Liberty Juiceby Brittainy Pounders
Itâ€™s news to many that President Obama is planning a complete overhaul to the Faith Based Initiatives that President Bush had put in place. Itâ€™s been a contentious matter and rightly so. Faith based initiatives were initially established to allot federal funding to faith based groups and religious organizations to advance charity work outside the churches. Conservatives have always believed that local churches, organizations and charities can much better serve the local needy than a large, overwhelming federal figure across the country.
Common sense would dictate that a local establishment can determine more successfully those who are truly in need of a hand up and weed out those who are looking for a free ride on the welfare train. We already know that fraud and corruption within the government welfare programs are rampant, with millions and millions of tax payer dollars being stolen from the government coffers. That being said, given the two options, most common sense Conservatives feel the best alternative would be to bring it down to a more personal, local level.
The Left was expectedly largely critical of this but is strangely silent now that Obama has new plans for the faith-based initiatives. And those plans are alarming. Obama has decided that he is going to take the faith based initiatives and now partner them with the EPA (Environmental Protection Agency) to push his radical Green religion and agenda into the churches. Whatâ€™s even more unnerving is the frequency of the word â€œpartnership,â€ between the White House and the churches, used within this 164 page document entitled â€œA New Era of Partnerships.â€
No longer will these programs be used to feed the poor and to clothe the children. Now the new EPA Churchesâ€¦excuse me, officesâ€¦ will be used to activate â€œfaith and community-based networks to promote energy efficiency, environmental responsibility, and green jobs. With minimal personnel costs to the government, massive partnerships could be scaled up through engaging religious and community leaders and organizations.â€
Meghan Clyne wrote an excellent article in the Weekly Standard about Obama and his green churches. She says:
Perhaps itâ€™s only reasonable that global-warming activists would turn to God for help as the scientific case for their position collapses. As if Climategate had never happened, the council report asserts with blind faith: â€œAdequately addressing global climate changeâ€”through better and more extensive partnerships with nonprofits and other effortsâ€”will result, for example, in less migration, fewer refugee crises, and greater food security.â€ The swollen Red Sea will part, the waters of Noahâ€™s greenhouse-gas-fueled flood will recede, and the meek shall inherit the earth. All it takes is a little federal infiltration of Americaâ€™s houses of worship.
Yet, the more you read these proposals the more you begin to wonder if â€œpartnershipâ€ really means â€œtakeover.â€ We know in the past that it has not been uncommon for governments to take over the churches and use them as tools of tyranny. King George did it in the Virginia colonies, requiring citizens to be members of the church, to pay tithes and he would appoint the Archbishops. After the Revolution, Thomas Jefferson seized those properties and sold them as a sign that the new government would not be allowed to hold the power over the churches and the citizens ever again in that way. Since that time, our Founders showed their appreciation and respect for faith and Christianity by opening the government up to the churches but making sure the churches were protected from the government.