I am a person of faith. That repels some, it warms the hearts of others. So your natural response would be, this is going to be a diary praising Obama's expansion of Bush's Faith based office. This diary will not do that. I am a Christian, but I also profoundly believe in the separation of church and state. I believe it's important to respect the rights of Jews, Muslims Hindus, Buddhists, atheists and agnostics. The right to believe or not believe in a particular religion is an impotrant freedom, and I think Barack Obama by expanding on Bush's Faith Based initiative, further blurs the line between the separation of church and state.
I will start not with a secular warning about religion in the public square, but a religious one, from Matthew verses 1-4:
1"Be careful not to do your 'acts of righteousness' before men, to be seen by them. If you do, you will have no reward from your Father in heaven.
2"So when you give to the needy, do not announce it with trumpets, as the hypocrites do in the synagogues and on the streets, to be honored by men. I tell you the truth, they have received their reward in full. 3But when you give to the needy, do not let your left hand know what your right hand is doing, 4so that your giving may be in secret. Then your Father, who sees what is done in secret, will reward you.
Here's the establisment clause along with the free exercise clause of the first amemdment.
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;
Here is Thomas Jefferson's Wall of Separation Letter to the Danbury Baptist Association in 1802:
Jefferson's Wall of Separation It's pretty clear to me that Jefferson is an absolutist in the belief that religion and government stay separate.
In fact most of the founding fathers had an apathy for religion, some even had antipathy towards religion as summarized by these quotes by Stephen Jay Gould. Founding Fathers Words on Religion
It would seem, for many years that we maintained a fairly strict interpretation of the Separation of Church and State as evisioned by Jefferson. This started to change in the 1980's when Ronald Reagan started courting the religious right. Reagan seemed to only pay lip serverice to the religious right however, as his own churchgoing was spotty at best.
The courtship of Evangelicals reached its high water mark on January 29, 2001, when George W. Bush establish the White House Office of Faith based and Community Initiatives.
Almost immediately, there was discontent, and within 8 months John DiIulio resigned as Head of the Faith Based office. He said to Ron Suskind in an article in Esquire:
> "There is no precedent in any modern White House for what is going on in this one: a complete lack of a policy apparatus," says DiIulio. "What you’ve got is everything—and I mean everything—being run by the political arm. It’s the reign of the Mayberry Machiavellis."
David Kuo, Special Assistant to the President, and a conservative Christian said in his book Tempting Faith that the Bush administration had no respect for the Christians they courted:
"National Christian leaders received hugs and smiles in person and then were dismissed behind their backs and described as ‘ridiculous,’ ‘out of control,’ and just plain ‘goofy,’
Moreover, Kuo says the money from the faith based initiative was targetted towards politically friendly conferences, with religious leaders to mobilize Republican voters.
More seriously, Kuo alleges that then-White House political affairs director Ken Mehlman knowingly participated in a scheme to use the office, and taxpayer funds, to mount ostensibly "nonpartisan" events that were, in reality, designed with the intent of mobilizing religious voters in 20 targeted races.
Nineteen out of the 20 targeted races were won by Republicans, Kuo reports. The outreach was so extensive and so powerful in motivating not just conservative evangelicals, but also traditionally Democratic minorities, that Kuo attributes Bush’s 2004 Ohio victory "at least partially ... to the conferences we had launched two years before."
It is because of this history that I found it surprising that Obama wants to expand the Faith Based Initiative. Obama Will Expand Faith Based Initiative
Let me stipulate that I don't for a second doubt Obama's religious sincerity, and I don't believe his expansion of this program is going to lead to partisan abuses the way the Bush Administration's management has but I do think Obama is doing this at least partially for political gain.
It's a three-fer for Obama, support of the fath-based program will show him to be a 'good Christian' the fears that he is a Muslim will disappear, and that will be good for him politically. Secondly, he can re-enter the religion debate with no mention of Reverend Wright, and that is definately good for him politically, and thirdly. it's a way to maybe poach some of the younger evangelical support from McCain.
The Obama campaign is even launching the Joshua Generation project to court younger evangelicals
The Joshua Generation project will be the Obama campaign's outreach to young people of faith. There's unprecedented energy and excitement for Obama among young evangelicals and Catholics. The Joshua Generation project will tap into that excitement and provide young people of faith opportunities to stand up for their values and move the campaign forward."
The official rollout won't be for another two weeks or so, but The Brody File has been told the activities will include house parties, blogging, concerts and more.
Even in making the announcent to expand the program, Obama had no problems profeessing his beliefs.
"I didn't grow up in a particularly religious household," he said. "But my experience in Chicago showed me how faith and values could be an anchor in my life. And in time, I came to see my faith as being both a personal commitment to Christ and a commitment to my community, that while I could sit in church and pray all I want, I wouldn't be fulfilling God's will unless I went out and did the Lord's work."
So what do you think, Kos readers, diarists? Is expanding the faith based program a good idea? More fundamentally, is it OK that political leaders express their religious views so openly?
I have problems with both expansion of the faith based program, and politicians openly espousing thier religious views. If you're a Buddhist or a Hindu or a Muslim, or an agnostic or athiest, why should your tax dollars fund a Christian church program? If you're a Chistian, you belive in paying unto Caesar what is Caesar's and paying unto God what is God's. Why would you want the government, that does so much wrong to fund a church program?
If politicians want to show me their religious faith, they don't have to tell me, they can show me by thier works.
Happy 4th everyone, I'm sure the founders would be happy that a site like Daily Kos exists.