NY Daily News 29/2001 W's Faith-Based Funding: An Idea Not To Believe In by Zev Chafets President Bush's plan to give federal money to faith-based organizations is a terrible and dangerous idea. The first hint of trouble is the term itself. What is a "faith-based" organization? Logically, it's the opposite of a "fact-based" organization. But that's not what it means. It's another way to say "religious." In public policy, euphemism is usually an early warning signal. Lately, there is a feeling in the land — and certainly in the Bush White House — that religious faith is inherently praiseworthy. This ignores history and reality. The Muslim fanatics who bombed the World Trade Center were motivated by religious faith. So were the Brooklyn rabbis who praised mass murderer Baruch Goldstein. So were the Southern ministers who fought civil rights. Some faith is lethal faith. Organized religion also can be the refuge of scoundrels — con men like Jim Bakker, holy hypocrites à la Jimmy Swaggart, demagogues such as Meir Kahane and racists like Minister Louis Farrakhan and Richard Butler, pastor of the Aryan Nations. Some faith is corrosive faith. Faith-based groups sometimes double as centers of secular influence. In the black community, ministers are often partisan powerbrokers — think of the Rev. Al Sharpton or the Rev. Jesse Jackson. So are white televangelists like the Rev. Pat Robertson and the Rev. Jerry Falwell. The recent presidential pardon of four Talmudic con men highlighted the clout of various Hasidic sects in New York. Not all faith is disinterested faith. In funding the good works of religious groups, the government puts itself in the position of deciding who is worthy. The criterion the Bush administration proposes — results, not doctrine — is ludicrously unworkable. A sect like the Five Percenters, for example, helps get prisoners off drugs, but it also organizes them into gangs. There are churches that house the homeless while dispatching activists to harass abortion clinics. Some American mosques and synagogues support Mideast extremists. The idea that money can be safely earmarked for government-approved charity is illusory. Money is fungible. Help a house of worship expand its day care center, and you may be freeing funds for other, more controversial purposes. To prevent abuses, the government will have to vet, certify and police religious groups. This isn't a slippery slope, it is a constitutional Grand Canyon. Bush can't be unaware of this. So why is he determined to go ahead? The charitable explanation is that he himself was helped by faith and wants to expand religion's capacity to help others. But it is also possible that he sees this as way to reach out (with a fistful of federal dollars) to his base on the Christian right and to ethnic voters in urban America. It is depressing, but true, that some faith is simply bad faith. Original Publication Date: 2/9/01 >> ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-~> <FONT COLOR="#000099">eGroups is now Yahoo! Groups Click here for more details </FONT><A HREF="http://click.egroups.com/1/11231/0/_/475667/_/981722842/"><B>Click Here!</B></A> ---------------------------------------------------------------------_-> Please let us stay on topic and be civil. To unsubscribe please go to http://groups.yahoo.com/group/cia-drugs -Home Page- www.cia-drugs.org OM
