CNN

Jeremy February 5th, 2009 12:18 pm ET

It is inaccurate to say "Separation of Church and State." It is found no where in the Constitution. In fact, the first Amendment, says Congress shall make no law establishing or prohibiting religion or the free practice thereof. America was birthed on Judeo-Chrisian values

Sir, your right when you say It is inaccurate to say "Separation of Church and State." It is found no where in the Constitution.
However, your other statment is the real issue here,America was birthed on Judeo-Chrisian values. This leave out anybody who doesn't belong to your religous dogma. Just ask an Indian!

Faith-based initiatives have flatly FAILED at what they were supposed to do: provide services that the Republican government did not want to fund, such as mental health, care for the indigent, etc. etc. etc.

I agree, shut this office DOWN. There are a significant number of organizations out in the non-profit world who could use the funding without the religious strings.

This was yet another boondoggle by the Republicans to shade that they were cutting social services that helped the poor through either state or federal organizations by instead funneling money to churches to take up the slack. Instead, fund our social services to take back on what they do, and do better than religious groups, and take the religious groups out of federal funding altogether.

A friend of mine who works for a non profit whose only goal is to reach the children of the poor and homeless and give them skills and knowledge to stay off of drugs and alcohol has seen almost 80% of their state and federal funding cut over the last 8 years. Their work includes camps, field trips, school clothes and books, presents for holidays and their birthdays, as well as lessons in self esteem: and has an incredible rate of success, yet their funding has been cut continuously. Prevention is the better alternative to the crime, welfare, and drag on the economy that drug and alcohol addicts place on our society.

He is changing everything, you better believe it (?)

America was NOT "birthed on Judeo-Chrisian values."

Seriously, stop making stuff up!!

My personal feeling about "faith-based" charities is that they should reply solely on donations. I object to taxpayer money being given to, and used to promote, ANY religion.

Doesn't anyone remember the "Christian" organization representative who said – while "aiding" the victims of the tsunami in Indonesia – "accepting our aid gives us the right to try to convert them". The organization was kicked out of Indonesia because of that statement – as they SHOULD have been!

First, all you bitter bloggers, he won. Get used to it. Second, you may not like faith and God in your life, but a lot of Americans do. There is as much hypocrisy among the corporate as there is among the faithful. Biden was asked what he fear most, and he said "The Pharisees".
I personally welcome faith in my President. You will see if it is real by his works, not his words. Your negativity is a problem for this country.

Close down the faith-based initiatives office NOW!!!. Let churches fund their own "missions." Oh, how unchristian of me!!!!!

Why do we even need this agency? This is a BUSHCO leftover we don't really need.

What did these groups do before this was started?? And what are they doing now?

If they want to stay in business, fine, but tax payers probably don't want their tax money spent here. Let the churches support them.

Didn't you just report on this?

He is the last angel standing, so holy and so pure, knowing all, living the Biblical principles, the Ten Commandments, the Sermon on the Mount, and obeying God's commands. It is conservative, and not extreme leftist liberal socialist.

Jeremy,

Do your homework. The first amendment's prohibition of the US government from "establishing or prohibiting religion or the free practice threof" applies to all forms of government-endorsed or funded religious expression. The term "separation of church and state" are used to DESCIRBE this prohibition that alerady exists – the exact words don't need to be articulated in the document.

As for your claim that we have an American tradition that runs counter to this tradition (i.e. your Judeo/Christian claim)..consider the following quote from Roger Williams, founder of the State of Rhode Island AND founder of the Baptist movement in America:

"Forced worship STINKS in the nostrils of God."

Yes, this very religious, very patriotic founding father was concerned about the mutual corruption of both our governmental bodies (i.e. the "forced" part of the quote) and our churches when either are given authority over the other.

Geraldine, the religious charities have never been accused of not helping those who are not of their faith (although yes, I believe a Catholic group WOULD refuse to serve soup to a Muslim, and vice versa).

As it stands, a Methodist group could refuse a Buddist volunteer from serving that soup. Also, those receiving the soup would be subjected to religious indoctrination as one of the conditions to get the soup, whether the religion cooking the soup acknowledges blatent proselytization or not.

