's Christian and then there's Christian, ya know? I spent decades as a non-practicising Catholic Christian; probably a lot of those guys in prison who ID themselves as various Christians haven't seen the inside of a church in quite some time...which, of course, helps to explain why they are in prison.

And, of course, Our Lord came to find the lost sheep - He works among the saints, but His concentration is on those who need Him most...and a guy doing life for murder really, really needs God.

In the end, it comes down to this: if a program is making a man more content and managable while he's in prison and makes him far less likely to ever return to prison when he gets out, why do you care if there's a cross on it? Leave Christians alone - let them do their work; they will ask you to come along, but you don't have to and they won't force you.

Rana,

Well, what I've just shown you, in my last post, is all that our Church gets, we do not receive, government funding, in now way shape or form!
And yes, we do have fund raisers, which help to pay church bills, to pay the pastor, and so forth.

But tithing is specifically the Lord's money, because we've entrusted our future in Faith that He is able to sustain us!

Do you follow?

Jeremiah

Mark-

I want to leave them alone... that means not giving them my money. I'm sure you understand.

J-

I'm talking about faith based groups, run by churches, that use federal funds through the faith-based initiative program, which this post is about.

Don't you feel better knowing that your money is going to something for a good cause, Rana? Something that pleases the Lord!

Jeremiah

Jeremiah, actually i am a little confused. you say tithing goes to the lord, and the offerings go to the work of the lord.....so where exactly is the tithing money given? (i assume the lord doesnt come down and collect it himself....). and if your church got government funding, would part of this money go to the same person that gets the tithing?

"so where exactly is the tithing money given?"

It's all given the same place, except, tithing goes in little envelopes, and you write how much you put in, as a reminder to keep track.

Offerings - Are put in the plate with the tithes, only not in an envelope.

"and if your church got government funding, would part of this money go to the same person that gets the tithing?"

No, It would all go to work for the Lord, helping those in need, and spreading the Message, but we don't get government funding, It'd be nice if we did, but we don't!

The main thing that I'm concerned about though is, for the government to allow the church to practice freely, by allowing Christians to speak out for Jesus Christ in our education system, where the receptive minds of our youth are being influenced, and taken advantage of by their Libtard teachers.

Teaching kids to have sex before marriage, and use drugs, alcohol, teaching there is no God, and all the other Atheistic Hogwash they are teaching them, is ABUSE!

One must look at the situation of the education of our youth, as a future thing, by taking God away from classroom is a breeding ground for trouble down the road, the young folks will be lead into all kinds of violence and obscenities, so in effect, our young people are being thrown away before they ever even get a start at life, a chance at life!

We need to protect and nurture our youth from before conception to well after they are of the presumed consenting adult age. Period.

We need to start working on the school system, NOW!

Jeremiah

Linn, excellent point. The anti-relgionists here like to complain that federal money is going to "support churches"---clear proof that they not only have no idea of how the faith-based initiatives work, they also don't care.

They also like to parade their ignorance about the meaning of the Establishment Clause, which Mark pointed out. When and if the application of any federal funding results in the ESTABLISHMENT of a religion BY CONGRESS, they will finally have a valid point.

The socialist mentality is also faith-based, though they hate to admit it, but their faith is in the State. They think the State is, or should be, in charge of pretty much everything in the country, from education to supporting people who do not work to support themselves to telling us how much water we can use to flush our toilets to whether or not our minor daughters can get abortions to how fast we can drive to the requirement that we wear seat belts to the kind of fuel we use in those cars to --- well, pretty much everything. Their faith-based initiative is to actually HAVE congress establish a religion, one which is mandatory, though they take the position that because their religion substitutes the word and concept "State" for that of "God" it is not a religion at all.

But if a dogma is based on unprovable beliefs, which require faith to accept, what else IS it but a form of religion? If its goals and rules are cloaked in claims of morality, what else can you call it?

What really upsets the anti-religionists is that their own peculiar faith system is not completely in charge, not totally in control, but that other faith systems also contribute to the care of the citizenry. And the key to the peculiar faith system that is Socialism is that it brooks no competition, no alternative point of view, no straying from the rigid dogma that defines it.

If an organization is doing good, who cares what kind of pictues they hang on the wall? Jesus, Bhudda, Mohammed, Dale Earnheart, whatever.

Whether the churches are doing great things or not, any money that goes to them through the government is money out of my pocket. And I do not want my money going to anything that would promote the idea that humans are not the only important things in the universe.

"Would you like it if the government funded the Church of Scientology? Satanism? PASTAFARIANISM ?"
(emphasis added)
Posted by: Rana Quijotesca at June 30, 2007 10:50 AM

I have a picture in my mind of a dreadlocked Tony Soprano sitting around smoking linguine, listening to Roberto Marlini CDs.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

wonder what SCOTUS would've decided if an atheist outreach program had sued TO BE INCLUDED for funding?

The Faith-based initiative programs have only funded Christian-based faiths. That is endorsing a religion.

Another baseless assertion made by CW. CW, have you any proof for any of your tripe you have posted here? You've never provided any backup links; are you sure you're--not your--not Dr. Retard's clone?

Deleted - off topic

Noone answered my question:

If you guys don't support welfare as a sort of mandatory charity, then why do you support Faith Based Initiatives, which are simply instances of government welfare funneled through religious organizations...?

Rana, I support welfare for those who actually need welfare. I came from a broken home, and my mom, God Bless her, had to rely on welfare programs in order to feed us. However, there are many abusers of the system, don'cha think?

Rana,

God IS the most important thing in this universe!
And for those who don't see it this way, I pity them, and Pray for them, because He's the ONLY thing that can make a change in this world my friend! Without God, Rana, Nothing will work, Not even Democracy!

I Praise, and Commend, all those who are out there searching for receptive hearts and minds, because when we are doing our best to win people to the Lord, We are PLEASING the Lord!!
And if you don't please God, He's not going to help you, It does'nt matter how hard you try, sooner or later something will go wrong!!

The people collectively, will bring condemnation upon themselves, Until they see that it is He who PROVIDES!! and noone else!

So, my advice to you, is get a relationship with Jesus Christ, and you will be blessed!

Jeremiah