Stimulus Plan Includes Religious Discrimination

[xsited1]

Let's get rid of the religious people! They're nothing but trouble makers!

“In order to receive stimulus money, our public schools will have to expel after-school Bible clubs and weekend religious meetings. People who want to speak about their faith will be unwelcome in public places.”

 

[Patriot2009]

That's not different from this, actually... and it comports with my understanding. this is from the bill...

"used for sectarian instruction, religious worship, or a school or department of divinity; or (ii) in which a substantial portion of the functions of the facilities are subsumed in a religious mission.”

I think it might just be a way to head off scalia and roberts from changing those limits. And I am very much ok with that.

Pages 164-165 of the stimulus contain the following prohibitions on the use of $3.5 billion available for renovation of public or private college and university facilities:

“(2) PROHIBITED USES OF FUNDS.—No funds awarded under this section may be used for—

(C) modernization, renovation, or repair of facilities—

(i) used for sectarian instruction, religious worship, or a school or department of divinity; or

(ii) in which a substantial portion of the functions of the facilities are subsumed in a religious mission; or construction of new facilities.”

OK, Part (2)(C)(i) is the offending provision. Part (2)(C)(ii) isn’t a problem because it is already common in federal funding laws. The (ii) paragraph means that the funds can’t be used to build, renovate or repair what would be a church or church instructional building. Some campuses include a school chapel. Any work on such a building couldn’t be performed with these funds. Although I personally wouldn’t have a problem with such a use of the stimulus money some would and I understand such objections.

But, the (i) paragraph is something new and is a departure from already existing federal law. It is far broader and includes all occasional or less than substantial uses for any religious activity. In other words this isn’t a matter of banning the use of the funds for an old on–campus chapel or church. It bans the one-time or two-time outreach dinner such as the one my church hosted at that elementary school one Thursday night. That’s a big difference.

The irony is that it wouldn’t ban a night of gambling on bingo by a local social club in the same building!

but they are already only allowing sectarian groups to use the property for non-sectarian, non -religious reasons. it changes nothing. still goes to the use of the premises, IMO.

and, no... they probably wouldn't be able to use the school for an "outreach dinner". but they shouldn't be doing that now, under the current laws.

if the school allowed it, they probably shouldn't. and, certainly, there are other places to have such an outreach dinner than at a school.

it's not that it bothers me, per se. but government money shouldn't be used so a church can reach out to new members.

and what if the mosque down the street wanted to use the school for the same purpose. would you feel the same way?

Jillian,

Apparently, you didn’t read the Supreme Court’s opinion in GOOD NEWS CLUB V. MILFORD CENTRAL SCHOOL (99-2036) http://supct.law.cornell.edu/supct/h...-2036.ZS.html

The Court held that it is unconstitutional to prohibit this sort of use in public buildings. We're NOT talking about the repair or construction of a chiurch or mosque on a school grounds. We're talking about a use that is commonly allowed under the decision I linked and many others just like it, for example, a weekly bible study club in a conference room off the school library after school. It really is common for church clubs, small congregations that can’t afford to build a church, Bible study groups and other religious groups to use public buildings in this manner.

 

[auditor0007]

Well, that's a good way to keep religious groups from meeting on college campuses. Let the atheist indoctrination begin. And for those church basketball leagues who pay to use public school gymnasiums for their games, I'm sure the ACLU will find that this is against the rules also. And lest we forget, Boy Scouts and Girl Scouts will most likely also be banned from using school facilities also. Please, let the atheist indoctrination begin.

The Constitution states that the government will not create or support any state run religion. It does not say that the state should try to hinder religious speech in every public place there is. People of all faiths need to start standing up for themselves and each other. This is a load of crap that keeps being forced down our throats. Even most liberals don't buy into this crap, only the fervent atheists themselves who want the state make atheism the religion of the land.

Just having the wording of this in this bill will give the ACLU the leverage it needs to bring one lawsuit after another upon one group after another. Since most of these religious organizations won't be able to fight it, the ACLU will again be setting policy. This is where the liberal dictators are leading us.