Despite the glaring violation of the separation of church and state, is it not exceedingly more pragmatic for organizations NOT to turn away volunteers wanting to help serve soup to the hungry and poor regardless of whether the volunteers' religion? What has religion got to do with free soup, anyway?

@ Jeremy

You don't get it. They function freely all they want, but once they accept federal money, that's that. If they want to keep receiving federal money, then they have to accept the conditions based on the fact that OUR GOVERNMENT IS NOT IN THE BUSINESS OF SELLING, PROMOTING OR PROSELYTIZING ANY RELIGION. You yourself cited the appropriate Amendment for that proposition, but you misunderstood how that applies here.

@ geraldine, who said "...does anyone believe a catholic soup kitchen is going to turn away a muslim without a meal?"

Two things: First, look at some of the comments from the fervently religious zealots that get posted here and elsewhere and then ask yourself that question again.

Second, that's not the point...the real question is "does anyone believe a catholic soup kitched is going to turn away a muslim who wants to serve the homeless soup?" The FACT is, they do turn them away. And it works counter to the intent of those federal funds to turn away someone who wishes to serve the community just because they do not share your religion.

It is inaccurate to say "Separation of Church and State." It is found no where in the Constitution. In fact, the first Amendment, says Congress shall make no law establishing or prohibiting religion or the free practice thereof. America was birthed on Judeo-Chrisian values. One reason our country has held for so long is because of those roots. We can thank people of faith for our first hospitals, a strong education system, and mental health clinics. Without God-fearing citizens our country would fail!

To hinder faith-based organizations from providing needed services would be to cut off the hands of servants. They must be allowed to function freely without interference, unless they are harming others. I suggest letting those who disagree serve with these organizations to observe how faith and service change lives!!

I would love to see a Jewish person apply for a job with CAIR as a litmus test of Obama's high and mighty executive order and see what happens?

I've realized that Pres. Obama is stuck between a rock and a hard place. The far left thinks he's compromising too much, and far right refuse to give him credit for things they would have fallen over themselves with glee about if Bush had done them. I say Pres. Obama, do what YOU think is right! We voted for YOU, not the far left, far right, Congress, or the Senate.

Office of Faith-Based Initiatives should be abolished. It should never have been created in the first place. ... AND no religious organization should receive one penny of government money, so there should be no need for an agency to "govern" it.

This really ticks me off.

look – the government cannot touch the efficiency with which faith-based organizations help individuals that need it. While the lines between church and state become blurred, does anyone believe a catholic soup kitchen is going to turn away a muslim without a meal?

Instead, how about we give another $1 to a government agency so they can get 10 cents worth of food to people that need it?

Individuals (and churches) have a moral obligation to help those that need it. Gov't has a moral obligation to not squander the people's resources. Pragmatism should win out in this case.

Wow Patrick! Did you even read the article? I guess you completely missed the line where the office was a BUSH initiative. Obama is just regulating it to make sure that the Constitution is being followed. In other words, if you are a Catholic faith based organization receiving money through this agency, you do not have the right to discriminate against hiring me because I am a Baptist...or Muslim...or Buddhist. The object of these organizations is supposed to be social service work...not religious recruitment. I do not have to share your religious beliefs to make sure another human being has shelter, clothing and food. I do however wonder how many of these groups actually operate in this manner.

I support the President on helping people, but I belive that this violates the seperation of church and state. I was against it under the former administration, for the very reason stated becuase discrimination occurs by the very nature of religion. As one blogger stated 9/11 was a faith based intiative and history is filled with examples of why the founders KNEW this to be a bad idea, and they were men of faith and still saw the danger to a free people reglion can bring.

Good! RELIGION, not faith have destroyed enough in this country. My parents taught me to be very skeptical of people who love to wear their religion on their sleeves. Hollering about how holy they are and constantly judging others. If they were the faith Christians they claim to be, they wouldn't have to always say it...........it would show!

Conservative leaders have sold many people the false notion that government is necessarily incompetent and self-serving. These same people do not seem to realize that the police, air traffic control, social security, medicare, the military, firemen, forest rangers, food inspectors, veterans' administration, public schools, road repair, etc. are all government programs. If a part of government doesn't work, let's fix it or get rid of it.

If you depend on the "free" market - which is not free in any sense but is dominated by global corporations who have no interest in the welfare of our children, their employees, the elderly, the environment, or anything else but next quarter's profits - we would all have lower salaries, fewer or no benefits, and less freedom.

