White House Faith Office to Expand

Shaitian
Posts: 386
Joined: 2006-07-15
User is offlineOffline
White House Faith Office to Expand

I'm suprised, that i have not seen this one here yet:


http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/06/us/politics/06obama.html?_r=1&hp

 

New York Times wrote:
 

WASHINGTON — President Obama signed an executive order Thursday to create a revamped White House office for religion-based and neighborhood programs, expanding an initiative started by the Bush administration that provides government support — and financing — to religious and charitable organizations that deliver social services.

“No matter how much money we invest or how sensibly we design our policies, the change that Americans are looking for will not come from government alone,” Mr. Obama said. “There is a force for good greater than government.”

In announcing the expansion of the religion office, Mr. Obama did not settle the biggest question: Can religious groups that receive federal money for social service programs hire only those who share their faith?

The Bush administration said yes. But many religious groups and others that are concerned about employment discrimination and protecting the separation of church and state had pushed hard for Mr. Obama to repeal the Bush policies.

Meanwhile, other religious groups were lobbying to preserve their right to use religion as a criterion in hiring. Some religious social service providers warned they might stop working with the government if they were forced to change policies.

Instead of deciding the issue, the president called Thursday for a legal review of the policy case by case before determining whether religious groups can receive government money and selectively hire employees based on their religious beliefs.

Mr. Obama told an audience in Ohio last summer, “You can’t use that grant money to proselytize to the people you help and you can’t discriminate against them.”

Joshua DuBois, a 26-year-old Pentecostal minister who led religious outreach for Mr. Obama during the presidential race, will direct the new White House Office of Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnerships. Mr. DuBois said in an interview, “The president is still very much committed to clear constitutionality and legality in this program. He’s committed to nondiscrimination.”

But Mr. DuBois said that after Mr. Obama gave his speech in Ohio “we have realized there’s a tremendous lack of clarity in this area, so we’ll review on a case by case basis.”

“If we are consistently finding the same thing, and presenting the same recommendations to the president,” he said, then the administration might seek to recommend a change in the law.

Asked whether his office would work with religious groups outside the mainstream, like the Church of Scientology, that may seek government grants for social services, Mr. DuBois said: “There’s no picking or choosing or cherry-picking of groups. That was allowed before, but it will not be the practice moving forward.”

The president also announced the formation of a 25-member advisory council that includes religious leaders and heads of nonprofit groups, among them, several evangelical Christians, the president of Catholic Charities U.S.A., a rabbi, a Muslim community organizer and the openly gay director of a nonprofit group.

Mr. Obama, who spoke about his Christian faith frequently during his presidential campaign, said Thursday at the National Prayer Breakfast that religion should not be “wielded as a tool to divide us from one another.”

He called on believers of all faiths to set aside divisions “to lift up those who have fallen on hard times.”

“No matter what we choose to believe, let us remember that there is no religion whose central tenet is hate,” Mr. Obama told an audience of Republicans and Democrats, diplomats and members of the clergy. “There is no God who condones taking the life of an innocent human being. This much we know.”

Mr. Obama signed the executive order on Thursday away from the view of television cameras or an audience.

Jeff Zeleny reported from Washington, and Laurie Goodstein from New York.



I think this will be interesting to see how he actually goes about this, only because he said that secular organizations will be able to be involved as well...  I am still leary of this though. We will have to see.


deludedgod
Rational VIP!ScientistDeluded God
deludedgod's picture
Posts: 3221
Joined: 2007-01-28
User is offlineOffline
Quote:“There is no God

Quote:

“There is no God who condones taking the life of an innocent human being. This much we know.”

I suppose this is correct, as since there is no God, it logically follows that there is no God which condones the taking of life of an innocent human being.

"Physical reality” isn’t some arbitrary demarcation. It is defined in terms of what we can systematically investigate, directly or not, by means of our senses. It is preposterous to assert that the process of systematic scientific reasoning arbitrarily excludes “non-physical explanations” because the very notion of “non-physical explanation” is contradictory.

-Me

Books about atheism


The Doomed Soul
atheist
The Doomed Soul's picture
Posts: 2148
Joined: 2007-08-31
User is offlineOffline
deludedgod

deludedgod wrote:

Quote:

“There is no God who condones taking the life of an innocent human being. This much we know.”

I suppose this is correct, as since there is no God, it logically follows that there is no God which condones the taking of life of an innocent human being.

 

Of course... we assume that there is such a thing as an "innocent human being"

What Would Kharn Do?


Archeopteryx
Superfan
Archeopteryx's picture
Posts: 1037
Joined: 2007-09-09
User is offlineOffline
The Doomed Soul

The Doomed Soul wrote:

deludedgod wrote:

Quote:

“There is no God who condones taking the life of an innocent human being. This much we know.”

I suppose this is correct, as since there is no God, it logically follows that there is no God which condones the taking of life of an innocent human being.

 

Of course... we assume that there is such a thing as an "innocent human being"

 

That's actually sort of a perceptive argument. If it's Christian "reasoning" we're using, then aren't all men sinners in the eyes of God due to the doctrine of original sin?

So there is no God who condones taking the life of an innocent human being. But since there are technically no innocent human beings in the eyes of God, then all human beings---especially those who aren't cockthirsty for Jesus---may be killed without shame.

So if you believe that there is no God that condones the killing of an innocent human being, because you also believe that there are innocent human beings, doesn't that also mean that you reject original sin, and therefore aren't you being sacrilegious?

 

Is "cockthirsty for Jesus" sacrilegious?

Hm.

*shrug*

 

A place common to all will be maintained by none. A religion common to all is perhaps not much different.


HisWillness
atheistRational VIP!
HisWillness's picture
Posts: 4100
Joined: 2008-02-21
User is offlineOffline
deludedgod

deludedgod wrote:

Quote:

“There is no God who condones taking the life of an innocent human being. This much we know.”

I suppose this is correct, as since there is no God, it logically follows that there is no God which condones the taking of life of an innocent human being.

It's a prudent and well-written statement on Obama's part, because it flies past all the gods that actually do condone the taking of life of a human being. The "innocent" part is genius. Who's this guy's writer? Whoever it is deserves to be paid in gold bars.

Saint Will: no gyration without funkstification.
fabulae! nil satis firmi video quam ob rem accipere hunc mi expediat metum. - Terence


geirj
geirj's picture
Posts: 719
Joined: 2007-06-19
User is offlineOffline
I'm fine with Obama

I'm fine with Obama pandering to the religious right, as long as he panders to me as well. Which he did in his inauguration speech.

Pandering to the religious right is simply going to be a requirement of the Oval Office for some time to come.

To be honest, I feel much better about an office of faith-based initiatives in the hands of Barack Obama than George Bush.

Nobody I know was brainwashed into being an atheist.

Why Believe?


Vastet
atheistBloggerSuperfan
Vastet's picture
Posts: 13254
Joined: 2006-12-25
User is offlineOffline
This would disturb me were

This would disturb me were it not for all the backflips being done to bring science back to America. Too bad the opposite is happening here.

Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.