Clipmarks
   
  
   
arifsalifollowshare
4-29-2007 9:25 AM422 views
arifsali says:
Is there any ethics involved here, the ethics of giving?
11 Comments   | Add a Comment
4-30-2007 12:39 PM
kmcolo
I think there needs to be a conversation around the subject of government funding of faith-based groups since a lot of the people interested in improving the lives of others are interested due to faith.

Religion is an important independent power structure in the larger context of society. My biggest worry is for the religions themselves, as they become more dependent on government handouts, will their role as an independent institution weaken or fail?
6-10-2007 11:12 AM
willhelm
My biggest worry is for the religions themselves, as they become more
dependent on government handouts, will their role as an independent
institution weaken or fail?
That is a very good point kmcolo. I have argued the same thing about our over-burdening taxes. This takes money away from those that give to good causes in their communities and states and deflects it to wasteful government programs. Many have now become convinced that by being stripped of a large chunk of income is the same as charity. This is just one way government robs individual of their humanity. I often tell people they should still tythe and give to charities regarless of government encroaching on our money...
6-10-2007 11:17 AM
willhelm
6-10-2007 2:43 PM
rvnurse2b
How can a person have a religion that they believe in and live by and not let that become part of their motivation?

I would submit to you that the reason there are schools, hospitals, orphanages, and other public institutions that we all take for granted is a direct result of religious people acting out their faith.

A central tenet of Christianity is to fulfill Jesus' Great Commission- to make disciples of all nations, baptizing them and teaching them to obey everything He has commanded. Jesus himself went to help others with their basic physical needs and in turn was given an audience with those who were impacted by what He did.
The faithful themselves should be the main funders of this ...
6-10-2007 3:07 PM
ratilfar
How would that be unconstitutional?
6-10-2007 5:41 PM
willhelm
How would that be unconstitutional?
Because govermnment would be applying a religious test to charity.
6-10-2007 6:06 PM
ratilfar
Wrong.

The Constitution makes no mention of that what so ever. This is discretionary spending so the government would have a free hand. If anything giving funding to religious organization could be seen as sponsoring religion, which is something that the Constitution speaks directly to.
6-10-2007 7:38 PM
willhelm
The Constitution makes no mention of that what so ever.
Exactly my point, because....


If anything giving funding to religious organization could be seen as
sponsoring religion, which is something that the Constitution speaks
directly to.
It would not be sponsoring religion. It would be excluding a religious test on funding and recognize religious organizations as equal to non-religious organization.

You're interpretation suggests the opposite, that a religious test be applied to distribution of discretionary funds. That is unconstitutional.

Religious organizations deserve just as much right to discretionalry funds as secular groups.

That said, I ...
6-10-2007 8:34 PM
ratilfar
Ok...lets go through the actual text...

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion"

Giving money in a preferential manner to religious organizations fits under the idea of the establishment clause. The Constitution only speaks of religious test when someone is to be hired for government service, a completely different thing. Don't confuse the two. If the money is used to push a religious agenda, then it falls under the above clause, if it is not (whether it has a religious title). The government can not interfere in the internal organization of these organizations, which by the way are free to discriminate themselves (like baring to help people of other religion...
6-11-2007 8:55 PM
willhelm
Giving money in a preferential manner to religious organizations fits under the idea of the establishment clause.
Key word: preferential. Yes, that would be unconstitutional. Which is why Secularists, Muslims, Bhuddists, etc have just as much right to lobby for, request, petition for funding as anyone else.
I suggest you read the whole document, it would help to ground your basis of argument.
We have been through this before and I am quite confident my interpretation is based on more facts and evidence than yours.
6-11-2007 9:47 PM
ratilfar
Really? Based on what? Your confidence not with standing?
Login to Comment.  Not a member yet? Sign up





Embed This Clip In Your Site...


OK