GraceAbounds

Obama wants to expand faith-based programs - Barack Obama News - MSNBC.com

Obama wants to expand faith-based programs

Says challenges faced today are 'too big for government to solve alone'
The Associated Press
updated 2:06 p.m. CT, Tues., July. 1, 2008

CHICAGO - Reaching out to religious voters, Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama called for expanding President Bush's program steering federal social service dollars to religious groups and — in a move sure to cause controversy — supported some ability to hire and fire based on faith.

(Note: The Associated Press initially reported Obama supports "their (faith-based organizations') ability to hire and fire based on faith." NBC reports the campaign says Obama's plan would prevent organizations from discriminating based on faith. The Associated Press changed its wording to say, "some ability to hire and fire based on faith." The campaign says this second version is still inaccurate.)

Obama unveiled his approach to getting religious charities more involved in government anti-poverty programs during a tour and remarks Tuesday at Eastside Community Ministry, which provides food, clothes, youth ministry and other services.

"The challenges we face today ... are simply too big for government to solve alone," Obama said.
Obama's announcement is part of a series of events leading up to Friday's Fourth of July holiday that are focused on American values.

The candidate spent Monday talking about his vision of patriotism in the battleground state of Missouri. By twinning that with Tuesday's talk about faith in another battleground state, he was attempting to settle debate in two key areas where his beliefs have come under question while also trying to make inroads with constituencies that are traditionally loyal to Republicans and oppose Obama on other grounds.

But Obama's support for letting religious charities that receive federal funding consider religion in employment decisions could invite a protest from those in his own party who view such faith requirements as discrimination.

Obama does not support requiring religious tests for recipients of aid nor using federal money to proselytize, according to a campaign fact sheet. He also only supports letting religious institutions hire and fire based on faith in the non-taxypayer funded portions of their activities, said a senior adviser to the campaign, who spoke on condition of anonymity to more freely describe the new policy.

Rev. Barry Lynn, executive director of Americans United for Separation of Church and State, criticized Obama's proposed expansion of a program he said has undermined civil rights and civil liberties.
"I am disappointed that any presidential candidate would want to continue a failed policy of the Bush administration," he said. "It ought to be shut down, not continued."

John DiIulio, who in 2001 was director of Bush's White House Office of Faith-Based and Community Initiatives, said Obama's plan "reminds me of much that was best in both then Vice President Al Gore's and then Texas Governor George W. Bush's respective first speeches on the subject in 1999," according to a statement from the Obama campaign.

Bush supports broader freedoms for taxpayer-funded religious charities. But he never got Congress to go along so he has conducted the program through administrative actions and executive orders.
David Kuo, a conservative Christian who was deputy director of Bush's Office of Faith-Based and Community Initiatives until 2003 and later became a critic of Bush's commitment to the cause, said Obama's position on hiring has the potential to be a major "Sister Souljah moment" for his campaign.
This is a reference to Bill Clinton's accusation in his 1992 presidential campaign that the hip hop artist incited violence against whites. Because Clinton said this before a black audience, it fed into an image of him as a bold politician who was willing to take risks and refused to pander.

"This is a massive deal," said Kuo, who is not an Obama adviser or supporter but was contacted by the campaign to review the new plan.

Obama proposes to elevate the program to a "moral center" of his administration, by renaming it the Council for Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnerships, and changing training from occasional huge conferences to empowering larger religious charities to mentor smaller ones in their communities.

Saying social service spending has been shortchanged under Bush, he also proposes a $500 million per year program to provide summer learning for 1 million poor children to help close achievement gaps with white and wealthier students. A campaign fact sheet said he would pay for it by better managing surplus federal properties, reducing growth in the federal travel budget and streamlining the federal procurement process.

Like Bush, Obama was arguing that religious organizations can and should play a bigger role in serving the poor and meeting other social needs. But while Bush argued that the strength of religious charities lies primarily in shared religious identity between workers and recipients, Obama was to tout the benefits of their "bottom-up" approach.

"Because they're so close to the people, they're well-placed to offer help," he said.
Kuo called Obama's approach smart, impressive and well thought-out but took a wait-and-see attitude about whether it would deliver.

"When it comes to promises to help the poor, promises are easy," said Kuo, who wrote a 2006 book describing his frustration at what he called Bush's lackluster enthusiasm for the program. "The question is commitment."

Obama also talked bluntly about the genesis of his Christian faith in his work as a community organizer in Chicago, and its importance to him now.

"In time, I came to see faith as being both a personal commitment to Christ and a commitment to my community; that while I could sit in church and pray all I want, I wouldn't be fulfilling God's will unless I went out and did the Lord's work," he said.

__________________

Minor Axis

I'm afraid I don't support faith based programs funded by U.S. tax dollars as my understanding is that they are offered with an agenda. If they were neutral, no strings attached help programs, no problem.

__________________
"I see in your eyes the same fear that would take the heart of me. A day may come when the courage of Men fails, when we forsake our friends and break all bonds of fellowship, but it is not this day. An hour of wolves and shattered shields when the Age of Men comes crashing down, but it is not this day! This day we fight! By all that you hold dear on this good earth, I bid you stand, Men of the West!"

All Else Failed

No money from the federal government should go to any religious organization. If they are dying let them die.

