Obama wants to expand faith-based programs - Page 2

Comicsartist · 07-02-2008, 12:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ptech

It is still possible I would vote for Obama, but his shameless pandering on this faith-based bullshit, and his vote in favor of giving the telecom companies immunity for violating our constitutional rights have made me think twice about it.

More statements like that, and I don't see anything to prove that he is an agent of change.

KO on Obama/FISA

Quote:

Thus, as I phrased it on the air tonight, obviously Obama kicked the left in the teeth by supporting the bill. But anybody who got as hot about this as I did would prefer to see a President Obama prosecuting the telecoms criminally, instead of seeing a Senator Obama engender more "soft on terror" crap by casting a token vote in favor of civil litigation that isn't going to pass since so many other Democrats caved anyway.

Daily Kos: State of the Nation

Is it just me or does KO have a valid point here?

ocealdia · 07-02-2008, 12:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cheapseats

It is a smart political move, maybe. It is NOT a wise move.

Churches should receive NO federal funding, NONE. Ergo, separation of church and state. One can NEVER be separate from who pays the bills, EVER.

The whole reason Churches don't pay taxes is because they're supposed to be using their many many contributions in God's work on earth, yes?

MOREOVER, strings attached are strings attached. If you can make giving money contingent on the churches not doing something, you can make giving money contingent on the churches DOING something. It is a hop, skip and a jump from government telling religion what to believe, or the other way around...government telling religion how to vote, or the other way around.

Y'All should be up in arms over this but nooooo. GoBama!

Pray tell, where is the outrage that the Great Non-White Hope was obliged to reject and renounce the Reverend Jeremiah Wright, while his courting of the Father/Son Graham tag team is applauded?

Exactly... gobama. Even Huffington.com and Arianna herself are disagreeing with his recent moves to the center. I can't believe he's still standing in front of his change sign while agreeing with most of bushie's policies. This is change?

Comicsartist · 07-02-2008, 12:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ocealdia

Exactly... gobama. Even Huffington.com and Arianna herself are disagreeing with his recent moves to the center. I can't believe he's still standing in front of his change sign while agreeing with most of bushie's policies. This is change?

Quote:

“It says that … if you get a federal grant, you can’t use the money to proselytize or discriminate against the people you serve or the people you hire. So that’s a notable distinction from the policy pursued by the Bush administration.”

Hollman’s group has opposed Bush’s faith-based efforts on two counts -- his attempt to have several federal laws rewritten in order to allow such discrimination and his efforts to promote funding of organizations that don’t strictly separate their religious functions from their secular ones.

But Obama’s speech demonstrated a broadly different understanding of the issue than has the rhetoric of Bush and his surrogates, Hollman said.

“It seems encouraging that he says, ‘Make no mistake, I believe in the separation of church and state,’” she said. “To me, that is signaling the importance of recognizing the constitutional principle and policy interest of protecting religious freedom while talking about the way government and religious institutions can be partners.”

Hollman added that Obama’s speech showed sensitivity to religious groups that express concerns about government funding churches, synagogues and mosques -- also a departure from Bush’s rhetoric.

“There’s nothing here that indicates that those who would emphasize religious-liberty concerns [about the faith-based plan] somehow don’t count or don’t understand what we’re doing here or are missing the boat,” she said.

On Bush’s faith-based programs, Obama says save best, ditch rest

There are key differences between Obama and Bush's faith based initiative plans.

ocealdia · 07-02-2008, 12:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ptech

It is still possible I would vote for Obama, but his shameless pandering on this faith-based bullshit, and his vote in favor of giving the telecom companies immunity for violating our constitutional rights have made me think twice about it.

More statements like that, and I don't see anything to prove that he is an agent of change.

I noticed his stance on the telecom thing.

There was a bloody battle here on this board in the past attacking bush for having telecom violate our constitutional rights.

God Is Santa for Adults · 07-02-2008, 12:55 PM

Obama, just when I was getting ready to vote for my first democrat, look what you've gone and done.

Keep religion out of the schools we help fund because they are only brainwashing our youth to believe in an ancient myth. Let's spend that money on real science education for a start instead. Haven't you seen the statistics lately? W's inititives have caused many many drop outs and illitirates from today's schools. Why 'stay the course'?

Comicsartist · 07-02-2008, 12:58 PM

Is it just me, or is everyone only reading the headline 'Obama to expand faith based initiatives' without going through and noting the differences between his and Bush's plans?

