Reaching out to evangelical voters, Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama is announcing plans to expand President Bush's program steering federal social service dollars to religious groups and — in a move sure to cause controversy — support some ability to hire and fire based on faith.
Obama was unveiling his approach to getting religious charities more involved in government anti-poverty programs during a tour and remarks Tuesday in Zanesville, Ohio, at Eastside Community Ministry, which provides food, clothes, youth ministry and other services.
"The challenges we face today ... are simply too big for government to solve alone," Obama was to say, according to a prepared text of his remarks obtained by The Associated Press. "We need all hands on deck."
Obama's announcement is part of a series of events leading up to Friday's Fourth of July holiday that are focused on American values.
The Democratic presidential candidate spent Monday talking about his vision of patriotism in the battleground state of Missouri. By twinning that with Tuesday's talk about faith in another battleground state, he was attempting to settle debate in two key areas where his beliefs have come under question while also trying to make inroads with constituencies traditionally loyal to Republicans.
But Obama's support for letting religious charities that receive federal funding consider religion in employment decisions could invite a storm of protest from those who view such faith requirements as discrimination.
Obama does not support requiring religious tests for recipients of aid nor using federal money to proselytize, according to a campaign fact sheet. He also only supports letting religious institutions hire and fire based on faith in the non-taxypayer funded portions of their activities, said a senior adviser to the campaign, who spoke on condition of anonymity to more freely describe the new policy.
Bush supports broader freedoms for taxpayer-funded religious charities. But he never got Congress to go along so he has conducted the program through administrative actions and executive orders.
David Kuo, a conservative Christian who was deputy director of Bush's Office of Faith-Based and Community Initiatives until 2003 and later became a critic of Bush's commitment to the cause, said Obama's position on hiring has the potential to be a major "Sister Souljah moment" for his campaign.
This is a reference to Bill Clinton's accusation in his 1992 presidential campaign that the hip hop artist incited violence against whites. Because Clinton said this before a black audience, it fed into an image of him as a bold politician who was willing to take risks and refused to pander.
"This is a massive deal," said Kuo, who is not an Obama adviser or supporter but was contacted by the campaign to review the new plan.
Kuo called Obama's approach smart, impressive and well thought-out but took a wait-and-see attitude about whether it would deliver.
"When it comes to promises to help the poor, promises are easy," said Kuo, who wrote a 2006 book describing his frustration at what he called Bush's lackluster enthusiasm for the program. "The question is commitment."
Obama proposes to elevate the program to a "moral center" of his administration, by renaming it the Council for Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnerships, and changing training from occasional huge conferences to empowering larger religious charities to mentor smaller ones in their communities. Continue >>
RSS
Comments
"all programs we support/provide should come from the churches themselves. Using a "Foodbank" as an outreach is fine, but if we use fed money, it can no longer be an outreach-we must sanitize the evangelical messege from it."
True. If you've read my posts for any length of time you know I have quoted Keith Green who said "the reason we have welfare in this country is because the Church has failed in its obligations."
The problem comes in when local governments want to license or permit efforts of Churches. When Church groups have to meet certain standards which are actually higher than those enforced on secular organizations doing the same thing. (Yep...you'd be surprised....)
Courts have even punished churches when sued by someone who thought they deserved something but didn't get it. Helping people God's way is about holding the government accountable THE SAME WAY we hold ourselves accountable. The problem has been that we don't hold ourselves accountable.
everyone has the right to freedom of religion, but not tax exemption!
Mr Obama is trying to be all things to all people. He is pro-Faith based groups. He is pro-homosexual agenda. He is pro- abortion. He is pro-whatever you want untill he gets in office. Then watch out.
all programs we support/provide should come from the churches themselves. Using a "Foodbank" as an outreach is fine, but if we use fed money, it can no longer be an outreach-we must sanitize the evangelical messege from it. Then, we are just a community club. Let's stay focused on the great commision, and leave the social programs to the government.
Two things: first, I am beginning to agree about the tax exempt status. As a pastor, I am seeing too many churches run like a after school club instead of a serious effort to reach the lost. Maybe taxable status would help thin the social clubs.
