GOV'T FUNDING OF RELIGIOUS IMPERIALISM
Imagine living under a government that routinely spends your tax dollars to promote a religion you don't belong to -- and don't particularly care for. Imagine government using your money to spread this faith in public institutions like schools, social-service agencies and prisons.
Now imagine being unable to go to court to try to stop it.
You won't have to imagine any of this if certain groups that are determined to take away your right to sue have their way.
Late last month, the Supreme Court heard arguments in an important case dealing with the right to sue. The legal challenge was filed by a Wisconsin group on behalf of taxpayers who oppose President Bush's decision to use tax money to promote his "faith-based" initiative.
The taxpayers say Bush's creation of various federal faith-based offices and his administration's sponsorship of conferences to promote that effort violate the separation of church and state.
The administration argues that these taxpayers lack the right to sue. They argue that the money spent to promote the faith-based initiative came from general government operating funds -- not a congressional appropriation that directed tax revenues to religious groups. Thus it supposedly did not cause these taxpayers any harm, and the administration says it's out of reach of a legal challenge.
Worse, some Religious Right groups are urging the Supreme Court to go even further and take away taxpayers' rights to challenge government spending that furthers religion in other instances.
This is misguided and dangerous. The separation of church and state has been interpreted to mean that government is not permitted to subsidize activities designed to promote or further religion. Such endeavors must be funded with private dollars.
Concern over the faith-based initiative is not misplaced. Many religious people oppose tax-funding of religion. They worry that it will drain religion of its vitality and make houses of worship too dependent on the state. Others don't want to be forced to support religions with which they strongly disagree.
Americans United for Separation of Church and State shares these concerns and has several challenges to the faith-based initiative under way in court.
This is not a matter of "special rights." The language of the First Amendment barring "an establishment of religion" obviously means something. If taxpayers believe that provision has been violated, they should have the right to make their best case in court if they can show legal injury -- just like any other American with a legal grievance.
Nor is this just an obscure argument over the right to file lawsuits. Much more is at stake.
Separation of church and state has served our country well, giving our nation an unprecedented degree of interfaith harmony and more religious liberty than any country on earth.
Today that principle is under attack by some misguided individuals and organizations that believe all taxpayers should be forced to support their religious doctrines or that government should act as an enforcer of controversial theological dogmas.
These people and the organizations they lead now seek to attack church-state separation through the back door -- by making it harder for Americans to defend that principle in court.
They must not succeed. Americans have an important role to play in safeguarding their own rights. When legislators go too far, the people can stand up and rein them in by filing lawsuits in the federal courts.
We will not be able to play that historic role if the courthouse door is slammed in our faces.
BY BARRY LYNN (A REVEREND AND ADVOCATE FOR SEPERATION OF CHURCH AND STATE)
Imagine living under a government that routinely spends your tax dollars to promote a religion you don't belong to -- and don't particularly care for. Imagine government using your money to spread this faith in public institutions like schools, social-service agencies and prisons.
Now imagine being unable to go to court to try to stop it.
You won't have to imagine any of this if certain groups that are determined to take away your right to sue have their way.
Late last month, the Supreme Court heard arguments in an important case dealing with the right to sue. The legal challenge was filed by a Wisconsin group on behalf of taxpayers who oppose President Bush's decision to use tax money to promote his "faith-based" initiative.
The taxpayers say Bush's creation of various federal faith-based offices and his administration's sponsorship of conferences to promote that effort violate the separation of church and state.
The administration argues that these taxpayers lack the right to sue. They argue that the money spent to promote the faith-based initiative came from general government operating funds -- not a congressional appropriation that directed tax revenues to religious groups. Thus it supposedly did not cause these taxpayers any harm, and the administration says it's out of reach of a legal challenge.
Worse, some Religious Right groups are urging the Supreme Court to go even further and take away taxpayers' rights to challenge government spending that furthers religion in other instances.
This is misguided and dangerous. The separation of church and state has been interpreted to mean that government is not permitted to subsidize activities designed to promote or further religion. Such endeavors must be funded with private dollars.
Concern over the faith-based initiative is not misplaced. Many religious people oppose tax-funding of religion. They worry that it will drain religion of its vitality and make houses of worship too dependent on the state. Others don't want to be forced to support religions with which they strongly disagree.
Americans United for Separation of Church and State shares these concerns and has several challenges to the faith-based initiative under way in court.
This is not a matter of "special rights." The language of the First Amendment barring "an establishment of religion" obviously means something. If taxpayers believe that provision has been violated, they should have the right to make their best case in court if they can show legal injury -- just like any other American with a legal grievance.
Nor is this just an obscure argument over the right to file lawsuits. Much more is at stake.
Separation of church and state has served our country well, giving our nation an unprecedented degree of interfaith harmony and more religious liberty than any country on earth.
Today that principle is under attack by some misguided individuals and organizations that believe all taxpayers should be forced to support their religious doctrines or that government should act as an enforcer of controversial theological dogmas.
These people and the organizations they lead now seek to attack church-state separation through the back door -- by making it harder for Americans to defend that principle in court.
They must not succeed. Americans have an important role to play in safeguarding their own rights. When legislators go too far, the people can stand up and rein them in by filing lawsuits in the federal courts.
We will not be able to play that historic role if the courthouse door is slammed in our faces.
BY BARRY LYNN (A REVEREND AND ADVOCATE FOR SEPERATION OF CHURCH AND STATE)
No comments:
Post a Comment