Liberals work? When did that start?

The messages you are viewing are archived/old.
To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select the boards given in left menu

My biggest fear is coming true right before my eyes.  America is becoming a theocracy.

First Bush nominates Harriet Miers for a lifetime appointment simply because she shares his faith and not because she's a qualified lawyer. Now, they're targeting Head Start.  This is a clear signal that America no longer has tolerance for freedom of religion, and if you don't believe in the *right* one, you WILL be discriminated against, you won't get federal assistance, and you may lose your job. What's next?

Tens of thousands of already at-risk children could lose their teachers. And Head Start could lose thousands of parent volunteers essential to the success of the program merely because those parents do not share the religious beliefs of the host federally funded religious organization, the group said in a statement on their Web site. From http://us.oneworld.net/article/view/120566/1/

Head Start Can Make Hiring Decisions Based on Religion, Says U.S. House

Niko Kyriakou
OneWorld US

Mon., Oct. 17, 2005

SAN FRANCICSO, Oct 16 (OneWorld) - An amendment to the new funding bill for Head Start promotes discrimination on religious grounds and would deal a devastating blow to some one million low-income children and their parents who are dependent on the program, according to a large and varied coalition of U.S. organizations.

Late last month, the Republican-led House of Representatives voted 231-184 in favor of the so-called School Readiness Act, which renews funding for the anti-poverty preschool program Head Start.

Wide bipartisan support for the bill's reauthorization through 2011 melted down after the attachment of politically charged amendment, introduced by Rep. Charles W. Boustany, Jr., (R-Louisiana), and Rep. John A. Boehner, (R-Ohio).

The added provision allows federally funded Head Start centers with religious affiliations to hire and fire workers and parent volunteers based on religious grounds. A similar bill approaching a Senate vote does not yet include any such amendment.

In 2004, Head Start served about 900,000 children on a budget of $6.775 billion.

Teachers and staff working at Head Start programs housed in religious organizations could immediately be fired because of their religion, said the democratic values advocacy group People for the American Way.

Tens of thousands of already at-risk children could lose their teachers. And Head Start could lose thousands of parent volunteers essential to the success of the program merely because those parents do not share the religious beliefs of the host federally funded religious organization, the group said in a statement on their Web site.

The yes vote marks the first time that the House of Representatives has voted to repeal civil rights protections in a floor amendment without committee hearings, debate, and testimony from experts.

Representative Boehner, chairman of the House education committee, explained the amendment, saying that he wants to ensure faith-based organizations can compete for federal Head Start grants without surrendering their constitutionally protected right to take religion into account in their hiring practices.

President Bush also argued in support of the bill.

Such provisions should be applied to all federally funded social service programs, so that faith-based organizations may operate on an equal level with secular organizations in competing to provide services that are funded by Head Start, said a White House statement, released just before the bill came before the House.

But hundreds of civil rights, labor, women, and religious rights advocacy groups say religious institutions already have equal access to funding as secular organizations, and disagree that the constitution protects the right to consider religion when hiring for federally funded programs.

Current law requires Head Start providers to comply with federal policies that prohibit discrimination on the basis of race, creed, color, national origin, sex, political affiliation or beliefs, according to the Unitarian Universalist Association of Congregations.

The Boehner Amendment would create an exception for religious organizations, the group said in a statement opposing the bill released after the House vote last month.

Our concern is that if such a provision were passed into law, the same opportunities to participate in the lives of their children and their children's education would not be available to parents of minority religions, the coalition of some 1,050 congregations said.

Under current law, religious organizations and houses of worship, which administer more than five percent of all Head Start programs, are only allowed to consider religion as a hiring factor when using their own private money.

The original non-discrimination requirements were signed into law by President Richard Nixon back in 1972, and President Ronald Reagan approved the current anti-discrimination language in 1981.

For many groups, the program's 33-year history of bipartisan support makes the Boustany/Boehner amendment a particularly unfortunate addition.

Head Start should be about putting qualified teachers in the classrooms, and not about using public money to require people to pass a religious litmus test, said Caroline Fredrickson, director of the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) in their Washington Legislative Office.

The success of Head Start is based on its commitment to helping underprivileged students and not pushing a political agenda, she said.

Head Start provides children from low-income families and under the age of five with academic preparation, socialization, nutrition, health, parental involvement, and family support, and currently serves about 60 percent of eligible 3-to-5-year-olds. It is not part of the federal welfare program.

