Courthouse News Service is reporting that two years after taking office, Obama has finally issued an amendment to Faith-Based Funding. It makes clear that those receiving funds cannot proselytize while giving social services funded by the Feds under the Faith Based Office. Now the two services will have to remain separate. 

This is a partial victory only. The Office shouldn't exist. There is no reason for the government to be defining social services according to religion and giving benefits accordingly. The groups giving out services should simply have to apply to one department and compete for funds equally. As it stands, there are funds set aside simply for making sure that religious organizations get funds and in effect get their hands on society. Especially societies most vulnerable. 

The Freedom From Religion Foundation sued to stop the use of Federal Dollars in funding religion but lost due to a lack of standing. It was the position of the court that Congress alloted the Executive Branch the money and that was the limit of the right of the people to complain legally. The Executive apparently is not barred from spending on religion. If someone wants to correct this, I'd like to hear it, but the reasoning is that the First Amendment says "Congress shall make no law", as I understand it. It's a cop out and contrary to our traditions, but maybe it's simply an error in the writing of the Constitution? 

But we got a small victory today and one of my Civil Rights complaints against Obama was eased today. Maybe one day he'll even grow a pair and do the right thing! Wait... he's still a politician.  

Views: 113

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

That's new to me, and they existed. Might have to keep an eye out for their building this weekend. Playing tourist there.
It's funny that "The Other Side" can't possess both positive and a negative opinions about Sarah Palin, for example. Yet they call themselves fair and balanced!
There was an article in the Post that said Palin wouldn't do another interview with Katie Couric because she was biased against her.

It's kind of hard to be biased when you say you have foreign policy experience with Russia because you can see them out your window...
Organized religion (i.e. Christianity) in the U.S. has persistently and consistently applied pressure to compromise the separation of church and state. We need to consign religion to its own realm and utterly out of the public realm. This means NO exceptions whatsoever. "In God we Trust"? NO WAY. "One nation under God"? NO WAY. Get rid of EVERY violation of church and state. Period.

Unfortunately, it says nowhere in the Constitution that Church and State have to be seperated. This phrase came from a letter written by Thomas Jefferson.  The closest we have is "government shall make no law establishing any religion."  Does our official motto In God We Trust count as a law? I think it should... I crossed out god and put reason on all my money, and I always skip the under god part of the pledge.

It sucks to be a non-Christian in the US, especially if you are a non-theist or **GASP** an -lowers voice- atheist.

Look out for the lead balloon!

Corporate money is flowing 9-1 to the broken party. Of course the American public can still tell them they can't buy the election, like we did with Meg Whitman in CA. Hopefully we will. It seems that the future of the nation, and perhaps the world, is in the hands of a large block of dunderheads who can't decide between Barack Obama and Sarah Palin.
This article shows how broken they are from my perspective. Rush Limbaugh questions the credibility and opinion of Motor Trend because they like the Chevy Volt. While I'm not a Chevy fan, it may be another step forward. Clearly Rush is arguing his point in support of not bailing out Chevy. If GM moves back to being a success, it's a loss for the Republicans. Will they actually attempt to kill American manufacturing, jobs, and union wages for a political point... apparently. Motor Trends response is tasty!

Assuming you’ve been anywhere near the biggest automotive technological breakthrough since … I don’t know, maybe the self-starter, could you even find your way to the front seat? Or are you happy attacking a car that you’ve never even seen in person?

Last time you ranted about the Volt, you got confused about the “range,” and said on the air that the car could be driven no more than 40 miles at a time, period. At least you stayed away from that issue this time, but you continue to attack it as the car only a tree hugging, Obama-supporting Government Motors customer would want. As radio loudmouths like you would note, none of those potential customers were to be found after November 2.

Back to us for a moment, our credibility, Mr. Limbaugh, comes from actually driving and testing the car, and understanding its advanced technology. It comes from driving and testing virtually every new car sold, and from doing this once a year with all the all-new or significantly improved models all at the same time. We test, make judgments and write about things we understand.
If you can stop shilling for your favorite political party long enough to go for a drive, you might really enjoy the Chevy Volt. I’m sure GM would be happy to lend you one for the weekend. Just remember: driving and Oxycontin don’t mix.

Oh, I love this! It feels so good to see Rush disemboweled...

what a fucking shot to the gut. "Driving and oxycotin don't mix." Wow. I agree, Bill. Mega pwnage of the Rush.
Atta boy, Obama.

One small notch in the belt.


© 2019   Created by Rebel.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service