Separation of Bush and Constitution - Page 2
Or how George Bush chose to ignore the First Amendment
by Deborah Levinson
The Potential for Abuse
A few quick examples should make it clear to anybody unwilling to ignore the Constitution just why, although Bush claims that the funding will be for secular programs only, that does not suffice to shield Bush from the glare of the establishment clause of the Constitution, which has been found to forbid the U.S. government from favoring one religion over another in any manner.
Do we truly expect a Bush created office to allocate funding to: Wiccans who are helping to renew the environment or feeding the homeless?
Scientologists who are cleaning up the streets of Los Angeles and parts of Florida and assisting those who are living on those very streets?
Churches and synagogues which are most actively gay and lesbian affirming such as the worldwide MCC and along with many local Jewish temples and synagogues, which are administering hospice and other care to those ravaged by AIDS?
Any religious body which includes amongst its secular social programs assistance for women who choose to terminate a pregnancy?
Let's pretend for a moment that this office of Faith-Based Whatever does allocate funding without reference to the underlying belief sets of the religion or its adherents.
So long as the funds are all spent for secular functions, that solves the problem. Right?
Wrong.
Because for every dollar of its own money that the Mormon Church does not have to spend on its charitable works (which are legion) that is one additional dollar for it to spend on forays into states, just as it sashayed into California in early 1999 providing massive funding for the Knight Initiative, which created a state definition of marriage excluding all but male/female couples.
Because for every dollar of its own money that the Catholic Church does not spend on its charitable works (which are many) that is one additional dollar for it to spend in opposition to a woman's right to choose.
Next page
> Bob Jones in Charge? > Page 1, 2, 3
|