When will Conservatives realize that the relationship between global corporations and their employees is an adversarial one. The goal of global corporations is to sell us the lowest quality product for the highest possible price. The goal of corporations is to get the maximum amount of work from employees while paying them the lowest possible salaries. When corporations win, consumers and employees lose.

Though I understand that no American President has survived without pandering to the Christians, this is the first time I've actually been disappointed in something Obama has done.

I can't stand the thought of Obama giving any advice about religion since he is half Muslim and half Christian or something. He has been given everything in this world without working for anything; he has no idea of experience and hope as the average person knows it. He thinks he is God for today's time, and don't be fooled about that. It's just like Satan who was once a beautiful angel of God, but because he thought he was too smart for God he rebelled and brought havoc and sin upon this earth. Same for Obama. Also same for those of you who believe anything he says.

If you want to discriminate in your hiring based on religious beliefs or proselytize your beliefs, then just don't take federal money. The federal government shoudln't be using taxpayers' cash to support religious discrimination or indoctrination. That being said, have fun with the civil lawsuits for discrimination anyway. Just because it's a [insert religion] group that's helping the homeless or addicted or whatever doesn't mean they should be able to require that you be a member of their group to join them in helping those people. That's total nonsense and is indicative of that religious group intending to preach and indoctrinate, which the government shouldn't be funding. See the forest for the trees people.

Sadly, the standard of "legal" is a very low bar to set.

Specifically, religious organizations are exempt from employment discrimination laws because of the nature of their work (e.g. a Baptist church is not legally required to consider Muslims or Buddhists for an opening as minister). LEGALLY – which is the standard that the Obama White House is establishing – religious discrimination could, in fact, continue to be tolerated while these faith-based groups would continue to receive government funding for their programs.

Frankly, the Office of Faith-Based Initiatives was – and continues to be – a ill-disguised means for religious groups to receive preferential treatment for receiving government funds (otherwise they would simply bid on government funds like all other charities). This is the equivalent of Affirmative Action for churches.

I challenge "Conservative, FL" to provide proof that Faith-Based charities are more successful than secular ones. At secular charities no one's shoving the Bible (or the Koran or the Idiot's Guide to Religion) down your throat.

Be ware of conservatives just throwing out claims of success without proof. I read a letter-to-the editor not long ago stating as fact that George W. Bush won the 2004 election by a landslide: Not True. That teaching sex-ed leads to more teenage pregnancy: Not True. That sexual orientation is a choice: Not True.

It's ironic what good liars all these so-called "Good Christians" really are.

What ever happened to the SEPARATION OF CHURCH AND STATE?
Did that constitutional mandate disappear with all this federal meddling in the economy?
We need to just tell them to STOP!!!!!!!
Restore FREEDOM!

My understanding is that faith based rehab programs have higher rates of success than non-faith based programs. Faith based organizations are better equipped to meet the needs of their communities than the impersonal welfare office. Churches, synagogues and mosques are based in the communities where people live and interact. These people know the people in their communities and know who is really in need of help and who is trying to play the system. It would save this country a lot of money if they would rely on the faith based organizations to distribute aid more and the welfare system less.

I like Obama, but this is Creepy. I've recently had my right to marry, voted away, by a bunch of religious zealots who are obsessed with my intimate life. The idea that my tax dollars are being funneled into these nazi Klan's, because they say that they don't discriminate is wrong.

On the other side, there may be kind and loving religious organizations who have their hands in the cookie jar too, but are they being considerate of everyone by accepting these tax funded contributions? No!

They should not be willing to accept this money. It's very greedy of them! I still like Obama, but he is allowing room for error by funding religious organizations!

second try for my post...

BHO is nuts..CAIR (or is it CIAR) will never hire a Southern Baptist. And the EEOC will take CAIR to court for failing to have diversity...never happen.

Religous discrimenation is alive and well.

I love when idiots leave comments and have no idea what they are talking about. That office was created under FORMER Pres. George W. Bush and thank GOD will be transformed under PRESIDENT OBAMA! There is a place for this office at a time when churches and other institutions are asked to take on a more dominant role in the lives of people in society.

