Separation of Church and State was always intended to mean that the Church would have no power to dictate to government and government would have no power to dictate to any man, woman, or child what he or she must believe in respect to religion and therefore no power to reward or apply consequences to any person based on what he or she believes respective to religion. Having power to reward or apply consequences based on religious beliefs is the literal definition of 'establishment of religion'.
Therefore all the bruhaha over symbols, statues, artwork, or where the Ten Commandments can or cannot be posted, etc. are waaaaaaay outside of the original intent of the Founders when they wrote the First Amendment.
There is no constitutional basis or authority for the government to furnish charity in any form to anybody and it is for that reason that I oppose the faith based initiatives whether administered by the Bush administration or a subsequent administration. However, IF the government is going to furnish charity, I am 100% in favor of those organizations that already have the staff, infrastructure, and expertise in place to provide charitable services rather than start from scratch and swallow up still more tax dollars in expensive and unnecessary bureaucracy.
As for who should direct the effort? Jeremiah Wright would be wholly unacceptable purely based on his racist and anti-American views. James Dobson would be a far better choice practically speaking and would administer programs far more equitably, but even he might be biased when it came to providing certain services to gays etc. so he also should not be appointed by anybody.
I say scrap all government charity and let the people take over that duty again. Government could be a clearing house to channel funds for national or international disaster or relief work. But if government is going to do charity, pick somebody with strong administrative skills who will channel the money where it absolutely will do the most good for the largest number of people.
