Hey...he had to do something after tossing his church under the bus......
Unlike JPN, Cass, and other Democrat apologists who ridicule, denigrate and mock religion....Obama see's the value in those of faith since they make up the vast majority of the electorate.....
Maybe you should clarify the above accusation with words I have previously stated rather than using a broad brush for the purpose of condemning me: Patton. As I have previously stated, I don't give a classic flying one who, how, when or if you choose to worship and have made that more than clear in previous posts.
I just happen to be an old fashioned believer in the First Amendment and a firm belief the Framers of the Constitution took great pains in designing a document that avoided the possibility of the theocracies experienced in Europe being established in the new nation and the freedoms we will celebrate this week on the date attributed to the acceptance of the Declaration of Independence.
Please note that in that famous document ratified on the 4th of July, 1776, there is clear mention of a "creator" and the word "God" is also a factor specifically in this section:
"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security. —"
http://www.ushistory.org/declaration/document/index.htmBut unlike the current attempt to attribute such historical statements to the establishment of a "Christian nation", neither that "creator" nor "God" is identified as Jesus Christ. This statement never fails to clarify a protection of your rights, but they also protect mine. The unfortunate circumstances is those words are most often used by some
to attempt to claim the superiority of those religious groups who are defined as Christian.
Amendment 1 - Freedom of Religion, Press, Expression. Ratified 12/15/1791. Note
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
Perhaps the real question that arises with faith based programs is whether or not provision of the tax dollars of all citizens of the U.S. constitutes "the establishment of religion" though to date the Supremes ruled in favor of Bush's Faith Based programs in this decision which, not atypical of the GOP dominated court, is a very narrow one
dealing with only very narrow and specific issues if one takes the time to read the case.
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/cgi-bin/getcase.pl?court=US&navby=case&vol=000&invol=06-157 As a consequence, to date, Faith Based programs have been established as legal by the Supremes.
If one studies the issue, I believe most would find that often those social programs administered by various religious groups can be highly effective in many communities and
have been historically. I know a number of programs provided by a Catholic Organization, Stanford Settlement, in my local community provides excellent services that may
now be lost to some because of the cuts related to the CA budget. To the best of my knowledge these services have always been delivered to all who need with no discrimination related to the personal beliefs of the beneficiaries.
But to go back to my previous statements on a personal level, while I noted that I am not Christian having personally chosen the belief system of many of the Framer's: Deism, so long as the services delivered by faith based groups is accomplished with no discrimination, when one is a believer of Christ's teachings in the Beatitudes,
I have no difficulty on a personal level with faith based programs.
While that opinion, for some, may appear to be a contradictory one, the Supreme ruling along with realistic pragmatic beliefs, also based on experience as the former Chairperson of the Board of the first public homeless shelter established in county of my previous residence lead me to those beliefs. That experience was related to a viable group of religious organizations who came together and under the umbrella of a public organization eventually were able to obtain both state and federal funding to "shelter the homeless" quite successfully with no discrimination based on the doctrine nor the dogma of any of the various religious groups involved along with social service groups in
that community.