 

[auditor0007]

"Nestled away in the now $900 billion-plus stimulus is a provision some conservatives believe is a backdoor attempt to stifle religious dialogue in the public square. While the bill provides $20 billion for the modernization of school facilities — with $14 billion going to elementary and secondary schools and $6 billion for higher education — it also expressly prohibits using the funds to modernize buildings where religious activities take place." The Bulletin > Philadelphia's Family Newspaper > Archives > Top Stories > Stimulus Plan Includes Religious Discrimination

Under current law a public school must allow after school use of its facilities for religiouos activities such as Bible study and religious services. What this bill will do is make it illegal for any school that accepts these funds for improvements, repairs or new construction to do so.

Excellent. We should not be having prayer and religious activities in public schools. The law reverses the previous one.

What a crock of shit. Religious people pay taxes to support our public schools. To use those facilities for their own group purposes has nothing to do with dictating anyone's religion upon anyone else. Public school facilities are used for Boy Scouts, Girl Scouts, and Church Basketball Leagues all the time. These don't involve people who may believe differently, yet people like you just want to make certain these facilities can't be used because you hate anything to do with religion.

 

[Shogun]

Sorry, it's just not true that filtering out your dogma junkie handout reflex from funds meant to do more than line your tithing coffer amounts to limiting your freedom of religion. Again, WE THE PEOPLE do not subsidize your fucking faith. Cry like lionfood all you need to but Ceasar doesn't have to wipe your ass just because you feel the urge to eat beans and ex-lax and it sure as hell isn't religous persecution if we reserve the tax based GOOD toilet paper for asses more common than those found only in your particular sect of dogma.

Where in the New Testement does jesus say to Cry Like A Bitch every time Ceasar is not coddling you like a newborn babe to a first time mother?

 

[Jon]

Hmmm...this, to me, seems like an attempt to keep these funds away from schools in conservative areas. Obama really is deadset on keeping Democrats in power, isn't it? I really hope his administration doesn't last long.

 

[auditor0007]

GOOD.


common tax money should not be thrown at religious organizations. period. why should non-believers pay into a kitty that relieves YOUR personal burden of faith? Screw you people. Go pray for fucking rain and cash if you want another megachurch or 40k car for your pastor OR FAILED FAITH BASED PROGRAMS. Some of us would rather not pair social safety nets with your goddamn dangled heaven carrot.

Good grief. This is as much of a no-brainer, AND travesty of crybaby martyrs, as an American President promoting a Buy American campaign.

In the end this will cost taxpayers more money as many of these groups pay to use these facilities, which means the schools will have to choose between the loss of revenue from the government funding or from these groups. Shogun, you are such a twit it's pathetic. You're so obsessed with ridding this country of religion that you don't care how it affects anyone, even those atheists who will end up paying higher taxes because of this stupidity.

 

[Care4all]

This thread is long and I don't know if anyone has noted this yet....

but it says they are prohibited from funding the repair of buildings that are used PRIMARILY FOR religious use....the primary function of the BUILDING.

If kids meet after school for a Bible Study club, one night a week in a classroom WOULD NOT MEET the standard of the room being used PRIMARILY for religious purposes.

This SCARE is just a bunch of HOT AIR....from what i am reading on it....

Care

 

[Shogun]

"Nestled away in the now $900 billion-plus stimulus is a provision some conservatives believe is a backdoor attempt to stifle religious dialogue in the public square. While the bill provides $20 billion for the modernization of school facilities — with $14 billion going to elementary and secondary schools and $6 billion for higher education — it also expressly prohibits using the funds to modernize buildings where religious activities take place." The Bulletin > Philadelphia's Family Newspaper > Archives > Top Stories > Stimulus Plan Includes Religious Discrimination

Under current law a public school must allow after school use of its facilities for religiouos activities such as Bible study and religious services. What this bill will do is make it illegal for any school that accepts these funds for improvements, repairs or new construction to do so.

Excellent. We should not be having prayer and religious activities in public schools. The law reverses the previous one.

