"Faith Based Initiative"

Why? Because I am disgusted by the thought that some person, because they hold a specific religious belief, thinks they can dictate what is right and what is wrong and therefore pretty much condemns me for my beliefs. I do not want my beliefs dictated based on some religious nutcase. Ever. My beliefs are my own. And I am unwilling to see my goverment attempting to dictate what is right and what is wrong for me.

I am not explaining this correctly - I get so mad at the idea that I cannot marshall my thoughts into a logical argument, and am, instead, left with chaotic emotional responses.

I had a simillar debate with a good friend of mine from college (who happens to be a bit of a God Squad'er). I maintained that "morals" per se were just an offshoot of decent human conduct and common sense, whereas he credits the existence of "morals" to Christianity.....which I still believe is a bit of a fucking leap. But, y'know, there's no convincing these people.

Not to derail the thread too much, but this brings up a really interestingly sticky idea. The concept of whats known as a universal moral code. ie: is there one? I have a friend who is a bit of a socialist and universalist who insists there is, that there is a set of morals (or rules if you will) that are just "so". I can't bring myself to agree with this, because humans by their nature won't always come to the same understanding on certain issues. What's right to one person is abhorrent to another, that kind of thing.

I find it curious that the US has this dichotomy of "separation of church and state" and yet seems like such a conservtive and heavily religious country. In Australia, that "separate church and state" concept isnt upheld quite so much, and we used to have (at my school anyway) christian folk singer nobs who'd come in for what they called "scripture" once a week. This was a heinous crime, they made us sing "Michael Row the Boat Ashore" ... I was scarred for life :-(

No, I don't think so. But they do think it's not really government's business to provide security for the poor or the otherwise disadvantaged.

Our nation (the U.S) is founded upon the Declaration of
Independance and the Constitution. We can nitpick these
documents all we want, but the fact is they worked.
They've been exonerated by history - ours is the longest
running democratic republic in history, taking a
system that was once as utopian and unmaintainable, and
creating a blueprint for the democracies to come.

If you actually read these documents they base their
mandate as directly given by God.

So if we suppress the concept of God itself (which is a
universal one) we are chiselling the very foundation of
a system that, for all it's flaws, has proved it's
worth many times over.

The documents weren't written by rabid Christians of course,
they were written and driven by deist intellectuals were
considered quite radical in their day. They eschewed
organized Christianity as a hypocritical sham, and included
the clause the separation of church and state (CHURCH
and state, not GOD and state). They didn't want to see an
official denomination or philosophy supported by the govt
crushing all theological opponents.

So school prayer is obviously nuts, and so is this Faith
Based Initiative, which is just one more of Bush's
sinister tentacles grasping for more control, more, more.

Actually, I agree with the general premise behind the
FBI's: Individuals, churches and other private organizations
should handle welfare and security for the poor, seniors
etc. I think if 95% of all welfare and social aid was handled
by private organizations, those in need would be much
better off.

But in practice, Bush's plan is just another power grab.
That which the government subsidizes, the government controls.

But I think we need to be careful to combat sectarian
fanaticism but, at the same time, not use a scalpel to
cut off and isolate God himself - every society has
it's God, and if it doesn't have a robed, white-bearded
God above it will settle for a charismatic, uniformed
God to lead it to glory, here on earth.

Re: Oops, glad you brought up the drug issue. I think
future historians will look back on the "drug war" as
one of the blackest jokes perpetrated by of our current
government.

I say this also because of family background: when my grandmother was hospitalised for mental problems in 1950, the local Lutheran church grandees came a-knocking on my grandfather's door. They said a single father could not cope with working and raising four kids under 10 without a mother on site, and began steps to have his kids (including my mum) adopted into nice Lutheran families. My grandfather (an agnostic) avoided this by finding home help from another church group, so cue the farce of my family pretending to be Jehovah's Witnesses for three years while my grandmother was in the bin.

As American citizens, you have certain rights and responsibilities from birth that do not include acquiescence to any other beliefs not of your own absolute free choice. Religious groups ask that you follow a creed, whereas Federal agencies still do not.

Also, America before nationhood was of course a haven for religious groups misunderstood or persecuted in Europe at the time, and in those times of pre-Evolutionary thinking OF COURSE they thought God had made everything. I think the authors of the Constitution etc. also knew if they didn't enshrine secularism, the nation they'd fought so hard to found on egalitarian principles would have problems with internecine battles between the various God squads. I often suggest to my friends in Europe that if the separation of church and state hadn't been declared, religious influence in America would be even more monstrous, corrupt and unassailable than it is right now.

(But then, Bush also sent money to the Taliban for a faith based approach to the drug war in Afghanistan.)

Just venting. Not capable of real extended discussion.

did we stop him