faith based initiatives

Some of the unique environmental initiatives that will be announced include: new faith-based eco-labeling systems for Islam, Hinduism, Sikhism and Judaism; 8.5 million trees to be planted in Tanzania; all Daoist temples in China to be ...Although these rules are sometimes said to have been created by the Bush faith-based initiative, other important sources are the Clinton-era "Charitable Choice laws," the 1964 Civil Rights Act, and various U.S. Supreme Court decisions. ...However, for those like myself who have watched the policy developments concerning faith-based initiatives over the past decade or so, a bit of speculation seems warranted about what might happen under the Obama Administration. ...Lew Daly on the faith-based initiative. Lew Daly (author of God's Economy) has an interesting essay about the history and future of the faith-based initiative, and its connection with the Court's approach to church-state separation. ...The “Reform of the Office” task force made draft recommendations today to President Obama's Advisory Council on Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnerships, advocating clarification and some modifications of the church-state rules that ...Obama on 'Faith-Based' Initiatives. Carrie Johnson / The Washington Post: Activists Cite Campaign Pledge, but Obama Slow to Break With Bush Policies. Candidate Obama drew little attention during last year's presidential campaign when he ...Learn about how religious intiatives at community colleges are growing in popularity and how these programs will impact the dynamics on campus.WASHINGTON (CNN) -- President Obama's newly revamped Office of Faith Based Initiatives is reigniting a contentious debate across the ideological spectrum over whether religious organizations that accept funds from the government should ...Put aside, for now, the questions whether (i) policies like the Clinton / Bush / Obama "faith-based initiative" are good ideas for delivering social-welfare services in an efficient and effective way; (ii) the Constitution permits such ...Government has no place in helping religious organizations, according to radio host and former Methodist pastor Allen Hunt, who objects to the policies of both President Barack Obama faith-based initiatives and those of his predecessor, ...
A certain user by the name of "grayure" seems to think so, and, in away she's correct:

" Fundamentalist evangelical Christianity is much more influential than it used to be. I was referring to 1947 science materials for my homeschooled daughter the other day, and in it there is no trace of creationism or even any suggestion that it even existed. That would not be the case today. Marriage is also more stable than it was fifteen or twenty years ago, particularly among younger people. There is also a faith schools initiative in this country (the UK). Also, with the loss of an effective political opposition here, some people see the Church as an alternative to state-based social action. Tony Blair considered his Christianity to be relevant to his politics when he was prime minister.

Meanwhile in the US, social affairs seem to be completely dominated by the religious right "

HAS Christianity become dominant in the world?

...I'm happy to report that Western Europe (apart from the U.K.) has become more secular (both spiritually AND culturally), and Christianity's dominance (both culturally AND spiritually) has decreased.

In general, it seems that the English-speaking world is moving BACKWARDS, as Western Europe is moving FORWARD.

Although Conservative parties have won recent elections in Europe, it's interesting to note that "Conservatism" in Western Europe resembles "Liberalism" in America.

Hell, one of Germany's "Conservative" candidates recently elected publically celebrated his victory...with his BOYFRIEND :)

Hmm, that wasn't very Christian of him *smirk*

So, MY answer would be YES and NO. Now, what's YOUR opinion? :)
" Someone needs to teach these people sex education to tell them that two pencil sticks don't go together "

Uh-huh...LOL
"Woman have a mouth and butt too"

Really? Wow, now THAT's a revelation (no pun intended) *smirk*
"Monkeyism"

Uh-oh, better not let Richard Dawkins hear you say that LOL





Frist was part of the Republican leadership. When the Republicans controlled the Senate earlier this decade, he was their leader in the Senate.

Now that he is no longer in Congress and no longer has to pretend to believe in the free market to continue to dupe his constituents into voting for him, Frist has shown his true colors. He now supports ObamaCare and wants this socialist scheme passed.

I recognize that there are a few good Republican congressmen and maybe a few good Republican senators, but if you don't live in their district, why would you still vote Republican? Voting for George W. Bush only gave us bigger government (in fact, the Democrats came to power criticizing some of Bush's big government policies, even though they obviously had no intention of changing any of them). Bush was so far to the left that he was often too extreme for the Democrats. Most Democrats broke with Bush a few years ago when a vote on whether or not prescription drugs could be imported from Canada was on the floor of Congress (Bush was so far to the left that he was actually defending this anti-market policy, for the benefit of the politically connected legal drug industry, which was too extreme for even the Democrats). Bush doubled the size of the Department of Education, which the Republican Party promised to eliminate, from Ronald Reagan's 1980 campaign to Bob Dole's 1996 campaign. In fact, many liberals felt that No Child Left Behind was too far left for their tastes (although others felt it wasn't extreme enough). Bush also passed the massive expansion of Medicare, which hastened the date of that program's insolvency (of course, this proposal began as part of HillaryCare and was the largest expansion of socialized medicine to be passed since the days of LBJ and his "Great" Society). Bush even reorganized welfare by creating the office of Faith-Based Initiatives (Faith-Based Welfare would be more accurate) to outsource welfare programs to churches. Apparently, these churches forgot about that pesky little commandment "Thou Shalt Not Steal."

