Faith Based Initiatives by President Trump

[Billy_Kinetta]

Irrelevant. Case law and precedent do not change the Constitution. Only the amendment process can do that.

That's a great try, but...it is used...as a research source for all courts in the US and its territories.

Perhaps it is, but the fact remains. Just because a law exists does not make it constitutional.

It is null and void before it ever gets to the Supreme Court then.

Only if formally challenged in the courts.

That is the drawback..Believe it or not, there is a law on it being null and void. But with Congress being mostly lawyers you think they could stay within the lines while coloring legislation.

Lawyers used to be considered a tad below horse thief. Now the system is set up completely for their benefit. You can't do anything without a lawyer these days.

 

[Moonglow]

That's a great try, but...it is used...as a research source for all courts in the US and its territories.

Perhaps it is, but the fact remains. Just because a law exists does not make it constitutional.

It is null and void before it ever gets to the Supreme Court then.

Only if formally challenged in the courts.

That is the drawback..Believe it or not, there is a law on it being null and void. But with Congress being mostly lawyers you think they could stay within the lines while coloring legislation.

Lawyers used to be considered a tad below horse thief. Now the system is set up completely for their benefit. You can't do anything without a lawyer these days.

I can but many can't.

 

[BS Filter]

Yes, I did give a damn when Obama did it. I endorse it. My point is the left will not like it simply because Trump did it. If Obama did it, the God haters on the left wouldn't say a word.

Really "God haters" no one hates God, but they hate radicals . Now some either believe in God, have no idea or disbelieve in God, so I doubt anyone hates God, but the radicals.

The "radicals".....You mean the Christians that believe their Bible, huh.

The Evans, like Paula White.

Yeah, the bible believers.

Which part of the bible? The part that directs slaves to obey their masters? The part that says adulterers should be stoned to death? No thanks, and I`m a churchgoer.

Well, I don't know what kind of church you attend, but I'm referring to the Church of Jesus Christ, the New Testament.

 

[Penelope]

I think he means the one where the OT says adulterers should be stoned
and the NT says looking at woman with lust is the same as adultery, and they should cut the offending member off.

Both refer to Trump.

And Jimmy Carter. He admitted to committing NT adultery. He didn't whack his weenie off, though.[/QUOTE

feelings of lust, was he an Evangelical. Trump is so he should of been stoned or at least blinded.

Paula White led him to God.

You're confused, dear. Christians are in the New Testament, not the Old Testament. Do you understand the difference between the law and grace?

So why would one want the Jewish 10 commandments on state land.

 

[Coyote]

I don't know if this has been posted yet, but if it has then please disregard. This is obviously a breech of the Constitution, the separation of church and state. What shall be done?
On National Day of Prayer, Trump establishes new faith-based initiative

Just like Bush and Obama. Did you give a damn when Obama did it?

Essentially it is only building on what was already in place, but regardless of who is president I draw the line at any public funding of faith.

 

[Coyote]

I don't know if this has been posted yet, but if it has then please disregard. This is obviously a breech of the Constitution, the separation of church and state. What shall be done?
On National Day of Prayer, Trump establishes new faith-based initiative

Just like Bush and Obama. Did you give a damn when Obama did it?

Yes, I did give a damn when Obama did it. I endorse it. My point is the left will not like it simply because Trump did it. If Obama did it, the God haters on the left wouldn't say a word.

It isn’t about hating God, it is about public funding.

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

I think he means the one where the OT says adulterers should be stoned
and the NT says looking at woman with lust is the same as adultery, and they should cut the offending member off.

Both refer to Trump.

And Jimmy Carter. He admitted to committing NT adultery. He didn't whack his weenie off, though.[/QUOTE

feelings of lust, was he an Evangelical. Trump is so he should of been stoned or at least blinded.

Paula White led him to God.

You're confused, dear. Christians are in the New Testament, not the Old Testament. Do you understand the difference between the law and grace?

So why would one want the Jewish 10 commandments on state land.

Why not? Do they frighten you? Pinch your conscience?

 

[IsaacNewton]

I don't know if this has been posted yet, but if it has then please disregard. This is obviously a breech of the Constitution, the separation of church and state. What shall be done?
On National Day of Prayer, Trump establishes new faith-based initiative

The kershchins and their immoral orange turd want taxpayer money to help them force their religion on everyone else.


What a surprise.

So what are the God haters going to do about this violation of the Constitution, the separation of church and state?

And Jesus said -
"become Caesar's ally, lay as a lamb with the lion, force thine brethren in god's eyes to follow you and your tribe, become the Taliban, become Isis, your beliefs are the only true beliefs on Earth it is your duty to use government of men to force these beliefs on your neighbor, be not troubled by the cries of the heathen who wish to live free, god hears not their protests, erect all manner of false idols and statues across the land and claim they honor me, mock those who mock you, when another slaps your face do not turn the other cheek but carry a rifle with a huge clip, threaten violence to all who would dare bring up that most of the founding fathers were Deists, not Christians, ignore the hungry and curse the poor, clean thine tongue and anoint it with oil before licking the unclean hooves of the wealthy...more later, right now I have to grab some pussy."

 

[BS Filter]

I think he means the one where the OT says adulterers should be stoned
and the NT says looking at woman with lust is the same as adultery, and they should cut the offending member off.

Both refer to Trump.