In hard times many look to the churches. They will need help. This is a step forward to help Americans get back on their feet. Fairly.

all in all obama needs to leave the faith groups alone and worry about this tax payer burden called a stimulus

9/11 was a "faith-based initiative."

i dont believe it should on based on what he thinks should happen in these organizations he is being a hypocrite because he is basing it on the way he was brought up

This is a great idea. I think Obama is finally going to help overcome the perceived gap between Democrats and faith-based groups. I also believe that he has the right team in place to make the subtle but substantial deparatures from the previous administration's approach.

Office of Management and Budget numbers reveal that the size of government grew under the Reagan and Bush Administrations. The Clinton Administration reduced it considerably in all areas of government work force, private contractors, and uniformed personnel. These are just the plain facts. It is a complete MYTH, created by GOP marketing, that Democrats grow government and Republicans reduce it.

It is yet to be seen what the results will be from the Obama Administration and it would be in the nation's best interest to stop the unsubstantiated political rhetoric and work together to change direction from the policies of the past 8 years.

Why are some of you so hateful? He is trying to do good things and you can never say anything nice. Didn't your mother ever teach you if you don't have anything nice to say don't say anything at all? I hope you are not a Christian because some of you act is not Christian like

Obama and liberals contradict themselves every time. Obama says it was religious based groups that provided charity which they always have not moveon.org! but as long as it makes the liberals feel better

Why on earth would a religious group NOT consider a person's religion when hiring? What use would anyone be to the group if they do not share ideologies?

Guess Obama found a spot for his buddy Josh Dubois. The only promises Obama appears resolute in keeping are the ones he made to anyone who helped him get elected.

So much to do....and I have complete trust in Obama.
His ideas are good for the country.

Patrick a mind is a terible thing to waste/. The article clearly states that Office of Faith-Based Initiatives was a Bush agency. President Obama is just trying to insure that those religious institutions who take Gov't money do not discriminate in hiring. How can you posibly have a problem with that. If Christians want to hire only Christians who believe as they do instead of the best person for the job, they are free to do so, just do not come to the Federal trough for funds to continue your prejudice. Simple concept!

Patrick

Grow up

No one should be discriminated against especially if you recieve money from the gov't. Money that I and hopefully you pay into with our taxes.

Have a nice day

Religion is as addictive a mental and emotional narcotic as crack cocaine or heroin is a physical one.
To provide government funds for “faith based initiatives” based upon those funds being strictly limited to the secular activities of the organization (no proselytizing or evangelizing) will prove to be most difficult to enforce and is doomed to failure from the start.
Given the frequent and almost uncontrollable obsessive-compulsive urges to “preach the word of god” of true belivers it is a certainty that there will be many and often egregious violations of the secular use only rules by these religious organizations.
Just like an addictive narcotic the temptation to use the funds for proselytizing or evangelizing to “save souls” will just be too great for the zealots running these organizations to resist.
When the rules are violated – and they most certainly will be – the sanctimonious and self-righteous nature of these religious organizations will be their underlying justification.
There is a truth about human conduct that most be observed here and it is one of the most rational underlying structures for the separation of church and state: Tempt not even an honest man.

Just where in that article did you read anything about increasing the tax burden to American Families?

No, he's not. These are volunteer positions.

I hope the Reverand Barry Lind is listening...we need to separate church and state so that we can practice our religion or lack thereof without coercion or hindrance from the government. If churches want to deliver social services let their congregations provide the support.

where is the other side of the story CNN? these kind of reorts are becoming to familiar in your reports. I want to see who opposses and why?????

I think the argument is flawed on both sides:
1. there is NOTHING in the Bible that would not allow a Christian to hire an non-believer, homosexual, etc.
Jesus was around "sinners" all the time.
2. there is NOTHING in the Constitution that would not allow the government to financially support "secular" work by ANY group that operates within the law. The state would support their work, not their beliefs.
All this artificial controversy will do is provide more work for useless lawyers!

"There were ideological decisions, instead of decisions based in fact." No kidding. Since when did we expect a religion based anything to consider facts over dogma?

This office is a waste of resources. Faith based initiatives have shown to be a failure across the board. Pray with one hand, do something with the other and see which hand gets more done.

So he is growing government and increasing the tax burden of American families? Halleluja!