Most infamously of all, the Bush administration pushed for an "Ownership Society" in which every American would own a home. Thanks to this scheme, a housing bubble emerged. When the bubble burst and the economy was plunged into a depression (as Bush threw capitalism out the window and shoveled billions of dollars into the pockets of Goldman Sachs and the other Banksters and began the process of nationalizing Government Motors), the Democrats blamed Bush's "laissez-faire" policies for the depression. Bush himself, in typical delusional fashion, claimed to have abandoned his "free market principles" (as if the "compassionate conservative" ever had any) to "save" the economy by turning a recession into a depression.

Isn't it time to just face the reality that the Republican Party is not a viable alternative to the Democrat Party? The GOP was formed because the Whig Party was unwilling to take a stand against the practice of slavery. I think we need another party because the GOP is unwilling to stand against big government. There is not a dime's worth of difference between the GOP and the Democrat Party. It is long past time to abandon the fantasy that the Republicans are a legitimate opposition party.





Back in 1980, there was a great battle over the Republican Party and its future. On one side was George Herbert Walker Bush, a liberal Republican from Texas, and the heir to the liberal Rockefeller wing of the Republican Party. He was declared the "frontrunner" by the liberal media. In opposition to him was the elderly former governor of California, Ronald Reagan, who was a prominent Goldwater supporter in 1964 (when the liberal establishment of the party stabbed the party nominee in the back and voted for far-left Democrat Lyndon Baines Johnson) and widely considered the heir to the conservative wing of the Republican Party. As we all know, Reagan won the nomination and the conservatives celebrated. Although at first, Reagan said that Bush would not be his VP, he eventually gave in and made the liberal from Texas his 2nd in command. A few months into his presidency, John Hinckley Jr., from a prominent pro-Bush family, and whose brother Scott had a dinner appointment scheduled with Bush's son Neil (the younger brother of W.) attempted to assassinate President Reagan and put the presidency into the hands of Vice President Bush. After this point, Reagan suspiciously "moderated" his views. After Reagan was term-limited, Bush replaced him as the president. In 1992, Rush Limbaugh and other now famous talk radio hosts first came to fame by supporting Pat Buchanan (who ran against Bush's tax increase and Bush's wars; Buchanan did not emphasize the culture war or "economic nationalism" anywhere near as much as he would later on) against President Bush in the Republican primaries.

However, after the Republican landslide in 1994 and the defeat of liberal Republican Bob Dole in 1996, the media immediately declared George W. Bush, the son of the previous Republican president as the "frontrunner" for the 2000 Republican nomination. In 2000, Bush declared himself a "compassionate conservative" and ran as the "conservative" candidate against "liberal" John McCain (who, of course, is slightly more liberal than Bush). As president, Bush proceeded to govern to the left of every president since LBJ. Although even the Dole campaign had pledged to abolish the Department of Education, Bush doubled its size. Bush also expanded government involvement in medical care more than any president since LBJ with his Medicare Part D (of course, the Clintons pushed HillaryCare, but that never passed). Rather than ending welfare, Bush created the Office of Faith-Based Initiatives to hand over management of welfare programs to churches (apparently, these churches must have forgotten about the commandment "Thou Shalt Not Steal"). Rather than attempting to make participation in Social Security voluntary (which was the Social Security reform that Barry Goldwater supported, although he was forced to backpedal on this during the 1964 campaign), Bush supported a "privatization" of Social Security that would have invested the Social Security "trust fund" in the stock market. Bush pushed an "ownership society" in which the government sought to make sure everybody owned a home (of course, this program was nearly as destructive to the American people as the "Great Society"). Bush handed out billions of tax dollars to the banksters and began the process of nationalizing the car companies (a process which was completed when Obama founded Government Motors). Bush also ran record deficits and caused a skyrocketing of the national debt.

How exactly did many people get the idea that the far-left Bush administration was some kind of "conservative" administration? Yes, he may not have been far enough left for some leftists, but he was significantly to the left of their heroes Bill Clinton and Jimmy Carter, so I suspect their dislike of him is mostly due to jealousy (and to dislike of the specific cultural values he wished to use government to impose). Why do many who claim to be on the right still see the need to act as apologists for a far-left president?