GraceAbounds

__________________

RecklessTim

Yeah, I wasn't very happy with this decision. Not at all...

It's funny that the religious right are all aboard the "faith based initiative" train... well until Obama gives the first check to a Mosque....

__________________
Mr President;
It has been reported that you are here to "lecture" us on democracy and human rights. But with a record like yours, you will not be very convincing.

GraceAbounds

I don't understand why people have a problem with the government supporting religious charities in regards to them helping out the community by serving others in way of providing food, clothes, and other services to people in need.

To me it seems that some people are so dead set against God that their opinions regarding that are more important than people getting help. And I will never understand why some people seem to think it is ok to force more taxes on people for more social programs, but then gawk at people that want to give and serve to the community on their own accord, instead of it being forced upon them to give through their taxes. Makes no sense to me at all.

__________________

RecklessTim

I would have no problem if this was the case. But it's not just about charity.

I support the charity work the churches do 100%, it's the only good that comes out of religion IMO. The monies given to the specific religious organizations is not all for charities and it doesn't go to all religions. Fix those problems and I would be behind it.

__________________
Mr President;
It has been reported that you are here to "lecture" us on democracy and human rights. But with a record like yours, you will not be very convincing.

Minor Axis

I may be misinformed, but if it's charity to simply help, that's ok but if it's charity to help and convert you, then I don't support it. But I'd rather see religious charities do their thing without the federal government interjecting tax dollars. I'd rather see those dollars go to federal help programs that work.

Instead of waiting for the conservative punch line I'll add it myself: "but federal programs don't work". Here's one resource to evaluate on your own.

__________________
"I see in your eyes the same fear that would take the heart of me. A day may come when the courage of Men fails, when we forsake our friends and break all bonds of fellowship, but it is not this day. An hour of wolves and shattered shields when the Age of Men comes crashing down, but it is not this day! This day we fight! By all that you hold dear on this good earth, I bid you stand, Men of the West!"

Hans

I am obviously very religious, but this is why the seperation of Church and State exists. If a person wants to go to a faith based program, they should go. The government shouldnt spend tax payers dollars on something that should be up to the person to figureout if they want to go.

GraceAbounds

No human can convert anyone to believing in God.

Sorry, I didn't bother to look at your link as I have my own personal experience to draw from.

Federal programs help the poorest of the poor and we need them, though I do not agree with how they are run.

Federal programs do not however help the middle class American that falls on hard times. When my family needed help due to circumstances that were no fault of our own, no federal program would help us. Our church however did. Our mortgage was paid, food was in our fridge, and our utilities were paid, and we had cash to pay for our gas and whatever other necessities were needed. Once we got through the storm we were not asked to pay anything back, it was given to us out of love, God's love. During that time we also got phone calls and visits from people that cared about how we were holding up. We had people reaching out to us on a personal level, not only caring about our financial difficulties at the time, but how we were holding up mentally and emotionally. They wrapped their arms around us and prayed for and with us. They networked to help us in any way possible.

Government programs do not do that. Understand that we had no food in our fridge and the government would not give us food stamps. They disqualified us because our vehicle was worth too much. Basically they wanted us to sell off our stuff to buy food. We just needed a hand up through the hard times, not a hand out. We were more than willing to sell our vehicle, but there was no guarantee it would sell, and we needed food today, not a month from then.

__________________

Minor Axis

Then simple influence to go our way.

__________________
"I see in your eyes the same fear that would take the heart of me. A day may come when the courage of Men fails, when we forsake our friends and break all bonds of fellowship, but it is not this day. An hour of wolves and shattered shields when the Age of Men comes crashing down, but it is not this day! This day we fight! By all that you hold dear on this good earth, I bid you stand, Men of the West!"

Dana

Because not everyone is a religious nut like you are...

__________________

GraceAbounds

The only way to not influence others (regarding anything) would be to live in isolation or to be a robot. So whether folks like it or not, we all impact others in some form or fashion, that is just how it is. You can't stop people from sharing who they are or their experiences, it is what makes us who we are; it is what makes us human.

__________________

IntruderLS1

Now why would you go and say something rude like that? What'd you gain by sticking your finger in her eye?

__________________

ssl

So missionaries should be only in one spot for no longer than a week, because that is enough time to spread the word about their faith to enough people and provide examples of this faith.

Yet, some stay for years, some move entire families every which way.



Dana, Grace shows nothing less than respect toward all; she deserves nothing less in return.


I am mixed on the faith-based programs. For the good side of the coin, I appreciate their hard work in helping out families in their communities. They provide so much when so much is needed. They need the community's support in return.

However, the current form of government has to show no favor towards one particular group over another, and therefore must adopt an "all or none" policy in this situation. I am not in tune with the idea that the government support the faith-based programs. I think that the people of the community support that which supports them in hard times.

I would support a Community Support Center initiative, in which each community has a center for all things that faith-based programs provide, in which all faiths combine together to support all those around them. The local government can provide monies towards mortgage and utility payments. In this case, the issue is solved, with the government not taking sides, but supporting all. And all faiths are "forced" to work along side each other, and build a much stronger force to help all.

__________________
The surface is calm
The deep sea churns violently
The shore is different

Goodbye