Obama's Council on Faith Based Partnerships has fallen off the map - and we need them back. Nothing exemplifies the sad lack of contribution of this much hailed diverse group of religious leaders than the current impasse on health care with the Stupak abortion amendment.
Even before President Obama took office he was assembling a team of religious leaders from a wide range of backgrounds to advise him as he proposed to tackle difficult issues such as poverty reduction, health care, war and other moral questions of governance. Many of us were excited about the prospect of Obama's Faith Council, which included such theologically and politically diverse names as Father Snyder of Catholic Charities; Rabbi Saperstein of the Reform Action Committee; Dr. Frank Page, former President of the Southern Baptist Convention; and Dr. Sharon Watkins, General Minister of the Disciples of Christ.
Unlike in the past, Obama's Faith Council was allotted no money to dispense so it was relieved of the political nightmare of accusations of favoritism and could focus on policy questions. The promise of this group lay in its diversity. The idea was that if this group could come to some consensus on the important moral issues of the day, it would help inform President Obama's administration to enact policy that reflected, by proxy, the religious wisdom of the vast majority of the American population.
Unfortunately, after a much-publicized announcement and launch, the group has basically been silent. Apparently the Council is working on a "report" to give to the president sometime next year on the various areas they have been assigned to investigate. This seems like a classic blow off -- "Yes, faith leaders, why don't you go write a report. I look forward to glancing at it."
The issues that need moral guidance are on the table now! By its silence, the president's Council on Faith Based and Neighborhood Partnerships is acquiescing to its own irrelevancy. Most Americans and policy makers have assuredly forgotten the council exists -- but not those of us who really believed in the possibilities of the group.
The 'Urgency of Now' includes finding a way to a health care bill, addressing questions of unemployment and foreclosures, the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, torture and even balancing gay marriage with freedom of religion. The time will never be more urgent for the Council's moral voice on these questions.
Cross posted from Beliefnet's Progressive Revival
but, mostly, I INSIST that you keep your religion out of my life.
The less religious involvement, the better!!
I insist that the State act to ensure that any embryo becomes a sentient entity. It is my avowed intention to personally intervene as necessary, in order to ensure fulfilment of that potential existence. For such a matter transcends Earthly considerations.
Thereafter, I couldn’t give a **** about what happens to that life. As far as I’m concerned it doesn’t deserve provision of healthcare to preserve it. Because its totally expendable.
There is nothing to balance. Gays have the unalienable right to the same legal recognition of marriage ceremonies, performed by whichever churches will perform them, and churches whose theology prohibits performing said ceremonies are perfectly free to perform only opposite marriages. They are not punished, except for losing gays' donations I suppose. But not punished in any way by the state.
The current state of affairs violates equal protection and the establishment clause.
http://www.thepetitionsite.com/1/tax-political-churches
An individual pays for medical insurance. A person needs a medical procedure. Said procedure is accomplished. Consumer gets what consumer paid for – a medical procedure.
What this discussion does NOT need, are superstitious flakes who insist that their version of morality must be thrust upon the rest of the populace no matter what harm it may cause, reminiscent of the Middle Ages Inquisition.
Morality should not, and indeed can not, be legislated under the rights guided and protected by our Constitution.
Good luck to you in trying to change the Constitution, though.
Do all clergy hold 'dual citizenship'?
What is up with this?
Why are so many 'people's representatives' really 'representatives' of Ratzinger thru Cstreet?
Sick of the lot of them.
Moneychangers in the temple.
My faith informs me. Faith, religion, and belief in a higher power fueled the civil rights movement and freedom movements worldwide. How do you think people were able to engage in a nonviolent action resistance movement in the face of attack dogs, angry and armed men, guns, and unjust laws.
Religious organizations were there, with Katrina victims and other volunteer groups when the government wasn't. Habit for Humanity International is a Christian based organization. Religious organizations are there feeding the homeless and poor. Collecting and donating clothes, shoes, furniture, and building/providing homes. I
Are Religious organizations organizations perfect? Of course not, if there were they wouldn't be human.
And honestly I find it demeaning to the men and women who fought in some many ways for their civil rights to unjustly tell them they didn't do it with their hard work and determination, but it was a god who made it all possible.
Faith only informs you of what you already know to be true but are for whatever reason to scared to admit for yourself on its own merits.
In South Carolina, the Catholic bishops condemned an anti-bullying law because they claimed that recognizing gays in any civil rights law would lead to same sex marriage. BTW, the Vatican made the same claim in attacking a UN resolution which would have recommended decriminalization of homosexuality to stop state sponsored anti-gay murder.
In Washington DC, the Catholic bishops have decided that their right to deny gays equal access to health insurance is so important that they hold the homeless hostage to enforce that right.
As for help with Katrina, many religious organizations blamed Katrina on gays.
Far from imperfect, some religious organizations have become a force for evil in the world.
And what exactly could they say about foreclosures? That they're wrong? Yeah, we all know that, but what else can be said by a minister on how to change that? Will they actually have solutions to the wars we're in, other than "stop them"?
As a non-Christian and a firm believer in separation of church and state, I find this pretty scary.
Get your facts straight.
And it's an ongoing travesty of justice that reasonable people -- i.e., non-believers -- are forced to subsidize religion through generous tax breaks and direct expenditures of tax dollars.
That would cut out about 85% of the American public from having a "place" in government.--including our President.
The Catholic church is a prime example. Catholics were protected under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 in employment, housing, etc. Catholics were also protected under hate crimes laws passed in 1969 and 1994. Now the Catholic hierarchy demands the right to discriminate against gays in nearly every way that Catholics are protected under federal law.
Your right to freedom of religion does not include the right to persecute others especially in ways in which you are explicitly protected against persecution.