Comicsartist · 07-02-2008, 01:11 PM

Quote:

"Few are closer to the people than our churches, synagogues, temples and mosques," the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee said. Such partnerships can take place without violating the Constitution, he said. "I believe deeply in the separation of church and state."

That's a HUGE difference between Obama and Bush right there.

Quote:

Obama acknowledged that he "did not grow up in a particularly religious household," but he said he changed because of his work as a community organizer in Chicago. "I came to see my faith as being both a personal commitment to Christ and a commitment to my community."

Obama: Expand faith-based programs - USATODAY.com

Ptech · 07-02-2008, 01:14 PM

CA

KO always has a point in my book, or usually so.

If the law passes and immunity is given, how on earth could President Obama prosecute them?

And on your second point about the specifics of Obama's faith initiative, your point is good, but as far as I'm concerned the state should be TOTALLY neutral on matters religious, and that principle renders unnecessary any White House Office of Faith, or whatever on earth he proposes to call it.

Comicsartist · 07-02-2008, 01:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ptech

CA

KO always has a point in my book, or usually so.

If the law passes and immunity is given, how on earth could President Obama prosecute them?

And on your second point about the specifics of Obama's faith initiative, your point is good, but as far as I'm concerned the state should be TOTALLY neutral on matters religious, and that principle renders unnecessary any White House Office of Faith, or whatever on earth he proposes to call it.

So far, everything I've seen or read talked about civil immunity, not criminal.

As for my second point, if Obama's plan can find a way to support projects that help underprivileged communities, be the projects Christian, Muslim, Jewish or secular in origin, it would be a good thing. If the projects are worth being funded by the Government, they should be, in my opinion. As long as they work out better than no child left behind, and the groups aren't 'pushing' their religion on you and making you accept their version of God before they'll help you.

God Is Santa for Adults · 07-02-2008, 01:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Comicsartist

So far, everything I've seen or read talked about civil immunity, not criminal.

As for my second point, if Obama's plan can find a way to support projects that help underprivileged communities, be the projects Christian, Muslim, Jewish or secular in origin, it would be a good thing. If the projects are worth being funded by the Government, they should be, in my opinion. As long as they work out better than no child left behind, and the groups aren't 'pushing' their religion on you and making you accept their version of God before they'll help you.

Excellent post!
I only wnder how a religious group could function 'without' talking or teaching about their religion. you know like: My life is so much better now that I help out at 'blank group' because the invisisible man has a plan for me?

07-02-2008, 12:55 PM	#15 (permalink)
God Is Santa for Adults Alcohol & Tobacco Free! Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: Tampa, Florida Posts: 402 My Mood: Thanks: 4 Thanked 8 Times in 6 Posts	Obama, just when I was getting ready to vote for my first democrat, look what you've gone and done. Keep religion out of the schools we help fund because they are only brainwashing our youth to believe in an ancient myth. Let's spend that money on real science education for a start instead. Haven't you seen the statistics lately? W's inititives have caused many many drop outs and illitirates from today's schools. Why 'stay the course'? __________________ Have Faith in Yourself... . ...Not an invisible friend! *I Believe = I Guess Religion is an Illusion of Control!* www.Yessy.com/OldBaldy www.OldBaldyPhoto.com
	Top

07-02-2008, 12:58 PM	#16 (permalink)
Comicsartist Pass that, will ya? Tournaments Won: 8 Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: oHIGHo Posts: 7,634 My Mood: Blog Entries: 6 Thanks: 115 Thanked 225 Times in 152 Posts	Is it just me, or is everyone only reading the headline 'Obama to expand faith based initiatives' without going through and noting the differences between his and Bush's plans? __________________ The art of a first rate intelligence is the ability to hold two opposing thoughts in mind at the same time while still retaining the ability to function. -F. Scott Fitzgerald-
	Top

07-02-2008, 01:14 PM	#18 (permalink)
Ptech Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Fort Pierce FL Posts: 1,304 Thanks: 35 Thanked 24 Times in 22 Posts	CA KO always has a point in my book, or usually so. If the law passes and immunity is given, how on earth could President Obama prosecute them? And on your second point about the specifics of Obama's faith initiative, your point is good, but as far as I'm concerned the state should be TOTALLY neutral on matters religious, and that principle renders unnecessary any White House Office of Faith, or whatever on earth he proposes to call it. Last edited by Ptech; 07-02-2008 at 01:17 PM.
	Top

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode