Comments on: Faith-Based Initiatives and Black Votes

By: Everett

Everett — Tue, 08 Feb 2005 07:36:04 +0000

A ministry that would take faith based money from any administration is an abomination. It would be nothing short of Judas and his 30 pieces of silver. The existance of the church that professess Christ as it's head, maintains it's existance through the giving of it's members, inspired by the faith and leading of it's minister. The minister ordained to preach and spread the word of God and the salvation through our Lord Jesus Christ, is to do just that!
If you already know from whence your help comes, what place will faith have in the church!
Ministers as well as members , will be paying more attention to political outcomes than prayer.
We who know the word, must remember, that the Government was put in place by God, but not ordained to carry out the will of God!
Churches will grow to the very limits of this government offering. It will become accustom to it. There will be corruption in it's ranks. It being taxpayer money, the church will have to make an accounting to government. The government will have to regulate it's books, thereby controlling the churches business , if it wants to keep recieving the help. The church would then be politically purchased.
I can already see the potential. I beg to tender this thought. When I see ministers preaching week after week to a football field of followers, what need would he have for government assistance? I don't question the ministry. My statement is, Has God shown that he can and will take care of his own house! He is God!
If the Government has the money to help, why can't the government just legislate it into law. I feel a major mistake taking place with this initiative. The fall out could be catistrophic!
I truly pray the all ministers believing in Jesus Christ as our Lord, would seriously search the scripture and pray for guidance. God is a jealous God! I see this offering as an idol, because it did not require faith. Only loyalty!
Nothing is free. Those that take, will be asked for something in return! That you can be assured!
Takers beware of the web you weave.

By: Just Me

Just Me — Tue, 18 Jan 2005 18:10:43 +0000

I think any money the government hands out to any charity-faith based or not should be carefully followed-there is always a huge potential for abuse and mismanagement. I am torn on the issue of faith based initiatives. On one hand, some religious charities are the only ones that will touch certain parts of the country, but on the other I worry that what makes a charity unique and able to reach its target may be compromised, if they change the program to suit the state funding rules. I don't know, just seems that whenever the government gets its hands in something-it often does a good job of only making it worse. As for the 30% of the AA vote, I don't see it coming in 2008. I do think the DNC, if it doesn't stop taking AA's for granted, and doesn't stap seeming to be so hostile to religious and moral issues (AA's are actually pretty religious and pretty morally conservative) that they will steadily lose AA votes. Although, that trickle I think will be much slower-at best I would think 15% of AA would vote for GOP in '08, and that has a lot to do with who is running on either parties ticket.

By: Myopist

Myopist — Tue, 18 Jan 2005 17:04:09 +0000

"That prediction seems too high to me." It sounds too high to me, too; a 30% share of the AA vote would have the same effect on the Democratic Party as a stake through the heart would have on... I was about to say, 'a vampire', but when it comes down to it one of those would ruin my day.

By: Kent

Kent — Tue, 18 Jan 2005 16:45:50 +0000

In spite of the fact that I am a staunch conservative (perhaps I should say because I am a staunch conservative?) I am very much opposed to the faith-based initiatives. Cut Federal spending and taxes, and trust the people to voluntarily give generously to the charity of their choice.

This approach completely avoids some very legitimate Constitutional issues, and it also avoids the danger of corrupting the churches themselves. My own church, famous for its conservatism, has nonetheless refused to seek faith-based initiative money to fund its social programs because of the fear of being compromised.

By: Robert Tagorda

Robert Tagorda — Tue, 18 Jan 2005 16:40:31 +0000

Harry: I agree. And I share your concern about faith-based programs undergoing changes simply to attract funding.

Anna: I'm unsure whether the faith-based programs are any better or worse than non-faith-based ones in terms of reporting. In all cases, I obviously think it should be in order. Given the high political scrutiny that the faith-based are under, the administration would be wise to give it additional attention.

By: Anna S.

Anna S. — Tue, 18 Jan 2005 16:33:53 +0000

Is non faith based money better reported? What is the standard of comparison for tracking the money. Perhaps they should do a better job tracking money, but if this is the same across the board, it is a general government problem, not a problem with faith based programs.

Also, what is so frightening about faith based rather then secular? I would argue both are religions, and both tend to have their own agendas, when you know go into a religios setting you know what their message is. As long as the group is doing what they say they are, and are within government guidelines, they should be allowed to do their work.

By: Harry

Harry — Tue, 18 Jan 2005 16:30:03 +0000

They should defninitely get their records in order. This is one place where I don't follow what I would expect to be the classic Democratic response. My major concern about faith-based programs is that the churches and other religious organizations would begin to alter their message and mission to appeal to the government program, rather than the other way around. But the reality is that, for instance, in many inner city neighborhoods, the church is the one entity that's been there, is trusted, and has the connections to be effective. And they shouldn't be ineligible for government funding just because they're a church and not a storefront non-profit.