PRESIDENT Bush recently announced his plan to issue an executive order opening up billions of dollars to faith-based programs. Bush's support of such institutions is based on his own experience of overcoming an alcohol addiction through religious conviction ("Bush Courts Black Voters," The Washington Post, Jan. 15). He claims the government should not discriminate against those organizations which have religious affiliations. However, in order to fairly administer funds to faith-based organizations, these programs need to prove their openness to all religions and maintain the primary goal of benefiting the community as a whole.
At the University, religiously affiliated groups may obtain contracted independent organization status. In the 1995 case of Rosenberger v. University of Virginia, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that Wide Awake Productions, a religious publication, was eligible to receive funds from student activities fees citing the First Amendment's freedom of speech. Both the Board of Visitors and Student Council chair the distribution of this money. Most students consider both of these institutions to be fair and democratic -- no different from the government of the United States. Therefore, if our university, a public institution, can support organizations that are religiously motivated, so can our federal government.
The separation of church and state is not violated unless the government gives funds to churches, temples or other places of worship for the sole purpose of prayer or evangelistic motivations. The government should not support evangelists with intentions of expanding their constituency. At the University, for example, the Catholic Student Ministry has a strong religious affiliation, but it is dedicated to helping the University community and remains open to all other religions. Granted, most of the participants do practice Catholicism -- yet, their communal relations and non-discriminatory practices make it acceptable to receive University funds.
University policy on CIO status does not outlaw religious connections as long as membership is not restricted by reason of religion. This rule maintains a principle of openness, but it is not completely effective. Instead, a religious organization should prove both religious tolerance and a sincere dedication to help the University through its actions and explicit goals.
An organization merely carrying a religious affiliation is not the same as a church institution practicing prayer. This distinction is crucial to upholding the principles of separation of church and state. Although a church may help the community, it is a place of prayer which is concerned mostly with fostering religious togetherness.
Religion is an important part of many Americans' lives. Everyone has the right to hold a religious affiliation and therefore should not be discriminated against. Religion should not be an automatic trigger for organizations to receive no government funding. The University uses democratic measures for these concerns and promotes religious organizations that are not only open, but also benefit the community.
Yet, agreeing with President Bush ends at financially supporting faith-based institutions. Bush believes most of the nation's problems are those of the heart. By funding religious-based programs, Bush hopes this nation's problems can be cured. Religion may have helped Bush through his alcohol problems, but it definitely is not helping him lead this country. Religion must not be glamorized or taken into account when answering our country's problems, because the separation of church and state is violated. The government cannot support a certain religion or use religion as an answer, because everyone in this nation does not hold religious beliefs. There is no problem when the government funds programs that help the community through a religious affiliation -- but this philosophy should not be applied to America's many foreign political or economic problems.
In order to make this distinction and prove faith-based program funding effective, two measures must be implemented to make the process fair and democratic. As seen in the University's CIO policy, the government must first assure the program is open to everyone, no matter religion, race, sex or gender. Second, the program's goals must be evaluated. Is this faith-based institution attempting to convert individuals or promoting the community's well-being under the auspices of a religious affiliation? If the primary goal is to help all individuals, as proven in the Wide Awake court case, the program is eligible for funding. The University should also look at this second standard and verify religious organizations' goals on Grounds. These two standards ensure an effective environment where the government can fund religious programs without breaking the church and state barrier.
(Michael Behr's column appears Wednesdays in The Cavalier Daily. He can be reached at mbehr@cavalierdaily.com.)
Read More
PARTING SHOT: On the art of walking and chewing gum
By Nathan Onibudo | YesterdayStudent journalism, and maybe even life more generally, is about holding space for multiple conflicting truths.
PARTING SHOT: Confessions of a nepo baby
By Grace Thrush | 2 days agoWhile I can’t point to one specific “aha” moment where I finally started to dispel my self-consciousness and claim my pride for the paper, I got there gradually over the course of my term as managing editor.
PARTING SHOT: Asked and answered
By Honor Wood | 2 days agoLooking back, the answer has been abundantly clear all along. I did it for the people.
