Quote:
|
Originally Posted by scaeagles
So, then, WB, what you are saying then is that it is more important to make sure that those passing out food don't allow certain religious beliefs to influence their hiring practices and don't dare mention the name of Jesus or Allah or whomever.
I thought the important thing was making sure they got fed and had their needs met.
While we're at it, we better make sure no Christians take in foster children. Foster parents take state money to care for them and they might dare bring them to church.
The whole idea is to limit government regulation so that the help gets to where it is needed in a more efficient fashion. Current government regulation makes overhead ridiculous and the process as inefficient as possible. I do not believe that government can do it better than relifgious organizations.
Would there be fraud and misuse? I have no doubt. I would dare say that there may be just a bit of that going on in the current way of the government handling things.
|
Scaeagles, you know perfectly well what I mean.
Separation of church and State- that "little line" is there for a damned good reason. Every word you say only convinces me more how very, very intelligent our Founding Fathers were.
As it stands now, the churches can go and do good deeds relatively easily. I can choose not to give to a church or organization that discriminates , and they are free to discriminate against me or my loved ones, so long as they don't do it on the public dime.