Will President Palin appoint Dr. Kent Hovind as the Secretary of Education?

Dr. Orly Taitz at Attorney General?

Larry Craig as Airport Security Czar?

Mark Sanford as Ambassador to Argentina?

Mark Foley as LGBT Youth Czar?

Ted Haggard, Director of Faith-Based Initiatives?

Glenn Beck as Director of the FCC?

Jeff Gannon as White House Press Secretary?


My husband of 20 years up and left me and my children. Most of our married life was not happy...He was never really a good father or husband...I am a christian women who has raised our children in the faith...He never took the initiative to take them to church and act like a christian man should act. Anyway, he left me and filed for divorce with in a months time...I begged him to stop the divorce and come home and try to work things out...Even though He was wrong I wanted to exhaust every avenue I had before throwing in the towel...He has shown me no mercy in this and didn't take the children's feelings into consideration..I have done everything that i know do do...Am I still under bondage..Or would I be free to marry should the opportunity arise somewhere down the road. I feel as though I have been abandoned...He makes most of his decisions based on his pride and selfishness. Now we have to suffer for his mistakes...As far as I know he was not unfaithful in that he committed adultery, but he has been unfaithful in EVERY other way..Sometimes I feel sorry for him..


I want to start a school that teaches Creationism and Intelligent Falling; and why institutionalized inflation and removal of the gold standard was the best thing to ever happen to this country

Also I want to spend two hours a day praying, and teach History from a conservative perspective.

I am so glad that conservatives will see to it that not only is my school subsidized through faith-based initiatives but also that little rich kids will get vouchers to help my business.

Selectively-protected hyper-competition is always the best way to go - for everything. It has worked so well in countries that have better education systems than we do.
I knew it! You Cons don't want to take responsibility for your own education or you are embarrassed that you get your education from Lush Dimjob.

You right wingers need to grow up and take responsibility for your own education instead of complaining about the current one because you are (R-Retards). I got everything I needed out of the public school system. YOU FAILED. get over it.


Seems like you can't have both. If churches want to pay taxes, then the govt. can provide "faith based initiatives".

However if the churches want tax exemption then THE CHURCHES can provide the same "initiatives" with the money they saved.

What do you think??


(IsraelNN.com) U.S. super comic-heroes such as Superman, Batman, and Wonder Woman will appear together with the Muslim superheros known as The 99 in a new comic series to be released within a year. The initiative is a collaborative effort of DC Comics and Kuwait-based Teshkeel comics.
The 99 series was started in 2006 by Naif Al-Mutawa, who wanted to portray Islam in a more tolerant light. It features 99 different superheros based on Muslim figures and values, but they are not overtly religious so that the comics can be read by people of all faiths.

Mutawa says he’s not sure how the new storyline between the Western and Muslim superheroes will develop. “Are we going to have them working together from day one?” he asks. “Or will they think the other is the enemy? There are plenty of possibilities.”

DC Comics president Paul Levitz looked forward to the new venture. “It is a long-standing tradition for characters to meet other in the fictional world,” he said. “This is a nice step forward.”

The 99, created by writers who have worked previously at DC or Marvel Comics, sells around one million copies a year. It has also spawned an animation series and an amusement park.
Wonder Woman in a burka, and Superman fighting for Totalitarianism and no rights.

Imagine the outrage if they joined forces with Christians.


Universal healthcare that would give everybody health insurance would be great. Many European countries and Canada have it.

But there are few points that I would like to make.

-First off, America has over 300 million people where these European countries like Sweden, Norway, Germany, the Netherlands, etc., and Canada don't even have half the population that America does. So insuring 300 million plus would be incredibly expensive.

-America is in a major budget deficit and it seems like it is not going to be reduced any time soon. And I know that spending and spending and printing more money will cause inflation to go up and make it even more expensive. Correct?

-If Americans want universal coverage they would have to make some sacrifices by accepting cuts in government funding towards other programs. (Public schools, faith based initiatives, defense, social welfare for women who have too many kids, etc.) Government can't solve everything at once. Sorry.

So my main point is that I would like to see a universal system that gives everyone coverage. But seriously, how can America afford to pay for it at this time?


