![]() |
|
|
December 3, 2008 at 10:53:32
Promoted to Headline (H2) on 12/3/08: by William Fisher Page 1 of 2 page(s) |
|
|
You may have heard that the Bush Administration is in a frenzied race to lock in its favorite policies before Barack Obama takes office. So far, Bushies have managed to use Executive Orders to savage regulations that trash environmental protections, give early Christmas gifts to business interests, and yet again submerge science under ideology. And it may not be so easy for the Obama Administration to undo this potpourri of hundreds of regulations. But not all the Bushies' assaults on the Constitution began with the election of a new president.
One shining example: In 2007, the Justice Department's Office of Legal Counsel issued a memorandum concerning one of the most troubling aspects of W's faith-based initiative.
This memorandum says it's OK for organizations that are recipients of grants from the faith-based initiative to openly discriminate against hiring people on religious grounds. It reached that dubious conclusion despite existing antidiscrimination laws and Congress' resounding refusal to change those laws.
The consequence is that charities affiliated with Catholic, Jewish, Muslim, or whatever faiths, can now legally refuse to hire job applicants - or accept volunteers -- simply because they are not of the same faith.
Maybe I'm missing something, but what that says to me is that my tax dollars might just be flowing to some outfit I couldn't work for or benefit from.
Then there's that pesky issue of Constitutionality. Doesn't our Constitution say something about Congress making no law respecting an establishment of religion?
Now if you're just hearing about this for the first time, it's not surprising. That's because the OLC regulation, while issued in 2007, was only recently posted on the Office of Legal Counsel's website.
One has to wonder why, if the Bushies are so proud of their faith-based programs, they spirit this good news onto their website, as it were, in the dead of night in a way that suggests they're trying to keep it well under the radar.
The OLC ruling grows out of a $1.5 million grant to a Christian relief and development organization called World Vision, Inc., founded in 1950. The grant came from the Office of Justice Programs pursuant to the Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act of 1974.
Now, the law says that, as a condition of receiving grants pursuant to the JJDPA, recipients must refrain from discriminating on the basis of religion in "employment in connection with any programs or activity" funded by the grant.
But World Vision wasn't thrilled with that law, so it asked the Department of Justice to waive it.
In World Vision's application for a waiver, the group said it has made it a policy to hire only "Christian staff to assist with the mission of the organization." It said it has done so in order to "maintain [its] identity and strength, which [are] at the core of [its] success," and because it "can only remain true to [its] vision if [it] ha[s] the freedom to select like-minded staff, which includes staffing on a religious basis." It stated that the work of the Vision Youth program is "very staff intensive." And its staff all "share a faith, passion and commitment to [World Vision's] mission."
The OLC responded: "You (World Vision) have asked whether the Religious Freedom Restoration Act ("RFRA") -- which prohibits the Government from "substantially burden[ing]" religious exercise unless that burden "is the least restrictive means of furthering [a] compelling governmental interest -- ...requires OJP to exempt World Vision from the religious nondiscrimination provision. We conclude that RFRA is reasonably construed to require that such an accommodation be made for World Vision, and that OJP would be within its legal discretion, under the JJDPA and under RFRA, to exempt World Vision from the religious nondiscrimination requirement."
1 | 2
http://billfisher.blogspot.com
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author
and do not necessarily reflect those of this website or its editors.
Contact Author |
Contact Editor |
View Authors' Articles |
|
|
|
|
| 4 comments |
|
Stunning news
great article, thank you so much! by Meryl Ann Butler (70 articles, 82 quicklinks, 5 diaries, 721 comments [29 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Wednesday, Dec 3, 2008 at 3:10:08 PM
|
|
Freedom of religion
If a government insists on taking the identity of a nongovernmental partner away from it as a condition of partnership, isn't that chilling of free exercise? A common value structure, whether it be belief in Christ of something else, is basic to many organizations. As long as the government doesn't just partner with groups with just one particular identity, it is not violating freedom. It's partners in good works include various types of Christians, Jews, Muslims, secular groups, etc. It's interesting that you cite the case of World Vision. Its understanding of the Gospel has led it to advocate before the Administration the abolition of torture, peacemaking, giving the world's poor a fair shake, etc. World Vision is sponsoring a Mobilization to End Poverty in Washington in April, hosted by Sojourners, which will address public policies needed to end the suffering of the world's poor. Is this bad? by Bill Samuel (5 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 445 comments [14 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Wednesday, Dec 3, 2008 at 8:47:43 PM
|
|
Reply: You miss the point.
It's OK with me if Christians choose to work with other Christians, Jews with Jews, Muslims with Muslims, etc., though it seems parochial, exclusionary and unnecessary. My point is that there's no justification for their doing that with our tax dollars. by William Fisher (208 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 10 comments) on Thursday, Dec 4, 2008 at 3:50:48 AM
|
|
If you receive tax dollars, then,
NO tax EXEMPTION FOR YOU. PERIOD! When you add religion to politics, then religion is no longer religion but just another lobbying device. And we all know how we need more lobbyists and Special Interest groups in Washington DC. This law must be challenged and we need SCOTUS Justices that will clearly rule by the constitutional rule of law. This IS UNconstitutional. There are plenty of World agencies that fight poverty and abuse and the chrisitan sect shouldn't be needed as a tax $$ recipient. Churches' Pastors and clergy live like Kings in their mansions and high class life style. Make them give up some of their elite life, as with the CEO's of the Banking industry if they need money so damned bad. It isn't money, it's a power grab and this will invoke civil strife(more) in our country. For instance, my right winger fudamentalist friends and relatives believe Muslims should be killed for calling ppl "infidels" and wanting to kill "Christians" and threatening death to (some of us). This would unbalance tax giveaways as RW Fund. Chrisitans believe the constitution is founded on the Bible( really, they do). Therefore, this would enable them to say, Muslims can't have funds and yadda, yadda yaaadda. Get my point? It's just opening doors to more strife in our country, IMHO. by shirley reese (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 592 comments [98 recommended, 1 rejected]) on Thursday, Dec 4, 2008 at 12:58:02 PM
|
Want to post your own comment on this Article?
|
||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tell a Friend:
|
Copyright © 2002-2009, OpEdNews |