And Jimmy Carter. He admitted to committing NT adultery. He didn't whack his weenie off, though.[/QUOTE

feelings of lust, was he an Evangelical. Trump is so he should of been stoned or at least blinded.

Paula White led him to God.

You're confused, dear. Christians are in the New Testament, not the Old Testament. Do you understand the difference between the law and grace?

So why would one want the Jewish 10 commandments on state land.

Because they can.

 

[BS Filter]

I don't know if this has been posted yet, but if it has then please disregard. This is obviously a breech of the Constitution, the separation of church and state. What shall be done?
On National Day of Prayer, Trump establishes new faith-based initiative

Just like Bush and Obama. Did you give a damn when Obama did it?

Yes, I did give a damn when Obama did it. I endorse it. My point is the left will not like it simply because Trump did it. If Obama did it, the God haters on the left wouldn't say a word.

It isn’t about hating God, it is about public funding.

No law against it.

 

[Disir]

I don't know if this has been posted yet, but if it has then please disregard. This is obviously a breech of the Constitution, the separation of church and state. What shall be done?
On National Day of Prayer, Trump establishes new faith-based initiative

Just like Bush and Obama. Did you give a damn when Obama did it?

Essentially it is only building on what was already in place, but regardless of who is president I draw the line at any public funding of faith.

I do, too. But, those arguments were completely disregarded when Obama became president. To be fair, this started under Clinton but back then it was called Charitable Choice. The ramifications became evident under Bush. In part, due to information sharing on the internet which had not been so readily available in the past. The Democratic Party had no intention of ending it. Still won't.

Be that as it may, that ship sailed. This is what we have to work with. Yet, the primary issues identified in many of these programs have still not been addressed. FBOs and secular counterparts operate under the exact same standards. Requiring those standards is not an attack on religion. FBOs do not get to hide behind God when they don't want to comply. They push that so it comes out with a need for "religious freedoms". Someone's bullshit filter needs to be cleaned.

 

[Coyote]

I don't know if this has been posted yet, but if it has then please disregard. This is obviously a breech of the Constitution, the separation of church and state. What shall be done?
On National Day of Prayer, Trump establishes new faith-based initiative

Just like Bush and Obama. Did you give a damn when Obama did it?

Essentially it is only building on what was already in place, but regardless of who is president I draw the line at any public funding of faith.

I do, too. But, those arguments were completely disregarded when Obama became president. To be fair, this started under Clinton but back then it was called Charitable Choice. The ramifications became evident under Bush. In part, due to information sharing on the internet which had not been so readily available in the past. The Democratic Party had no intention of ending it. Still won't.

Be that as it may, that ship sailed. This is what we have to work with. Yet, the primary issues identified in many of these programs have still not been addressed. FBOs and secular counterparts operate under the exact same standards. Requiring those standards is not an attack on religion. FBOs do not get to hide behind God when they don't want to comply. They push that so it comes out with a need for "religious freedoms". Someone's bullshit filter needs to be cleaned.

I don't object to federal government supporting faith based initiatives - they do a good job in certain areas, and they should be a recognized part of our overall safety net. I also don't object their having the same acess to grants that other groups do, as long as they have to follow the same rules.

 

[Rustic]

I don't know if this has been posted yet, but if it has then please disregard. This is obviously a breech of the Constitution, the separation of church and state. What shall be done?
On National Day of Prayer, Trump establishes new faith-based initiative

The kershchins and their immoral orange turd want taxpayer money to help them force their religion on everyone else.


What a surprise.

So what are the God haters going to do about this violation of the Constitution, the separation of church and state?

Lol

The Progressive Shit for brains, please show us in the constitution where it says separation of church and state? Times up...
Because it is not there… Progressives are fucking retards

 

[Disir]

I don't know if this has been posted yet, but if it has then please disregard. This is obviously a breech of the Constitution, the separation of church and state. What shall be done?
On National Day of Prayer, Trump establishes new faith-based initiative

Just like Bush and Obama. Did you give a damn when Obama did it?

Essentially it is only building on what was already in place, but regardless of who is president I draw the line at any public funding of faith.

I do, too. But, those arguments were completely disregarded when Obama became president. To be fair, this started under Clinton but back then it was called Charitable Choice. The ramifications became evident under Bush. In part, due to information sharing on the internet which had not been so readily available in the past. The Democratic Party had no intention of ending it. Still won't.

Be that as it may, that ship sailed. This is what we have to work with. Yet, the primary issues identified in many of these programs have still not been addressed. FBOs and secular counterparts operate under the exact same standards. Requiring those standards is not an attack on religion. FBOs do not get to hide behind God when they don't want to comply. They push that so it comes out with a need for "religious freedoms". Someone's bullshit filter needs to be cleaned.

I don't object to federal government supporting faith based initiatives - they do a good job in certain areas, and they should be a recognized part of our overall safety net. I also don't object their having the same acess to grants that other groups do, as long as they have to follow the same rules.

I do object but....it hasn't accomplished a whole lot in my lifetime. Some FBOs operate really well and some do not. Sometimes when the organizational structure changes then it follows the services change as well. Too, sometimes they are overwhelmed with those in need. Sometimes they say we can only help this type of individual and it has to fit in this very small set of criteria. It really depends and it is just like any other social service organization . I do object when an FBO tries to wheel and deal and become THE social services provider in a specific area and then fails to do what they said they would do. Screwing everyone in the process.