1. What is the name of the of the Council that Vice President Al Gore championed that would distribute funds and conduct additional research to discover new prevention strategies for youth development programs under the Clinton Administration?
a.Ounce of Prevention b. Pound of Prevention c. Youth Initiative d. Three Strikes

2.The notion that crime is injury is the big underlying idea of:
a.NCCDb. OJJDPc. BARJ d. NIBRS
3.Law enforcement practices in which behaviors have traditionally been labeled as juvenile status offenses but are not treated as criminal offenses is a practice known as:
a. Restorationb. Over-prosecutionc. Carousingd. Bootstrapping
4.In what year was The National Probation Act was enacted?
a. 1918b. 1925c. 1923d. 1972
5.Those individuals required to report suspected cases of abuse to the state are referred to as what type of reporters?
a.Mandated b. Imminent Dangerc. Liaisond. Discretionary
6. What type of procedure would a ‘Street Corner Adjustment’ be considered in policing juveniles?
a.Officialb. Unofficialc. Adjudication d. Status
7.Under which presidential administration did Congress create the OJJDP?
a.Clintonb. Bushc. Nixond. Ford
8.What philosophy centers on the assertion that crime and delinquency affect persons instead of the traditional assertion that crime affects the state?
a.Faith-Based Initiative b. Marginal Sanctioning c. Restorative Justiced. Systematic Diversion

9. There is a dubious practice of incarcerating women for their:
a.Safetyb. Own Goodc. Self-Protectiond. Rehabilitation
10.Which program was called ‘a worthless expenditure of tax-payers dollars’ under the Clinton administration?
a.Midnight Basketballb. Ounce of Prevention Councilc. OJJDPd. RYSE


The White House Skip Main Navigation
PRESIDENT | VICE PRESIDENT | FIRST LADY | MRS. CHENEY | NEWS
Your Government | History & Tours | Kids | E-mail | En Español

Podcasts Podcasts RSS Feeds RSS Feeds
In Focus

* Afghanistan
* Africa
* Budget Management
* Defense
* Economy
* Education
* Energy
* Environment
* Global Diplomacy
* Health Care
* Homeland Security
* Immigration
* International Trade
* Iraq
* Judicial Nominations
* Middle East
* National Security
* Veterans

More Issues more issues

News

* Current News
* Press Briefings
* Proclamations
* Executive Orders
* Radio
* Setting the Record Straight

More News more news

Interact

* Ask the White House
* White House Interactive



Your Government

* President's Cabinet
* USA Freedom Corps
* Faith-Based & Community Initiatives
* Office of Management and Budget
* National Security Council
* USA.gov



Appointments

* Nominations
* Applications




Link to Barney's Front Page
Barney Photos

Barney and Miss Beazley follow President George W. Bush along the West Wing Colonnade Wednesday, July 23, 2008, on the way back to the Oval Office at the White House. White House photo by Joyce Boghosian
Barney and Miss Beazley follow President George W. Bush along the West Wing Colonnade Wednesday, July 23, 2008, on the way back to the Oval Office at the White House. White House photo by Joyce Boghosian
Photo of the Day Archive

2008
2008
2007
2007
2006
2006
2005
2005
2004
2004

Email this page


Barney's Bio
BarneyBarney, the President's Scottish Terrier, was born on September 30, 2000. Although just seven years old, Barney has starred in nine "films" and has lived quite an exciting life... » Barney's Biography

Miss Beazley, a Scottish Terrier, arrived at the White House on January 6, 2005 as a birthday present from the President to Mrs. Bush... » Miss Beazley's Biography
Barney's Films

Barney Cam VII: A Red, White and Blue Christmas (2008)
• Windows Media
• Quicktime
• Real Media

Barney Cam VI: Holiday in the National Parks (2007)
• Windows Media
• Quicktime
• Real Media

My Barney Valentine (2007)
• Windows Media
• Quicktime
• Real Media

Barney's Holiday Extravaganza (2006)
• Windows Media
• Quicktime
• Real Media
• Text Version

A Very Beazley Christmas (2005)
• Windows Media
• Quicktime
• Real Media
• Text Version

Barney and Miss Beazley's Spring Garden Tour (2005)
• Windows Media
• Quicktime
• Real Media

Barney has found Miss Beazley (2005)
• Windows Media
• Quicktime
• Real Media

Where in the White House is Miss Beazley? (2004)
• Windows Media
• Quicktime
• Real Media

Barney Reloaded (2003)
• Windows Media
• Quicktime
• Real Media

Barney and Spot's Winter Wonderland (2003)
• Windows Media
• Quicktime
• Real Media

Barney Cam (2002)
• Windows Media
• Quicktime
• Real Media
Got a Question. Just send us an E-mail.
November 22, 2004 | 3:32 p.m.(EDT)

Q. Morgan from England writes:

Dear Mr. Barney,
I was wondering if you could help me with my maths homework. What is 7x7?