What a crock of shit. Religious people pay taxes to support our public schools. To use those facilities for their own group purposes has nothing to do with dictating anyone's religion upon anyone else. Public school facilities are used for Boy Scouts, Girl Scouts, and Church Basketball Leagues all the time. These don't involve people who may believe differently, yet people like you just want to make certain these facilities can't be used because you hate anything to do with religion.

Indeed, and you STILL are capable of sending your kids to public schools. end of obligation. This isn't about the Boy Scouts and THEY are not crying like fucking sissies about not getting a chuck o' change from the fucking stimulus package. Good Grief.



Boy Scouts Lose Philadelphia Lease in Gay-Rights Fight

PHILADELPHIA, Dec. 4 — For three years the Philadelphia council of the Boy Scouts of America held its ground. It resisted the city’s request to change its discriminatory policy toward gay people despite threats that if it did not do so, the city would evict the group from a municipal building where the Scouts have resided practically rent free since 1928.
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/06/us/06scouts.html?_r=2&th&emc=th&oref=slogin

 

[auditor0007]

"Nestled away in the now $900 billion-plus stimulus is a provision some conservatives believe is a backdoor attempt to stifle religious dialogue in the public square. While the bill provides $20 billion for the modernization of school facilities — with $14 billion going to elementary and secondary schools and $6 billion for higher education — it also expressly prohibits using the funds to modernize buildings where religious activities take place." The Bulletin > Philadelphia's Family Newspaper > Archives > Top Stories > Stimulus Plan Includes Religious Discrimination

Under current law a public school must allow after school use of its facilities for religiouos activities such as Bible study and religious services. What this bill will do is make it illegal for any school that accepts these funds for improvements, repairs or new construction to do so.

Excellent. We should not be having prayer and religious activities in public schools. The law reverses the previous one.

For a long time, an old school was church for a friend of mine. It was a small school, unused for many years, they rented it from the school district. This will make things such as that impossible. Another church rents out an area of our high school every Sunday, this will make that impossible. Why should our PUBLIC buildings not be allowed for the PUBLIC to use. Heck, they won't even let the Boyscouts use them anymore without paying, now they won't be able to use them at all.

Years ago, I remember they arrested a bunch of students holding a Bible study in their dorm at the University of Washington. There was a big fuss made and the students were released and the University was forced to clarify their position and allow Bible study and other such things to take place voluntarily in their dorms. This will once again, lead to arrests of students for simply studying the Bible voluntarily in a group.

Our forefather's wanted us to have freedom OF religion, not freedom FROM religion.

But the atheists want to rid us of all religion. It is their mantra. Anyone believing differently is blind to this.

 

[Shogun]

GOOD.


common tax money should not be thrown at religious organizations. period. why should non-believers pay into a kitty that relieves YOUR personal burden of faith? Screw you people. Go pray for fucking rain and cash if you want another megachurch or 40k car for your pastor OR FAILED FAITH BASED PROGRAMS. Some of us would rather not pair social safety nets with your goddamn dangled heaven carrot.

Good grief. This is as much of a no-brainer, AND travesty of crybaby martyrs, as an American President promoting a Buy American campaign.

In the end this will cost taxpayers more money as many of these groups pay to use these facilities, which means the schools will have to choose between the loss of revenue from the government funding or from these groups. Shogun, you are such a twit it's pathetic. You're so obsessed with ridding this country of religion that you don't care how it affects anyone, even those atheists who will end up paying higher taxes because of this stupidity.

I posted MY evidence, dude. Where is yours? Read any good "Boyscouts kicked the fuck out of public venues becaue of their anti-gay stance" articles lately? do you have EVIDENCE that the general population will "pay more taxes" if your silly dogma junkie ass is not allowed free reign of public resources? Non-sequiters may increase the tithes in the donation plate but i'm just not all that impressed.

Indeed, a nation without religion would give each of us one less reason to marginalize others. I look forward to that AFFECTING the nation. The FACT remains that you will not be hindered at all by being excluded from the public tax tit. Tell me, IS THIS WHAT YOU THINK JESUS WOULD HAVE DONE? Crying about funding from Ceasar?

 

[auditor0007]

I don't think that any right winger would want any part of the stimulus package to be used for repairing/building a mosque or a part of a school that would be used for Islamic religious purposes either.

