CargoAdmin, Bureaucrats, Moderators (CommentStreams), fileuploaders, Interface administrators, newuser, Push subscription managers, Suppressors, Administrators
14,662
edits
White House Office of Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnerships: Difference between revisions
White House Office of Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnerships (view source)
Revision as of 23:01, 21 December 2024
, 21 December 2024Text replacement - "The New York Times" to "The New York Times"
m (1 revision imported) |
m (Text replacement - "The New York Times" to "The New York Times") |
||
| Line 38: | Line 38: | ||
==Controversies== | ==Controversies== | ||
*The [[separation of church and state]] was noted as one of major issues with the Faith-Based Initiatives laws. Critics have claimed that millions in government grants have gone to ministries operated by political supporters of the Bush administration, or have been given to minority pastors who recently committed their support.<ref>''The Washington Post'', October 3, 2002, re Pat Robertson;</ref><ref>'' | *The [[separation of church and state]] was noted as one of major issues with the Faith-Based Initiatives laws. Critics have claimed that millions in government grants have gone to ministries operated by political supporters of the Bush administration, or have been given to minority pastors who recently committed their support.<ref>''The Washington Post'', October 3, 2002, re Pat Robertson;</ref><ref>''The New York Times'', May 3, 2005, re Rev. Luis Cortez; [[David D. Kirkpatrick]]</ref><ref>''The New York Times'', March 30, 2006, re Bishop Sedgwick Daniels</ref><ref>''Los Angeles Times'', January 18, 2005, re Rev. Herb Lusk, Bishop Harold Ray</ref><ref>PBS.org Bill Moyer's Now transcript, September 26, 2004 re Faith Partners</ref> | ||
*In June 2006, U.S. District Judge Robert W. Pratt ruled that a faith based-program called InnerChange at a Newton, Iowa prison, operated by Charles Colson's Prison Fellowship Ministries, unconstitutionally used tax money for a religious program that gave special privileges to inmates who accepted its evangelical Christian teachings and terms. "For all practical purposes," Judge Pratt said, "the state has literally established an Evangelical Christian congregation within the walls of one of its penal institutions, giving the leaders of that congregation, i.e., InnerChange employees, authority to control the spiritual, emotional, and physical lives of hundreds of Iowa inmates."<ref>{{cite news|last=Henriques|first=Diana B.|author2=Andrew Lehren|title=Religion for Captive Audiences, With Taxpayers Footing the Bill|newspaper=New York Times|date=December 10, 2006|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2006/12/10/business/10faith.html?pagewanted=print|access-date=2008-06-30}}</ref> [See ''Americans United v. Prison Fellowship Ministries'', 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 36970, June 2, 2006] | *In June 2006, U.S. District Judge Robert W. Pratt ruled that a faith based-program called InnerChange at a Newton, Iowa prison, operated by Charles Colson's Prison Fellowship Ministries, unconstitutionally used tax money for a religious program that gave special privileges to inmates who accepted its evangelical Christian teachings and terms. "For all practical purposes," Judge Pratt said, "the state has literally established an Evangelical Christian congregation within the walls of one of its penal institutions, giving the leaders of that congregation, i.e., InnerChange employees, authority to control the spiritual, emotional, and physical lives of hundreds of Iowa inmates."<ref>{{cite news|last=Henriques|first=Diana B.|author2=Andrew Lehren|title=Religion for Captive Audiences, With Taxpayers Footing the Bill|newspaper=New York Times|date=December 10, 2006|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2006/12/10/business/10faith.html?pagewanted=print|access-date=2008-06-30}}</ref> [See ''Americans United v. Prison Fellowship Ministries'', 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 36970, June 2, 2006] | ||
*On June 25, 2007, the [[U.S. Supreme Court]] ruled 5–4 in ''[[Hein v. Freedom From Religion Foundation]]'' that executive orders may not be challenged on [[Establishment Clause of the First Amendment|Establishment Clause]] grounds by individuals whose sole claim to legal standing is that they are taxpayers. Both of President Bush's court appointees, [[John G. Roberts]] and [[Samuel Alito]], sided with the majority. | *On June 25, 2007, the [[U.S. Supreme Court]] ruled 5–4 in ''[[Hein v. Freedom From Religion Foundation]]'' that executive orders may not be challenged on [[Establishment Clause of the First Amendment|Establishment Clause]] grounds by individuals whose sole claim to legal standing is that they are taxpayers. Both of President Bush's court appointees, [[John G. Roberts]] and [[Samuel Alito]], sided with the majority. | ||