A. Barney, First Dog:
Barney 49.

Barney Questions Archive

Got a question for Barney? Send the White House an email...
Barney Photos
Barney Cam 2007 Photo Essay

Barney Cam 2006 Photo Essay

Barney Cam 2005 Photo Essay

Barney Cam Photo Essay

Barney Photo Match Game

decoration
President | Vice President | First Lady | Mrs. Cheney | News & Policies
History & Tours | Kids | Your Government | Appointments | Jobs | Contact |
Accessibility | Search | Privacy Policy | Help | Site Map


Has anyone thought about ending funding for that? Hmmm? All that fiscal conservancy and spending cuttery?


I say death.

Here's why:

More people have died for their religious beliefs than anything else.

Flying a plane into a building (9/11), was a faith based initiative. If they weren't told they would get 72 virgins in heaven they wouldn't have done it.

Muslims hate Christians to this day because of the Crusades.

Nazism was a religion. 6 million people died because of it. Not just Jews, but Polish people and people from other groups were killed as well.

It's a shame that before people learned to accept each other they learned how to make nuclear weapons.

If you find anything I've said interesting, buy or rent the movie "Religulous". It is a sometimes funny, excellent documentry on religion and what people believe.


I love being a conservative. We conservatives are proud of our philosophy. Unlike our liberal friends, who are constantly looking for new words to conceal their true beliefs and are in a perpetual state of reinvention, we conservatives are unapologetic about our ideals. We are confident in our principles and energetic about openly advancing them. We believe in individual liberty, limited government, capitalism, the rule of law, faith, a color-blind society and national security. We support school choice, enterprise zones, tax cuts, welfare reform, faith-based initiatives, political speech, homeowner rights and the war on terrorism. And at our core we embrace and celebrate the most magnificent governing document ever ratified by any nation--the U.S. Constitution. Along with the Declaration of Independence, which recognizes our God-given natural right to be free, it is the foundation on which our government is built and has enabled us to flourish as a people.

We conservatives are never stronger than when we are advancing our principles. And that's the nature of our current debate over the nomination of Harriet Miers. Will she respect the Constitution? Will she be an originalist who will accept the limited role of the judiciary to interpret and uphold it, and leave the elected branches--we, the people--to set public policy? Given the extraordinary power the Supreme Court has seized from the representative parts of our government, this is no small matter. Roe v. Wade is a primary example of judicial activism. Regardless of one's position on abortion, seven unelected and unaccountable justices simply did not have the constitutional authority to impose their pro-abortion views on the nation. The Constitution empowers the people, through their elected representatives in Congress or the state legislatures, to make this decision.

Abortion is only one of countless areas in which a mere nine lawyers in robes have imposed their personal policy preferences on the rest of us. The court has conferred due process rights on terrorists detained at Guantanamo Bay and benefits on illegal immigrants. It has ruled that animated cyberspace child pornography is protected speech, but certain broadcast ads aired before elections are illegal; it has held that the Ten Commandments can't be displayed in a public building, but they can be displayed outside a public building; and the court has invented rationales to skirt the Constitution, such as using foreign law to strike down juvenile death penalty statutes in over a dozen states.

For decades conservatives have considered judicial abuse a direct threat to our Constitution and our form of government. The framers didn't create a judicial oligarchy. They created a representative republic. Our opposition to judicial activism runs deep. We've witnessed too many occasions where Republican presidents have nominated the wrong candidates to the court, and we want more assurances this time--some proof. The left, on the other hand, sees the courts as the only way to advance their big-government agenda. They can't win national elections if they're open about their agenda. So, they seek to impose their policies by judicial fiat. It's time to call them on it. And that's what many of us had hoped and expected when the president made his nomination.

Some liberal commentators mistakenly view the passionate debate among conservatives over the Miers nomination as a "crackup" on the right. They are giddy about "splits" in the conservative base of the GOP. They are predicting doom for the rest of the president's term and gloom for Republican electoral chances in 2006. As usual, liberals don't understand conservatives and never will.

The Miers nomination shows the strength of the conservative movement. This is no "crackup." It's a crackdown. We conservatives are unified in our objectives. And we are organized to advance them. The purpose of the Miers debate is to ensure that we are doing the very best we can to move the nation in the right direction. And when all is said and done, we will be even stronger and more focused on our agenda and defeating those who obstruct it, just in time for 2006 and 2008. Lest anyone forget, for several years before the 1980 election, we had knockdown battles within the GOP. The result: Ronald Reagan won two massive landslides.

The real crackup has already occurred--on the left! The Democratic Party has been hijacked by 1960s retreads like Howard Dean; billionaire eccentrics like George Soros; and leftwing computer geeks like Moveon.org. It nominated John Kerry, a notorious Vietnam-era antiwar activist, as its presidential standard-bearer. Its major spokesmen are old extremists like Ted Kennedy and new propagandists like Michael Moore. Its great presidential hope is one of the most divisive figures in U.S. politics, Hillary Clinton. And its favorite son is an impeached, disbarred, held-in-contempt ex-president, Bill Clinton.

