scourge99
DP Veteran
- Joined
- Aug 26, 2007
- Messages
- 6,233
- Reaction score
- 1,462
- Location
- The Wild West
- Gender
- Undisclosed
- Political Leaning
- Moderate
http://m.cnn.com/cnn/ne/politics/detail/242697
Let's make this very easy to understand for everyone by using an example much easier to relate with. If the KKK was receiving government money and performing charity work is it OK for them to discriminate against black people when they hire workers for the charity services funded by gov't? No, it is not.
However, the KKK could receive funds if it does not have a policy of discriminating when it highers workers for the charity services. This does not mean they cannot discriminate for membership. What this means is that the KKK must clearly show the difference between members and workers who are paid using gov't funds.
This is simply a case where people are attempting to justify the means by the ends. That is, (going back to the KKK example) people are trying to convince others that it is ok for the KKK to discriminate in government funded programs as long as they help enough people.
It appears Obama is just trying to save face and is not reneging on his promise. Hopefully this will not be ANOTHER broken promise.
Controversy surrounds Obama's faith office.
President Obama's newly revamped Office of Faith Based Initiatives is reigniting a contentious debate across the ideological spectrum over whether religious organizations that accept funds from the government should be allowed to discriminate when hiring.In one corner is a string of religion-backed organizations that have accepted federal funds from the 8-year-old program to advance their secular charity work. President Bush issued an executive order in 2002 that allowed these groups to continue their practice of discrimination with respect to hiring. Specifically, many of the organizations carry policies against hiring outside their religion or hiring homosexuals whose lifestyles conflict with church doctorines.In the other corner are separation-of-church-and-state advocates and human-rights organizations that say the government must constitutionally compel these organizations to follow nondiscrimination laws if they accept federal funding. Anything less, they say, would at best be a violation of church-state separation and at worst an implicit endorsement of discrimination.
...
Obama himself waded into the debate during the presidential campaign, delivering a widely viewed speech in Zanesville, Ohio, during which he endorsed faith-based programs, but said the beneficiaries of such government aid should be forced to cease discriminatory practices
"If you get a federal grant, you can't use that grant money to proselytize to the people you help and you can't discriminate against them -- or against the people you hire -- on the basis of their religion," Obama said in the July 1 speech at the East Side Community Ministry
...
"President Obama understands he's at risk of alienating the vast majority of the evangelical community," Rodriguez said.
Let's make this very easy to understand for everyone by using an example much easier to relate with. If the KKK was receiving government money and performing charity work is it OK for them to discriminate against black people when they hire workers for the charity services funded by gov't? No, it is not.
However, the KKK could receive funds if it does not have a policy of discriminating when it highers workers for the charity services. This does not mean they cannot discriminate for membership. What this means is that the KKK must clearly show the difference between members and workers who are paid using gov't funds.
This is simply a case where people are attempting to justify the means by the ends. That is, (going back to the KKK example) people are trying to convince others that it is ok for the KKK to discriminate in government funded programs as long as they help enough people.
It appears Obama is just trying to save face and is not reneging on his promise. Hopefully this will not be ANOTHER broken promise.
Last edited: