Comments on: Obama’s Flawed Faith-Based Plan

By: Rick Sparks

Rick Sparks — Sun, 01 Aug 2010 08:13:31 +0000

>> Friendly Athiest, and Rick Sparks insist on making snearing comments about the people who practice faith, they will never see the solutions that having faith in God can provide.

Name ONE "solution" faith provides, Kristina.

By: Colleen, CA

Colleen, CA — Tue, 28 Oct 2008 12:20:01 +0000

That's why I don't believe in the faith based initiative to begin with. Where government money goes, government control follows! When will we all learn that? More government is not the answer to our problems, compassion is! I am a Christian and a Bush supporter but I think he blew it when he created this because it is at the mercy of whoever is in charge and can be changed at anyone's whim, as we are seeing now, which leaves every organization that took money from this initiative in jeopardy. We need to stand on our own two feet and trust God to provide for our needs, not look to the government to do it!

By: Terrance, Richmond,

Terrance, Richmond, — Sat, 19 Jul 2008 21:20:42 +0000

Here's the problem folks. The atheists are not interested in helping anyone. They are humanist and, as humanists, they believe that achievement in this life is the only thing for which they can hope. I pity atheists, because they have no real hope. The problem with the plan to give public monies to "Faith-Based Organizations" is not the limitations that would accompany the money. It is that the money is going in the first place. Religion is a lot like a product in the free market; the best ones survive and the not-so-good ones fail. Regardless of whether they survive or fail, the government has a responsibility to avoid any actions which will establish or discriminate against a religion. Obama knows this. He and most of his fellow democrats don't care what the Constitution says. Obama, like Robespierre during the French Revolution (look him up, not a nice guy), is trying to destroy religion. First he will bring it under government control (through funding) and then he will abolish it and set up a false religion in it's place.

The point is, the restrictions that are tied to the money don't matter. They are moot if the real problem, the money, is corrected.

By: Lonna, Missouri

Lonna, Missouri — Sun, 06 Jul 2008 18:26:42 +0000

Organized religion has discriminated against people of different beliefs since the beginning of time. Why do you think religious idealism is at the heart of most wars? And I'm fine if the president wants to give charity monies to organized religion, but he'd better include islams, druids, pagans, wiccans, and every single fringe group out there including those that believe in plural marriage. It will be fun to watch this entire issue melt down faster than chernyobl. Fun stuff ahead of us, eh America?

By: Allan. VA

Allan. VA — Sat, 05 Jul 2008 22:45:54 +0000

Faith based initiatives do not discriminate against atheists. They welcome all well meaning people to join the effort. They use all volunteers who are capable and who have skills that are applicable to the needs. There may be some exceptions, as evidenced by the hate-filled comments by some of the previous comments.

Government should invest in local community service groups, in other service organizations and in religious based organizations to multiply the investment with the inevitable local contributions in personal service and in monetary contributions.

When the government's hand is directly on a project, it is inherently inefficient. Local application of limited government funds is minimal when compared to local contributions.

Allan

By: William, Indiana

William, Indiana — Sat, 05 Jul 2008 18:18:23 +0000

All Obama and the left wants is to discriminate and completely crush those who do believe.

If people of faith want to accept and respect those who do not follow any form of faith, then the nonbelievers should show some respect in tune. If nonbelievers cannot accept a persons principles based on faith, then why should the faithful continue to tolerate the double standard. It goes both ways.

By: Dick, TN

Dick, TN — Fri, 04 Jul 2008 14:37:10 +0000

Could be that the entire concept is flawed. As one who prefers minimal government, I dread the idea of government finding yet another avenue to interfere in our lives, particularly hiding behind a charity or faith organization.

By: Ezra, NJ

Ezra, NJ — Thu, 03 Jul 2008 16:14:02 +0000

I am shocked that the Heritage foundation which promotes our liberty from government intervention would support the expansion of the welfare state and further government encroachment into social matters when it added faith-based institutions to those who make a living off of government handouts. Any church, synagogue or mosque which accepts government handouts deserves what it gets.

History is replete with good institutions which were destroyed by encroaching government intervention after they started receiving government funds.

I say. Maintain the faith of faith-based programs by not accepting government funds. The problem is not faith vs. secular … the problem is government vs. private. Let's keep the discussion where it belongs.

By: More on Obama’s Faith-Based Plans by anatheist.net

More on Obama’s Faith-Based Plans by anatheist.net — Wed, 02 Jul 2008 22:55:15 +0000

[...] part! Take, for example, the Heritage Foundation’s (a conservative think tank) recent statement regarding Obama’s proposal: But even worse, Obama’s plan says that when a faith-based [...]

By: Todd Tucson, AZ

Todd Tucson, AZ — Wed, 02 Jul 2008 17:46:50 +0000

Hey Rick and friends, We can always count on your type to immediately put down people of faith. You probably hate the Founding Fathers too. PS, FACT:24 of the Founding Fathers had a seminary degree. Guess they were just suckers, too.