The Democratic Party today i


faith-based initiatives are like the money that President Bush gave out during his term under an executive order so that religious-based organizations could carry out secular activities. For example, a Christian Church is funded by the government so that they could specifically feed the poor.


1. In which foreign crisis did President Clinton commit U.S. troops to lead a multinational force to restore a democratically elected president and eventually send former President Carter to negotiate?
(Points: 1)
Bosnia

Haiti

Somalia

Rwanda



2. What nationality were the terrorists that blew up the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma City?
(Points: 1)
Sudanese

Syrian

Saudi Arabian

American



3. The U.S. Supreme Court's decision not to allow a vote recount in Florida led to _____________________ winning the 2000 presidential election.
(Points: 1)
Bill Clinton

Al Gore

George W. Bush

Barack Obama



4. Which of the following was not a domestic policy initiative of the George W. Bush administration?
(Points: 1)
federal funding for stem-cell research

No Child Left Behind Act

faith-based initiatives

major tax cut



5. What was the main constitutional issue regarding Bush's claims to executive privilege?
(Points: 1)
Bush's interpretations of executive privilege posed a threat to the impeachment process.

Bush's interpretations of executive privilege endangered the principle of the separation of powers.

Executive privilege should not be applied in cases involving the judicial branch of government.

Presidential pardons cannot be granted to former presidents who have been indicted.



6. What two structures were the targets of Islamic extremists on September 11, 2001?
(Points: 1)
World Trade Center; Hoover Dam

Empire State Building; Pentagon

White House; Golden Gate Bridge

Pentagon; World Trade Center


Bush with his 5 Trillion spent it on going to war in Iraq (and cut taxes for the top 5%, something NO president has done during a time of war, not to mention Iraq has 78 billion dollars in oil profits last year), Afghanistan, "faith-based" initiative failures such as abstinence ONLY education, starting the bank bailout, etc., all of which we borrow from foreign countries that can compromise our national security.

Obama is spending it on THIS COUNTRY in roads, bridges, healthcare, energy, education, etc. things that will help this country in the short and long term and should have been done FROM the beginning in 2001, but was ignored. Both the private sector AND local governments have not tried to solve these issues so now the federal govt. has to step in. At least, Obama is paying for it by raising taxes only on the top 5% (and only to the levels DURING CLINTON, which were still lower than under Reagan or Nixon) - when we had our biggest levels of economic growth).

Yet conservatives are complaining when the money is being spent here and not in a quagmire in Iraq, and voted for Bush in 2000 and 2004, and now all of a sudden act as if they had nothing to do with Bush getting into office. Fiscally, John McCain was more conservative than Bush when he ran back in 2000.
Shandra - yes he did, quit watching your koolaid Fox Noise. The number is correct.
pjkondor, we were attacked by Al-Qaeda with almost all the hijackers from SAUDI ARABIA (our supposed ally), Iraq had NOTHING to do with 9/11 as established by the 9/11 commission. At least Afghanistan was where we should have been. Oh, but Iraq had atrocities - you mean back in 1980 against the Kurds? So we come back 29 years later? You make no sense (not surprising for a conservative).


Just want to say this first. Below are laws that must be followed by all faith based initiatives.


# They may not use direct government funds to support inherently religious activities such as prayer, worship, religious instruction, or proselytization.

# Any inherently religious activities that the organizations may offer must be offered separately in time or location from services that receive federal assistance.

# FBOs cannot discriminate on the basis of religion when providing services (GAO 2006:13)

I also heard they supposedly got 30% of the homeless population off the street and into jobs.

Oh, I'm an atheist by the way.
They have food drives, offer free education classes to anyone seeking it, such as reading and basic work-skills, counseling, etc.

Sounds like they just want to help people. :)
oph_chad, wow, thanks for being a good human being!

Pagan, because the organization (while not religious when giving services) is still a church. Basically they're just a bunch of people that want to help other people though.


Also, look at these laws that must be followed:

# They may not use direct government funds to support inherently religious activities such as prayer, worship, religious instruction, or proselytization.

# Any inherently religious activities that the organizations may offer must be offered separately in time or location from services that receive federal assistance.

# FBOs cannot discriminate on the basis of religion when providing services (GAO 2006:13
Well, of course getting 100% of the homeless population away wasn't realistically possible.

But I heard they did offer free classes to people, for things like education, work-experience/skills, etc.
tribeca, what other ways do you have in mind?


im supposed to write a letter to obama about faith-based initiatives. Should religious groups that use federal funding continue to discriminate against the people they serve of hire?





