Read it all before you hit the Reply key. Especially the last line.
Nash, I think all the "homeless dude" would have to do is report the incident to whatever oversight agency in placed in charge of an operation like this by Congress.
The government itself would do the investigating and prosecution. That's sure what I would want and expect.
FD, you don't
trust the government to objectively check the claims and evalutate the programs? LOL. Who does that remind you of? Don't you trust your government?
Santa, I'll wager I'm more familar with the US separation clause AND the 2nd Amendment than you are.
You oppose the mere mention of "God" in any US government venue as a breach of separation. That is simply incorrect.
Proof? Why was one of the first acts of the US Senate in April 6, 1789 to appoint a Senate Chaplain? Why the very "old white dudes" that FOUNDED this country and WROTE this Constitution were apparently violating the separation clause, weren't they?
Well, certainly by YOUR standards they were. Yet they were obviously not violating THEIR OWN standards and they were the FOUNDERS. Go figure! What was their intent then? Hmm.. Santa's version or the Framer's version. Tough decision.
20 Years ago, when I volunteered in a Catholic soup kitchen, we were handing out DONATED US Government foodstuffs. Like cheese, butter, powdered milk, flour, etc. The US Government GAVE that stuff to us to hand out...they gave it to MANY charitable organizations, both religiously affiliated and non-religiously affiliated.
Violation of separation? If it was, then this sure wouldn't be a "new" thing then, would it? The Constitution and the Republic survived anyway. There wasn't any big outcry then...what changed?
You continually seek to link this with 2nd Amendment rights.
Those who would strip 2nd Amendment rights from law-abiding citizens (remember, felons lose their 2nd rights)are removing a clearly delineated Constitutional right from people who have done no wrong. The writings of the Founders leave no doubt as to the intent of the 2nd.
In the separation clause, what right is being removed in this instance?
The government is NOT sponsoring an "official" religion (like Denmark). The government is NOT favoring one religion over another (they've made this clear in the preliminaries). The government will prohibit proselytizing while performing the aid functions (they've also made this clear in the preliminaries).
The money is theoretically going to those in need, NOT the "faith based orgs". Those that violate the guidelines get axed from the program.
So where is the government sponsoring a religion? What citizen is having his right of "separation" violated?
While the very mention of "God" in a government related venue seems to be a violation of separation to YOU, that is not what the founders intended.
If you look at present everyday life in the US, you see it everywhere and no one freaks like you do. Happens everyday in trial court for example.
The big reason is because we KNOW there isn't going to BE a "government religion" here. Ever.
We don't kill people in millions because they follow the "wrong" religion.
Never have, never will. Freedom of religion is a cornerstone of this Republic and is one of the reasons folks left Europe to come here in the first place. That isn't going to change because of this program or any other.
No one here is forced to "believe". They never will be.
....and I still don't believe this program will pass Congress, so unknot all of your shorts.