It is simple: government funding from a secular state like the US should not go to religious causes.

Why would I, as a Christian, care if a school was used Islamic, Jewish, or any other group? They have a right to use these facilities just like anyone else. You know what's funny. Since Atheism isn't considered a religion, an atheist group could hold a function where a religious group could not.

 

[Jon]

This thread is long and I don't know if anyone has noted this yet....

but it says they are prohibited from funding the repair of buildings that are used PRIMARILY FOR religious use....the primary function of the BUILDING.

I don't see that at all.

 

[Munin]

Excellent. We should not be having prayer and religious activities in public schools. The law reverses the previous one.

For a long time, an old school was church for a friend of mine. It was a small school, unused for many years, they rented it from the school district. This will make things such as that impossible. Another church rents out an area of our high school every Sunday, this will make that impossible. Why should our PUBLIC buildings not be allowed for the PUBLIC to use. Heck, they won't even let the Boyscouts use them anymore without paying, now they won't be able to use them at all.

Years ago, I remember they arrested a bunch of students holding a Bible study in their dorm at the University of Washington. There was a big fuss made and the students were released and the University was forced to clarify their position and allow Bible study and other such things to take place voluntarily in their dorms. This will once again, lead to arrests of students for simply studying the Bible voluntarily in a group.

Our forefather's wanted us to have freedom OF religion, not freedom FROM religion.

But the atheists want to rid us of all religion. It is their mantra. Anyone believing differently is blind to this.

What atheists? Obama is a Christian, Biden is a Catholic, ... It would even surprise me that their was an atheist in the government

 

[Patriot2009]

GOOD.


common tax money should not be thrown at religious organizations. period. why should non-believers pay into a kitty that relieves YOUR personal burden of faith? Screw you people. Go pray for fucking rain and cash if you want another megachurch or 40k car for your pastor OR FAILED FAITH BASED PROGRAMS. Some of us would rather not pair social safety nets with your goddamn dangled heaven carrot.

Good grief. This is as much of a no-brainer, AND travesty of crybaby martyrs, as an American President promoting a Buy American campaign.

In the end this will cost taxpayers more money as many of these groups pay to use these facilities, which means the schools will have to choose between the loss of revenue from the government funding or from these groups. Shogun, you are such a twit it's pathetic. You're so obsessed with ridding this country of religion that you don't care how it affects anyone, even those atheists who will end up paying higher taxes because of this stupidity.

What I suspect will really happen is that the Dems will pass this bill despite widespread objections to this provision. Then it will go to the courts and both sides will be forced to spend big bucks on the court battle. Eventually, a year or more down the road the Supreme Court will decide the case consistent with the current decisions, assuming, of course, that the make-up of the Court doesn’t change between now and then.
In the meantime, religious organizations will be thrown out of some buildings because of this law and have to find other places to meet. I don’t know if there any other facilities in that little neighboring town that can accommodate our outreach dinners. But, of one thing you can be sure. If our church fathers decide to hold such a dinner, or some other event, it will go forward despite the efforts of folks like the legislators who put this provision into this bill.

The devil simply won’t have his way!!!

 

[xsited1]

This thread is long and I don't know if anyone has noted this yet....

but it says they are prohibited from funding the repair of buildings that are used PRIMARILY FOR religious use....the primary function of the BUILDING.

If kids meet after school for a Bible Study club, one night a week in a classroom WOULD NOT MEET the standard of the room being used PRIMARILY for religious purposes.

This SCARE is just a bunch of HOT AIR....from what i am reading on it....

Care

And therein lies the problem. If a religious group uses a room in a school that is used infrequently by the school, the government can cut-off funding for that school. If a religious group uses a classroom 6 days a week while the public kids only use it 5 days a week, the government can cut-off funding. Imagine if you live in a small town and buildings are in short supply. The school could lose funding.

There are a lot of loopholes in this. On the surface, it appears to give the government a way to attack conservative organizations.

 

[auditor0007]

I don't think that any right winger would want any part of the stimulus package to be used for repairing/building a mosque or a part of a school that would be used for Islamic religious purposes either.

