Faith-Based Conflict of Interest
Posted by
Kevin
Gee, how could a guy like me be so unreasonable as to oppose Bush’s benign “Faith-Based” Initiative? This is how:
A Philadelphia church appears to be reaping a windfall of government funds following its pastor’s endorsement of presidential candidate George W. Bush, said Americans United for Separation of Church and State.During the Republican Party’s 2000 national convention, the Rev. Herbert H. Lusk II, heartily endorsed Bush for president in a satellite television uplink from his church. Since that time, Lusk has repeatedly advocated for Bush’s “faith-based” initiative that seeks to fund church-run social service programs.
Today as the president was preparing to speak at Lusk’s Greater Exodus Baptist Church on combating AIDS at home and abroad, the Associated Press reported that the church’s charitable operation, People For People, has been awarded a nearly $1-million “faith-based” grant. The article also noted that Lusk hopes President Bush’s “faith-based” agenda will help garner more black votes for the president’s re-election bid. Lusk told the AP that Bush “is worthy of the African-American vote.”
Why would anyone think there’s a conflict of interest there? I’m probably just a left-wing nut job who needs to go get a tin-foil hat. I’m sure the explicit endorsement and the $1 Million grant are completely unrelated.
Oh, well. It’s not like they’re using such grants as hush money or anything:
In addition, televangelist Pat Robertson, a Bush ally, was converted from being a harsh critic of the faith-based initiative to being a supporter by a well-timed government grant. In early 2001, Robertson warned his “700 Club” viewers that the initiative “could be a real Pandora’s box” because religious monitories might wind up receiving faith-based grants.In fall 2002, Robertson’s Operation Blessing received a half-million-dollar faith-based grant from the Department of Health and Human Resources. Since then, the TV preacher has not criticized the initiative.
Ah, who am I kidding? Never mind…
Render that moola to the the government, which is the government’s, and render that moola which is the Lord’s, to the Lord. Let’s keep “the state” and the church separate. N’est pas?! I am paraphrasing Jesus himself.
Comment 6/23/2004
While i don’t necessarily oppose faith-based initiatives (after all, they can do some good), this is definitely a reason to be leery of this sort of stuff. Particularly, since they’re giving this church my money.
Comment 6/23/2004
I pay my taxes to run the government, not a mission.
Comment 6/24/2004