Second; is there anything that says churches must accept this money from the feds? I won't run a social program in my church if it needs federal funds. Our primary call is to reach the lost and introduce them to a life changing relationship with Christ, not provide daycare or staples to them.
The trouble with giving churches special status is that if you do this then logically equivalent status must be given to everyone who wants to preach anything they want, otherwise particular religions get preference in the state's eye and this can fairly easily seen to be in violation of separation of church and state. It follows that the only logical possibility is to treat them all as businesses.
Heck, the way I see it is that if a church with a claim on certain universal truths can't even make ends meet as a business then probably it's got other fundamental problems working against it and ought to go out of business.
torus--
I don't agree with you, but I would be more inclined to your view than the way it stands right now. I would much rather see a church run as a business and not be beholden to the State than the way it now stands. Tax exempt, and the State holds the free speech leash.
This is one area where conservative Christian leaders were very misguided when they chose to align with the Republican Party so many years ago.
This is part of the reason why conservatives are having trouble this election season. The rest of the Christians finally woke up and caught up with this.
Obama picked the wrong package to support in his bid to gain the trust of conservative voters.
John - Don't be a fool. By your argument anyone who preaches/teaches anything should be tax exempt. The university I teach at, should it be tax exempt? Of course not, it's a business, an employer, holding land and so on. Similarly churches are just businesses. Their business is teaching their particular religion to their particular flock. But they're employers and hold land and hence should pay taxes.
john14-6 said, "In fact, it is the very tax exempt status that keeps pastors, preachers, ministers, etc, from preaching certain things and on certain topics."
I agree with you here, but I think the tax exempt status, should be altogether removed. No special perks for churches over anyone, or anything else. It will allow everyone's true colors to shine. If a church is really just an extension of the American civic religion, or merely a "religious" branch of a political party, then partisan politics is what they will preach. But if they preach the gospel, then the only real change will be a shorter budget. This will make it all the more plain who are the followers of Christ, and who are Pharisees.
JHS--
In fact, it is the very tax exempt status that keeps pastors, preachers, ministers, etc, from preaching certain things and on certain topics.
All churches should be tax exempt regardless of what they preach. We are guaranteed freedom of religion and therefore the government has no right to tax any church or religious institution - this special tax exempt status with the government restricting the political speech of churches: pastors, priests, ministers, reverends, etc, has been a great part of what has allowed much evil to take hold in our culture.
john14-6
" I'd rather the Church be completely out of the State's control and influence."
Reply :Well then lets get rid of tax exempt status for all churches and ministries, at least with your line of thinking.
I see this as just another pandering to the evangelical vote, and side-stepping the issues that really matter: Stopping the slaughter of the unborn, and protecting the institution of marriage. Until he adresses this, I care little what efforts he expands or support.
"In time, I came to see faith as being both a personal commitment to Christ and a commitment to my community; that while I could sit in church and pray all I want, I wouldn't be fulfilling God's will unless I went out and did the Lord's work," he was to say.
The problem with this statement is that it fits the modern view of evangelism/outreach. Prayer has always been the arm of evangelism. When you're in prayer, you're led BY THE SPIRIT to evangelize and do the work of the kingdom - God leads you, not your sense of obligation to do something. You can do a thousand ministries in your own strength OR you can do it when and how God leads you.
There are ministries galore doing things in their own strength and doing nothing of eternal value, but those who wait on the Lord see lasting fruit. It's the eternal fruit God is concerned with not the temporal. There are Christians around the world enduring great persecution and starvation at the hands of militant governments, yet they are nearer to the Lord than half the Christian population of America. They don't complain or beg. They are content in their affliction knowing that one day all this world will pass away, but God's Word will never pass away.
Obama is a cynical and sinister figure. As a Christian, I don't trust him, not in the least. I agree with others here, that the Church should not receive federal funds of any kind. To tie the Church to the State in this manner will lead to all kinds of restrictions being placed upon the Church to silence it, whenever the state deems to tighten the leash.
If the Church is to speak truth to the culture then this idea of using federal funds for faith based initiatives is a slippery slope. I'd rather the Church be completely out of the State's control and influence.