We became interested in [school] early on for [child] and met with [headmaster] in September 2008 when [child] was 3 to tour the school and discuss our interest. We’ve also spoken extensively to parents who have children enrolled at the school, such as [names of parents]. We attend [name of church] and [child] is currently in pre-K at [school]. We plan on attending open houses over the next few years.

We’ve looked at a considerable number of schools in [city] because we both feel strongly about investing in education early and both had wonderful experiences and opportunities due to our own private educations. We are especially interested in [school] for [child] because we are looking for an outstanding faculty and challenging academics as well as athletics, fine arts, music and an emphasis on giving back. We also want [child] to be in an open, welcoming and progressive environment where every child receives individual attention. We feel strongly that we want our son to be in a community where empathy, integrity, moral and emotional intelligence, self-awareness and confidence are integrated into the environment. The overall philosophy of the school is very appealing to us, as are special programs such as the remarkable focus on community service, the Travel Program and diversity initiatives. We also appreciate the consistency of the unchanged leadership of the school for over 20 years. As members of [name of church], we would like our son’s education to encompass the philosophy of the [name of religion] faith, while embracing other faiths and diversity of thought and practice at the same time.
Finally, based on our tours, observations and conversations with friends and people associated with the school, we have come away with the impression that it is a warm, caring environment and the children who attend are smart, friendly and simply good kids.

We learned of [school] by several avenues and from excellent word of mouth. We first became aware of [school] due to my interviewing of several potential [name of college] candidates from the school. In September of 2008, we met with [name of headmaster] to express our early interest in the school and take a tour. We have several friends who have children at the school: [names of friends]. We’ve spoken to them at length about their experiences at [school] and they have been overwhelmingly positive.


We’ve looked at a considerable number of schools in [city] because we both feel strongly about investing in education early on and both had wonderful experiences and opportunities from our own private educations. We are especially interested in [school] for [child] because we are looking for outstanding faculty and challenging academics plus athletics, the fine arts, music and an emphasis on giving back. We also want [child] to be in an open, welcoming and progressive environment where every child receives individual attention. We also feel strongly that we want our son to be in a community where empathy, integrity, moral and emotional intelligence, self-awareness and confidence are integrated into the environment. The overall philosophy of the school is very appealing to us, as are special programs like the remarkable focus on community service, the Travel Program and diversity initiatives. We also appreciate the consistency that must come due to the fact that the head of the school has remained unchanged for over 20 years. As members of [church], we would like our son’s education to encompass the philosophy of the faith, while embracing other faiths and diversity of thought and practice as well.
Finally, based on our tours, observations and conversations with friends and people associated with the school, we have come away with the impression that it is a warm, caring environment and the children that attend are smart, friendly and simply good kids.


I think if we all used our faith like a mustard seed, we could put the sun in the proper position, the way GOD wanted it to be.


In 2001, President Bush announced the Faith Based and Community Initiatives plan, which uses funds appropriated by Congress to establish a series of conferences designed to coordinate and support both religious and secular community organizations. The Freedom from Religion Foundation, represented by taxpayer plaintiffs, challenged this program on the basis that it violated the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment, but the suit was dismissed for lack of standing.

The Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals reversed the district court, holding that various Supreme Court precedents establish that the Foundation did have standing. The government has appealed the case to the Supreme Court, arguing that the Foundation's inability to identify a particular Congressional appropriation removes the programs from the Establishment Clause prohibition on Congressional action supporting religion.

If you were on the U. S. Supreme Court, what would your decision be?


If I understand correctly, religion-based charities are tax-exempt. Since such organizations benefitting from "faith-based initiatives" are benefitting from government intervention and US taxpayers' money, should they be stripped of their tax-exempt status? Why or why not?


Also, it's been shown that Bush's "faith-based initiatives" have never benefited religious organizations that aren't Abrahamic in origin. Since Obama discussed the religious and philosophical diversity of our country in his Inauguration address, is it likely that religious groups of non-Abrahamic origin will now benefit from this program?


I mean really, they sell "air" at a 100% markup. As I haven't researched these faith-based initiatives, I'm wondering just what in the hell these churches can't afford on their own!?
I understand that much of it goes to charity work and such... but... why do tax dollars need to do that. The church is made out of money?
When an organization has no money, and you hand them 10% of your paycheck, they just made a profit...
Ah, Kitteh... how exactly does that money get transferred to God? Who does he bank with?