It is simple: government funding from a secular state like the US should not go to religious causes.

But there are no problems accpeting taxes from Christians for purely secular activites---some of which attempt to suppress religious ideology ?

No, this makes no sense. The US is a state for all religions (freedom of religion), therefor it has no state religion and it does not fund any religious causes.

It does not suppress religious ideology, it still allows them to use private money for their private Causes: religion.

Public money is used for public causes: no religion because each taxpayer has the right to have a different religion, so a christian/Jew/atheist should not see his taxpayermoney go to fund a mosque or and atheist should not see his taxpayermoney go to fund a scientology church.

This isn't about funding churches or mosques, lmao. It's about banning the use of a public facility for anything that is associated with religion.

 

[auditor0007]

GOOD.


common tax money should not be thrown at religious organizations. period. why should non-believers pay into a kitty that relieves YOUR personal burden of faith? Screw you people. Go pray for fucking rain and cash if you want another megachurch or 40k car for your pastor OR FAILED FAITH BASED PROGRAMS. Some of us would rather not pair social safety nets with your goddamn dangled heaven carrot.

Good grief. This is as much of a no-brainer, AND travesty of crybaby martyrs, as an American President promoting a Buy American campaign.

In the end this will cost taxpayers more money as many of these groups pay to use these facilities, which means the schools will have to choose between the loss of revenue from the government funding or from these groups. Shogun, you are such a twit it's pathetic. You're so obsessed with ridding this country of religion that you don't care how it affects anyone, even those atheists who will end up paying higher taxes because of this stupidity.

I posted MY evidence, dude. Where is yours? Read any good "Boyscouts kicked the fuck out of public venues becaue of their anti-gay stance" articles lately? do you have EVIDENCE that the general population will "pay more taxes" if your silly dogma junkie ass is not allowed free reign of public resources? Non-sequiters may increase the tithes in the donation plate but i'm just not all that impressed.

Indeed, a nation without religion would give each of us one less reason to marginalize others. I look forward to that AFFECTING the nation. The FACT remains that you will not be hindered at all by being excluded from the public tax tit. Tell me, IS THIS WHAT YOU THINK JESUS WOULD HAVE DONE? Crying about funding from Ceasar?

Your evidence is the twisting of our Constitution, plain and simple. When organizations that pay to use these facilities are no longer permitted to use them, then the schools will lose revenue. But I'm sure you believe that by removing these organizations, others will take their place.

 

[auditor0007]

Sorry, it's just not true that filtering out your dogma junkie handout reflex from funds meant to do more than line your tithing coffer amounts to limiting your freedom of religion. Again, WE THE PEOPLE do not subsidize your fucking faith. Cry like lionfood all you need to but Ceasar doesn't have to wipe your ass just because you feel the urge to eat beans and ex-lax and it sure as hell isn't religous persecution if we reserve the tax based GOOD toilet paper for asses more common than those found only in your particular sect of dogma.

Where in the New Testement does jesus say to Cry Like A Bitch every time Ceasar is not coddling you like a newborn babe to a first time mother?

You're so stupid you don't realize that many of these groups of faith actually pay for the use of those facilities.

 

[Patriot2009]

This thread is long and I don't know if anyone has noted this yet....

but it says they are prohibited from funding the repair of buildings that are used PRIMARILY FOR religious use....the primary function of the BUILDING.

If kids meet after school for a Bible Study club, one night a week in a classroom WOULD NOT MEET the standard of the room being used PRIMARILY for religious purposes.

This SCARE is just a bunch of HOT AIR....from what i am reading on it....

Care

Care,
Go back and read the proposed statute again!

You’re correct that Paragraph (ii) prohibits the use of the funds for a building that has as its purpose primarily religious activities. But, the paragraph before it, Paragraph (i), is much broader and is separated from paragraph (ii) not by the word “and”, but by the word “or”. This distinction is critically important in interpretation of the language.

In other words, Paragraph (i) prohibits the use of the funds in a building that is used for any religious activity no matter if it is only incidental to the building’s primary purpose or not!

That little word "or" changes everything.