Issue Three: Public Funding of Faith Groups
Oh yeah, you read that right. Seems that the US Supreme Court, in one more split vote says that religious groups can indeed get public funds for their organizations. I mean, you would think that on this issue at least, the Courts would have clearly opposed granting public funds to such groups, but not this court.
Actually, to be technical, the court ruled that YOU, the one paying the bills here, can’t sue the Government for spending your money on faith based programs, projects. It simply takes away your power to control your government.
WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court on Monday barred ordinary taxpayers from challenging a White House initiative helping religious charities get a share of federal money. (source)
Let’s be silly for a minute. Assume that Mitt Romney wins the general election in 2008 and becomes President. Let us then say that he decides to fund a Mormon Church Group to go around the country and baptize all dead persons into the Mormon Church, and file this absentee baptismal in their huge vaults over there in Utah. Let us say that he issues these funds from the General Treasury or his discretionary fund.
You don’t like it, but guess what, ain’t dick you can do about it, because you no longer have the right to take the government to court for such trivial issues. You no longer have redress before the courts.
Now myself, I rather think the USA is sue happy, but this takes the matter too far in the opposite way. Then too this is this little anomaly. Mainstream media for the most part have ignored this ruling. I mean there is discussion on the campaign ruling, bit of humour on the ‘bongs for Jesus’ ruling, but barely a mention on this one. Now you don’t think it is because these news groups are afraid of all these religious groups, and their advertising dollars, do you?
While the absurd notion that Romney would win, and do, that is hypothetical, the fact is that the Mormon Church is indeed doing absentee baptisms for those dead. They are storing that data in Utah. So that part is actually real, go figure.
The point is that by denying people the right of redress, you basically would need Congress to act on it, and given how well Congress listens to the voters, well guess you shit out of luck.
If you look at all three rulings, it should be sending a chill down your spine. This is rapidly showing that the new court, fiddled with by Bush, stacked with Judges who obviously have no concept of Justice, or of the Rights enshrined in the Constitution, are heading. It makes one shudder at what is going to happen when abortion once more hits the High Court.
The real problem is that this court is not old. The new Conservative Appointments aren’t about to step down for some time, and that means that Bush has indeed left a legacy after he’s gone. He will have left a Court that will take the USA to the dark ages, where racism ruled, where lynchings were not a crime, and where women were thought to be better off if they were bare footed, and pregnant, while cooking the man his dinner.
It means that basic human rights issues, that are supposed to be guarded by the Court, will wither unresolved, until a new court is mustered. By then, who knows how many will suffer, all because George Bush wanted to leave a legacy.
The problem is also, what happens if a really religious zealot is elected President? Or if they garner control over Congress? Separation of Church and State was behind the actual formation of the US way back when. Yet today it seems that Religious Freedom is for those who follow a conservative view, and that there is no room for those who believe in GOD, but also believe in the rights of others.
I don’t think anyone really expected all this mingling of Religion and Government, when George Bush first came on the scene. While it is nice to know that the man at the top was religious, you kind of hoped he’d govern for all, not just those who buy into his brand of God. Strange how things turn on you, when you forget the basic principle of voting.
Vote for the Guy who supports Your Rights. Odds are he’ll not try to usurp them, as George Bush has done during his tenure.
Now he has the US Supreme Court helping.