Posted on 10/22/2003 4:49:00 AM PDT by Mark Felton
The most dangerous force our country faces right now doesn't come from the threat of international terrorism. It comes from evangelical Christian fanatics connected to the White House, like Army Lt. Gen. William G. Boykin.
Last week, NBC ran a story showing Boykin in front of audiences at several evangelical churches across the country. Projected behind him was President George W. Bush. "Why is this man in the White House?" Boykin asked his audiences. "I tell you this morning, he's in the White House because God put him there for a time such as this."
This was after the recently appointed deputy undersecretary for intelligence also told the audiences the United States has been battling Satan during our war with Osama bin Laden and Saddam Hussein. He also said the reason terrorists have been attacking us is "because we're a Christian nation."
The three-star general in full dress uniform told the cheering crowds that when he was fighting against a Muslim militia leader in Somalia in 1993, he knew the Christian god was on his side. He had nothing to fear from Muslims because their god was an idol.
If images of radical hell-fire-and-brimstone religious fanatics who scream at us in the Free-Speech Area come to mind, you're not far off. The worst part is that this man isn't a sandwich-board-toting crazy. He has actual power, and he is a leading military figure in our ongoing wars against Muslim countries. He's not alone. Bush and his staff of evangelical Christians are slowly forcing their views on the rest of America and the world. America is shifting from democracy to theocracy.
Almost immediately after Sept. 11, President Bush said we were now in a "crusade." Even though he later retracted this remark and has waged a public relations campaign saying he respects Islam, you can't help but feel that Bush thinks he's on a mission from God.
According to Newsweek, prior to deploying troops to Iraq, Bush, the self-proclaimed "Born Again" evangelical Christian, told religious broadcasters "terrorists hate the fact that ... we can worship Almighty God the way we see fit," and that the United States needs to bring God's gift of liberty to "every human being in the world." Sounds like he forgot to say "whether they want it or not."
Bush's use of religion as a justification of policy isn't limited to war. Last week he declared Marriage Protection Week. This anti-homosexual statement coincides with the anniversary of the death of 21-year-old Matthew Shepard's death. You may remember him. He was the student from Laramie, Wyo. who was beaten to death for being gay (See Hallie Gorman's column "Protection hurts gays" in last week's Orion for more information).
This tasteless statement is just one more way Bush places his religious views on others, and it comes only months after a summer of Bush using biblical references to promote heterosexual marriage over homosexuals. Bush isn't just making statements - he also plans on using our tax dollars to fund his religious views.
According to Americans United for Separation of Church and State, the Bush administration plans on creating a "faith based" initiative that could funnel large sums of public funds to religious social services. Under the initiative, $30.5 million will go to grants given to social and religious groups. And it will give close to $20 billion to religious groups that claim to operate substance and mental health service programs. Religious groups could also compete for $8 billion in housing grants. If this initiative makes it through the legislature, it will be a direct slap in the face of the First Amendment, which says "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion."
Since Sept. 11, Bush has been sounding more like a preacher giving a sermon than a president. The reverend C. Welton Gaddy, a Louisiana pastor and executive director of the Interfaith Alliance Foundation, told CNN that "This president is using general references ... and vocabulary that come straight out of a very particular religious tradition, which is evangelical Christianity." He went on to say that this doesn't reflect the broad range of religious views this country has.
Gaddy's right. When one religion is forced above others, it turns us away from being a free country. When guys like Bush, Boykin and Attorney General John Ashcroft use religion to determine policy decisions, the constitutional-based wall that has separated church and state since this country's inception starts to crumble. When the dust from that wall clears, we'll no longer be free.
Ryan Sabalow can be reached at opinioneditor@orion-online.net
Don't Allow Him to Edit Your Opinion
Now how could the President have gotten such a twisted idea?
Wait till they grow up, start paying taxes, and then have a teenage son or daughter come home stone drunk back-talking trash.
They'll be conservatives, then.
This moron put the whole country in a panic and on an alert, all because he doesn't like President Bush and General Boykin???
Enough already!
Instead, write him a letter and let him know you are praying for him.
Just goes to show how ignorant of the facts these people really are...this plan was put in place in 1996 under Clinton, Bush is just encouraging more participation:
"Section 104 of the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996 (P.L. 104-193), the so-called "Charitable Choice" provision, specifically addresses the use of contracts, vouchers and other funding to arrange for "charitable, religious or private organizations" to provide services under Temporary Assistance for Needy Families, Medicaid, Supplemental Security Income and Food Stamps (and has been interpreted as applying to certain other programs as well). The statute also requires that religious organizations be permitted to receive such funding "on the same basis as any other non-governmental provider." In addition, the interim regulations for the new Welfare-to-Work Program explicitly permit faith-based organizations to apply for and receive competitive grants. Private Industry Councils and other entities administering the formula Welfare-to-Work grants are required to coordinate those activities with faith-based organizations."
And it IS constitutional under the guidelines:
Section 104 (the Charitable Choice provisions) of P.L. 104-193 includes various protections for both religious organizations and welfare recipients in an attempt to find a balance between the rights and religious liberties of both parties. Any state or local welfare agency considering a financial arrangement with a religious organization for welfare or certain relatedprograms must follow the requirements of Section 104, which include arranging for alternative providers if welfare recipients request them and not discriminating against religious organizations in contracting procedures.
The Center for Public Justice and the Christian Legal Society have published a brief guide of the statutory provisions. It holds that Section 104 is constitutional and offers guidance to both government agencies and congregations on complying with the law.
The guideline can be found at:
Charitable Choice rests on the constitutional concept that government must not discriminate against religion when it carries out its programs and interacts with nongovernmental groups.
Sorry, but you are wrong...see my post #33.
Perhaps, but if reducing the RATE of GROWTH of these programs is successfully mischaracterized as draconian cuts by the democrats and their fawning media, that isn't a feasible goal right now. The next best thing is to eliminate the prohibition on religious organizations from competing for those funds, especially since religious organizations typically deliver the services much more efficiently than organizations such as the united way, etc.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.