Comments on: Huckabee: Stimulus Bill is Anti-Religious

By: Barbara Buccola

Barbara Buccola — Mon, 16 Feb 2009 17:56:31 +0000

Dear “KITTY KATT”
The “Separation of Church and State” is not in the constitution. The phrase is from a letter written by Thomas Jefferson to the Danbury Baptist. It was really to keep the Govt out of the church, not the other way around.

@Kitty Katt

By: Michael Merritt

Michael Merritt — Mon, 16 Feb 2009 03:59:41 +0000

Really? It’s a big bill, so I couldn’t find any near reference to what you’re talking about, but maybe you can.

http://appropriations.house.gov/pdf/Recovery_Bill_Div_A.pdf
http://appropriations.house.gov/pdf/Recovery_Bill_Div_B.pdf

So where is the 1st amendment suppressing clause?

By: Jackie

Jackie — Mon, 16 Feb 2009 02:20:08 +0000

When he said it was anti-religious, it wasn’t that the bill in and of itself was anti-religious but that things in the bill were stopping freedom of religious practice. For example, as soon as this bill is signed, students in state funded colleges will technically no longer be able to have prayer groups in their dorms. Aren’t prayer groups just an exercise of our freedom of religion? Or do we no longer have inherent rights under Obama rule?

By: jkeisb

jkeisb — Fri, 13 Feb 2009 01:07:48 +0000

I am not gullible and can sense when something is fishy. But this news about the stimulus plan having an addendum about refusing funds to religious universities just raises the hair on the back of my neck. I can see where this administration is headed and it is certainly not for the betterment of society at large. Just to appease their itches that they up till now never could scratch and in the process leave in their wake a multitude of angry and disappointed voices and creating unnecessary turmoil. This cannot be. This must be brought to naught.

By: velda

velda — Thu, 12 Feb 2009 00:36:56 +0000

> With the House cramming so much “crap” into the bill it will inevitably lead to someone claiming “I didn’t get mine!”

Agreed… people are just going to be left wondering why The Government didn’t bother to save them.

By: c3

c3 — Wed, 11 Feb 2009 21:23:43 +0000

I went to the link (an article in Politico). The only specific was this:

“The former Republican presidential candidate pointed to a provision in both the House and Senate versions banning higher education funds in the bill from being used on a “school or department of divinity.””

Well, I’m not sure that this one thing makes the whole bill “anti-religious”. I do have to admit that insofar the a “department of divinity” as part of religious studies, this would suggest a certain “anti-religious” tone.

Frankly, whether the funding is in there or not, such funding categories shouldn’t be in an economic stimulus package. Funding or not funding divinity departments is not my idea of immediate economic stimulus. I’d have the same comment for “Women’s studies” departments or “Black Studies” departments.

With the House cramming so much “crap” into the bill it will inevitably lead to someone claiming “I didn’t get mine!”

By: Kitty Katt

Kitty Katt — Wed, 11 Feb 2009 17:42:27 +0000

Good!! The constitution seperates church from state. The churches have no business telling the government what laws to pass or we will be another Iran.