Recently I've been looking into getting a federal grant for an inner city food pantry. We've run into some problems because we're a religious organization. Thus, we've had to incorporate under a separate non-profit organization not affiliated with the church. I'm not sure if I agree with the current policies on the books pertaining to federal funds and religious charities, as there are loopholes you can use as we did to get our non-profit set up.

What are your opinons? Should religious, church-based charities be able to receive federal grants?

The only problem with federal funds going to religious charities is that it violates separation of church and state, and in a sense endorses religion. We're a free society offering liberty to all citizens regardless of religious belief. To give tax dollars to a certain religious group would set a dangerous precendent, IMO.

By setting up a separate non-profit separate from the church, it's not really affiliated with the church, so you're able to get around that. There are actually some strict guidelines for such non-profits...namely, you can't preach or establish religion at any events.

I think that's where society has missed the boat on separation of church and state as it pertains to charities. Separation of church and state was developed to protect the church from state control. It did not limit the church's involvement in state affairs.

Still, if there are so many loop holes, I don't see the real justification.

When passing out funds for charitable causes, I don't think the government should take religious faith into account. They should look at the overall mission of the charity.

One has to note that even the Salvation Army has Christian roots, as does City Rescue Mission, Grace Rescue Mission, Jesus House, and most other decent charities.

I don't want my tax dollars going to support somem right-winged charity trying to evangelize people, so I'd say I'm against funding of religious charities. There are plenty of charities out there that aren't attached to any religious organization. The Red Cross and United Way are good examples. I personally invest all of my money into medical research, as you can imagine.

I can say the same for left wing. I do not give to United Way because it goes to bum shelters and other places I am against, plus I do not want tax dollars condoning bums sleeping in boxes instead of finding a job.

are you serious?

I have never heard anyone say such things about the United Way. Even my most conservative friends support the group.

Let me ask you this, if the United Way doesn't help "bums" as you put it (and by the way United Way supports other organizations like Big Brothers Big Sisters, the Boy and Girl Scouts etc) who will?

Would you prefer that the homeless just die in the streets? I want your honest answer.

They support a LOT of bum shelters. Yes. They support other things too. However, I do not want my money going to coddle bums. I deserve the right to control who gets the money I donate. The United Way takes that right away from me.

It is that simple.

Oh. Dying on the streets? That is not even a logical comment. All they have to do is get a job.

Actually you can designate which United Way Agency you would like your funds to go too if you participate in a corporate giving program. You might inqure about this with your employer.

I do not trust them to really send it where I want it. I can do that myself... And St. Jude's and MS are much happier as a result.

You can also give to Hospice through the United Way.

Comments like these are unfortunately all too common. I used to be among them. It's the product of a general ignorance of what the United Way supports and the important role that the average United Way agency plays in trying to help people in difficult circumstances, invest in the future of children and improve our community as a whole.

While there are indeed bums who are more interested in panhandling than working, they are a mere fraction of the number of truly needy people who benefit from the services of United Way-funded agencies.

For those who have such a harsh (and arguably spiteful) view of the poor and downtrodden, I wish they could spend a year, a month or even just a week in their shoes. When you actually work with the poor (and try to help people out of the pit of poverty), your perspective drastically changes.

No, not that I am saying that your religious affiliated group will prosteylize to the people it is providing a service to, but others will, and I do not want my tax dollars supporting religious prosteylization. I see it as a clear violation of the constitution.

Allowing tax dollars to go to faith based charities opens the door for corruption, abuse, and blatant disregard for the 1st Amendment.

Corruption and abuse of tax dollars certainly isn't limited to "faith-based" charities. I can think of a few examples of corporate entities receiving tax dollars where the door has flung wide open to "corruption, abuse, and blatant disregard" for the American taxpayer.

I have serious questions about church groups receiving federal grants at all, and IF they're going to do so it must be made very clear that not a penny of the money is used for religious purposes. If your food pantry is having people praying or preaching to those recieving meals, you can't have public funding and need to stay private. I think it's fine, I think it's GREAT to give this message to people in need, but you can't use public funding to do it.

I never intended to indicate that corruption was limited to faith-based charities. However this discussion does center on those organizations. There is a possibility for corruption everywhere.

However the possibility of corruption with respect to faith based charities is also a violation of the consitution in my eyes.

I was only attempting to stay on topic and not open the discussion up to corruption in charitable organizations.

Fair enough. I was simply noting that it's not limited to religious institutions.