The Supreme Court seems to be making a lot of decisions based on faith and very few based on justice lately. One of the most recent involves giving millions of tax dollars to faith-based charities with the justification that taxpayers do not have the "standing" to challenge the White House. What the HELL does that mean? We don't have the "standing"? Aren't we the ones who pay their salary? Aren't we the ones who elect them? And we don't have the political standing to sway their decisions or forced them to make moral and ethical ones.
But to show I'm not biased, I agree with the Supreme Court's ruling on the "Bong Hits 4 Jesus" case. Though I think the student has a right to free speech, and the school shouldn't be able to do anything if he's talking, say, in the cafeteria, about doing bong hits for Jesus, to put it in writing at a school-sponsored event is a violation of school policy and he should have been punished. Parents have the right to expect that their children won't be exposed to advertisements seemingly promoting drug or alcohol use (though I believe profanity should be allowed).
3,566 US Soldiers killed in Iraq
26,129 US Soldiers wounded in Iraq
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
8 comments:
The Supreme Court is going off the deep end. If you have money, power or political influence it is your court. If you are one of us common folks you are out of luck.
I agree with you on the first part... and on the second part really. But "Bong Hits 4 Jesus" really seems like a joke that went way out of proportion.
I just don't see why a "faith based" organization is inherently more worthy of funding than one that isn't. There are plenty of both faith based and secular programs that have a great deal to offer people. They would NEVER get away with EXCLUDING faith based organizations from funding - that would be discriminatory. Yet, it's ok to exclude secular organizations. WTF.
Above all, the quality, thoughtfulness, and need of the services should be the ONLY factor that determines funding.
As far as I can tell, the Court That Bush Built will always come down on the side of Authority. This is an impression, not a statistical analysis, but that seems to be the way of it.
Laura,
I think they would get away with excluding faith-based charities because public money is not supposed to be given to religious organizations.
I think what annoys me most is tha the biggest story abotu the justice system right now is all about Paris Hilton. No wonder our country is so shallow and superficial. look at what they're watching on CNN.
Paris Hilton thankfully isn't really an issue of the justice system. Just a clear view of the fact that a vast number of people have seriously skewed priorities.
Not all faith based organizations get money, and lot's of secular groups do get funding. I see no reason to not fund an organization that is doing a good job. (so long as "faith based" is not limited to "Christian" and I seem to recall hearing of some Islamic groups getting money. so all is good in my book.
Yes the people elect the politicians and have the ultimate oversight in that we can fire them and vote elect someone else if they piss enough of us off. Witness the new congress and senate. (Not that much has really changed but that is another debate)
Exmi,
If the organization promotes its religion, even if it's Muslim, the I don't care what the cause. The don't get my money, and they shouldn't get my tax dollars.
Post a Comment