"Bringing faith to the West Wing" and "Base language"

Readers react to Salon's coverage of Bush's faith-based charities plan.

Feb 5, 2001 | Read "Bringing faith to the West Wing" by Bruce Shapiro.

As an evangelical Christian, I share Bruce Shapiro's concerns regarding Bush's plans to give federal funds to programs run by religious organizations. After all, it wasn't for nothing that Jesus warned us that you can't serve both God and money.

-- David P. Graf

Bruce Shapiro nailed it. Everything he predicted in his article will come to pass. What's worse -- to me anyway as a Christian -- it will cause further harm to Christianity.

The fundamentalists, particularly the ones who marry their faith to the Republican Party, do not represent the larger body of Christianity. They are a vocal, very small minority who have achieved a power grab. So now their views are in the forefront of the public gestalt due to the "Left Behind" fiction series and the bended knee of the Republican Party (just whose doobies have the fundies got in their grip anyway?), and so they become the de facto voice of Christianity for now.

Christianity is about loving one another and loving God, not political agendas and listing whom "God hates" (only fundies use those words together). But, after this "faith-based charity programs" initiative, and all the resultant scandals that will happen, the main body of Christianity will receive a black eye due to the actions of its snotty, sociopath little brother, American fundamentalism. And that really sucks.

-- Tim Hanson

Hey, let's give him a chance.

I didn't vote for the guy, and until he suggested giving the folks who are already providing charitable care for those in need a helping dollar or two, I was hoping he'd fall on his face.

But I've seen the so-called welfare agencies in action, and I've seen federally funded social agencies try to do well by doing good. Churches and temples, on the other hand, usually with much less money to work with, have an added ingredient. They have people working who really care.

My grandfather once told me that in the Depression, neighbors helped each other, and you gave a man a job in exchange for money. Whether it was a job that you had to have done was beside the point. What was important was that the man be able to hold his head up, and also to know that someone cared.

I know it's cool to be a cynic, and believe me, I'm pretty jaded myself. But I'd like to see this idea get at least a fair try. As far as I'm concerned, there is a lot of need out there, and things can't get much worse.

-- Dacia Adams

When I was a teenager, I was in a Baptist youth group that would "volunteer" at a homeless mission. Our volunteer work consisted of us standing in front of a group of homeless men and singing "praise songs" for an hour followed by a long sermon. I felt so sorry for the men who had to be subjected to this every night before they could have a hot meal.

The idea that this kind of activity is now going to be sponsored by government funds completely burns me up. It is in no way constitutional, no matter what kind of language is used to describe it.

-- Jenifer Geiger

Right now 62 percent of Catholic Charities' budget of over $2 billion comes from some form of governmental agency, be it state, local or federal.

Get a grip -- faith-based organizations do a better job at helping the poor. And if I have to write a check to the federal government by way of taxes to fund some program, I would rather see a program that has results than one administered by the feds.

Look at the low-income housing problem, the Bureau of Indian Affairs, the Federal Aviation Agency, etc. Government stinks at doing things -- the liberals can't stand it because after eight years of a president who did little for the poor we finally do have one that cares.

-- Risa Kaplan

Next Page: "Isn't faith-based just Bush speak for faith-biased?"

• View blog reactions