I think I will hand out government cheese on the street corner.


as this initiative has directed tax money to clergy/churches and even created gov't jobs for clergy/staff at tax payer expense..is it not unethical in view of the constitution? some can argue that churches provide much community assistance, which they do, but so do the secular charities that are now losing equal footing for gov't subsidies.
true. it does not violate the 1st amendment. however, it does give religious charities a distinct advantage over the secular charities in applying for gov't dollars. if the goal of this initiative is to help community charities why the need to bolster religious charities? correct answer is there is more than what is on paper here. yes, it does provide that the money they rec'v must go to non religious activities, which keeps it on the correct side of the establishment clause, but the bottom line is it favors religious charities and creates gov't jobs at federal, state, and local levels to further it's mission. imo it is unethical to do that. if you think i am wrong plz explain.
agreed magpie - did u know that Obama has actually expanded the program now? complete w/ Pentecostal minister in charge of the office :/


Petro-Canada to Sponsor Project Homeless Connect for 2009


11:57 AM ET, February 5, 2009


CALGARY, ALBERTA, Feb 5, 2009 (Marketwire via COMTEX) -- Hundreds of homeless or near-homeless Calgarians will receive needed support through Project Homeless Connect (PHC) in 2009 due to the financial and in-kind support of Petro-Canada.

"Petro-Canada is pleased to be able to help Project Homeless Connect," said Ron Brenneman, Petro-Canada's president and chief executive officer. "This is a practical and immediate way to help the growing number of homeless in Calgary."

PHC is a one-day event, to be held four times in 2009, where homeless or near-homeless individuals and families are provided with many services in one location. On-site access to materials and services include: medical treatment, counseling, housing, new identification documents, income support, employment and education opportunities. In addition, hair-cuts, meals, clothing and comfort kits containing personal items are provided.

"We are thrilled to have Petro-Canada's support for Project Homeless Connect," said Tim Richter, President and CEO of the Calgary Homeless Foundation. "With Petro-Canada's investment, as well as their direct participation in staging the four editions of PHC in 2009, the Homeless Foundation has a strong partner in helping provide much needed resources and supports to homeless and near-homeless Calgarians."

PHC events for 2009 will take place between 9:00 a.m. and 4:00 p.m. at the Petro-Canada Centre, 150 - 6th Avenue SW, Calgary, on February 28, May 23, September 19 and November 23.

Project Homeless Connect (PHC) in Calgary

The Calgary Homeless Foundation organized and hosted Calgary's first PHC on April 26, 2008, serving 650 people. The next two PHC events saw a steady increase in participants, with 1,038 people served in the most recent event on November 22, 2009. PHC is an initiative from Calgary's 10 Year Plan to End Homelessness and is based on a model used in more than 170 communities in Canada, Australia and the United States.

Petro-Canada

Petro-Canada is one of Canada's largest oil and gas companies, operating in both the upstream and the downstream sectors of the industry in Canada and internationally. The Company creates value by responsibly developing energy resources and providing world class petroleum products and services. Petro-Canada is proud to be a National Partner to the Vancouver 2010 Olympic and Paralympic Winter Games. Petro-Canada's common shares trade on the Toronto Stock Exchange (TSX) under the symbol PCA and on the New York Stock Exchange (NYSE) under the symbol PCZ.

Calgary Homeless Foundation

The Calgary Homeless Foundation leads the implementation of Calgary's 10 Year Plan to End Homelessness. Issued in January 2008, Calgary's 10 Year Plan was created by the Calgary Committee to End Homelessness, a community-based, multi-stakeholder, leadership group, who issued the Plan and selected the Foundation to implement the Plan. The Foundation is moving forward on Calgary's 10 Year Plan in partnership with the many homeless serving agencies, the private sector, our government partners, the faith community, other foundations and all Calgarians to end homelessness in Calgary once and for all


obama will destroy us all



I'm talking about to U.S.


President Barack Obama will make changes Thursday to President Bush's controversial Office of Faith-Based Initiatives, partly to ensure religious groups that receive government money do not discriminate in hiring, administration officials said.

Obama found that one of the problems with the previous Initiative was that tough questions were decided without appropriate consideration, data, and input from different sides, the officials said. There were ideological decisions, instead of decisions based in fact, they added.


Obama officials say his executive order will make religious groups demonstrate to the government that their hiring is legal and non-discriminatory.


President Barack Obama will make changes Thursday to President Bush’s controversial Office of Faith-Based Initiatives, partly to ensure religious groups that receive government money do not discriminate in hiring, administration officials said.
Obama will sign an executive order that will strengthen the constitutional and legal grounding of the Office, two senior administration officials told CNN.
Critics of the agency, which steers government money to religious charities that perform social services, say that under the Bush Administration faith groups were allowed to take religion into account when hiring.
Do you agree or disagree?



The Age of Reason should supplant the bible.
Yes President Obama is religious but he is smart enough to put reason before it.