1. Standard memberwittywonka
    Chocolate Expert
    Cocoa Mountains
    Joined
    26 Nov '06
    Moves
    19249
    25 Jun '07 22:581 edit
    "By a 5-4 vote, a conservative majority concluded taxpayers did not
    have "standing" to challenge in court the discretionary spending
    authority of the executive branch for its Office of Faith-Based
    and Community Initiatives."

    http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/06/25/faith.based.office.scotus/index.html

    Another step back for the separation of church and state...
  2. Standard memberKellyJay
    Walk your Faith
    USA
    Joined
    24 May '04
    Moves
    148571
    26 Jun '07 04:46
    Originally posted by wittywonka
    "By a 5-4 vote, a conservative majority concluded taxpayers did not
    have "standing" to challenge in court the discretionary spending
    authority of the executive branch for its Office of [b]Faith-Based

    and Community Initiatives."

    http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/06/25/faith.based.office.scotus/index.html

    Another step back for the separation of church and state...[/b]
    Did they start a state religion?
    Kelly
  3. Standard memberNemesio
    Ursulakantor
    Pittsburgh, PA
    Joined
    05 Mar '02
    Moves
    32455
    26 Jun '07 04:49
    Originally posted by KellyJay
    Did they start a state religion?
    Kelly
    No. The State endorsed religion. This is by definition not separation.

    Nemesio
  4. Standard memberKellyJay
    Walk your Faith
    USA
    Joined
    24 May '04
    Moves
    148571
    26 Jun '07 04:54
    Originally posted by Nemesio
    No. The State endorsed religion. This is by definition not separation.

    Nemesio
    Endorsed religion, hmm you lost me here, it did not setup a state
    religion? You think if a state penny touchs a religious 'anything' that
    is some how against the law?
    Kelly
  5. Standard memberSwissGambit
    Caninus Interruptus
    2014.05.01
    Joined
    11 Apr '07
    Moves
    92274
    26 Jun '07 05:34
    Originally posted by KellyJay
    Endorsed religion, hmm you lost me here, it did not setup a state
    religion? You think if a state penny touchs a religious 'anything' that
    is some how against the law?
    Kelly
    The state has gone further than that. They have a specific office just for faith-based charities. This implies that special preference is given to religious charities.

    I have no problem with the government supporting charity work, but there must be no discrimination against non-religious charities.
  6. Standard memberKellyJay
    Walk your Faith
    USA
    Joined
    24 May '04
    Moves
    148571
    26 Jun '07 06:281 edit
    Originally posted by SwissGambit
    The state has gone further than that. They have a specific office just for faith-based charities. This implies that special preference is given to religious charities.

    I have no problem with the government supporting charity work, but there must be no discrimination against non-religious charities.
    I doubt there are special preferences, more than likely a group setup
    to make sure no special preferences are given. Nothing implied about
    it, unless you think that every group that gets a specific office gets
    special preferences.
    Kelly
  7. Standard memberKellyJay
    Walk your Faith
    USA
    Joined
    24 May '04
    Moves
    148571
    26 Jun '07 06:31
    Originally posted by SwissGambit
    The state has gone further than that. They have a specific office just for faith-based charities. This implies that special preference is given to religious charities.

    I have no problem with the government supporting charity work, but there must be no discrimination against non-religious charities.
    Do you think that all the non-religious charities are getting special
    treatment above religious ones without this special office?
    Kelly
  8. Standard memberSwissGambit
    Caninus Interruptus
    2014.05.01
    Joined
    11 Apr '07
    Moves
    92274
    26 Jun '07 17:48
    Originally posted by KellyJay
    I doubt there are special preferences, more than likely a group setup
    to make sure no special preferences are given. Nothing implied about
    it, unless you think that every group that gets a specific office gets
    special preferences.
    Kelly
    Why didn't they just call it the "Office for charitable initiatives"?
Back to Top