Some 50 groups known as long-time supporters of the Head Start program have also come out against the bill, including the National Head Start Association (NHSA), the advocacy organization that supports and conducts trainings for Head Start providers.

In a statement released September 23, NHSA president and CEO Sarah Green praised many of the bill's provisions but said her group opposed the bill due to the Boustany/Boehner amendment because children shouldn't be taught that discrimination is a good thing--just because Congress favors it.

Many of these groups worry that the amendment associates the government with promotion of a religious mission, and removes safeguards that protect the program's beneficiaries from unwanted proselytizing. It also de-emphasizes the quality of care, according to Americans United, a religious liberty watchdog group based in Washington.

Publicly funded programs ought to hire the best qualified applicant, says Rev. Barry W. Lynn, executive director of the group.

Why on earth would we encourage discrimination in a tax-funded program? It's simply unacceptable, he said.

Lynn pointed out that since Head Start does not teach religion, there is no need for religious groups to engage in discriminatory hiring practices.

Many of the groups opposing the bill, such as the National Education Association (NEA), a 2.7-million-member organization, actually supported much of the legislation.

For example, groups like NEA were pleased that the School Readiness Act does not allow for block granting of Head Start funds to states.

Many were also happy that the bill would align Head Start curricula with K-12 education while preserving the non-academic services provided by the program.

The new bill forces Head Start centers to compete for grants as well, and addresses concerns over cases of financial waste in the program that have surfaced nationwide by requiring greater disclosure of how money is spent.

But many groups took issue with aspects of the Readiness Act besides the Boustany/Boehner amendment.

For example, the NEA voiced concern that the bill would require teachers to have higher academic degrees, without providing for a substantial increase in funding either for professional development or compensation.

HR 2123 also does not suspend the National Reporting System, which the Government Accountability Office recently identified as unacceptable given its focus on math, literacy and language testing but not social and emotional development.

Charges that the introduction of the Boustany/Boehner amendment was politically motivated take credence from an unlikely source.

David Kuo, former Deputy Director of the White House Office of Faith-Based and Community Initiatives, testified before the House Government Reform Subcommittee on Criminal Justice, Drug Policy, and Human Resources last June, stating: [M]any members of the president's own party expressed equal parts apathy and antipathy towards this agenda. Money for the poor? Why, it will just get wasted, they said. We just need to cut the funds and let the private sector take over. We don't need more funds, all we really need to do is make sure that we have a huge political fight over religious charities' right to hire and fire based on their own faith. That way, as I have heard time and time again, Republicans will be seen as fighting for religions and Democrats will be seen as fighting against it.
 

You are definitely the chosen people:  Chosen to be banned from heaven.  This is what the people who pretend to support you really believe.  And it must be true, because according to them, you and I will be spending eternity together, and no doubt that will be hell for us both.

Jerry Falwell: Jews and Muslims Can't Go to Heaven

I would mess with you about the foot channel, but since you took the time to agree with me, I'll let it go this time. 

MEOW

to speak to an American when we get phone calls or call a place and get an ESL on the line.  Maybe if we refuse to speak to them....they might realize they need to hire some Americans.

But they're outnumbered by neocons who are more like roaches than people.  They're nasty, keep multiplying, aren't very nice to be around, are very hard to get rid of and are just creepy and disgusting.

 This is a good read. Would be funny if not so true.

http://www.commondreams.org/views06/0610-23.htm

http://www.badbush.com/war_pres.html

Also click on the ***back to main page*** link. 

who repeatedly say that Palin has hurt McCain.  I think some people are obviously put off my Sarah Palin but others find her refreshing.  The media is generally more liberal and so we obviously hear more about how she hurts McCain than helps, but I think she is doing great.  I think they make a great team.  You could say that Biden hurts Obama especially with some of the boneheaded things he has said but you don't hear people continually bringing that all.  Nope....it is always Sarah.

I saw an interview with that Rothschild woman yesterday.  She stated that she is not only is voting for McCain and Palin, even though she is a major democrat, but she is also going around and talking to many democrats who are not so extreme left as Obama.  They too are voting for McCain.  She would not name names but there are many democrats who do not want to go so extreme left.  You might be surprised at the outcome of this election.  It will most definitely be close either way.

I never call Republicans any of those names and I don't like it when Republicans use the same derogatory names for liberals.  I don't like Ann Coulter because I just think she uses her intelligence for fear and hate mongering, but that's just me.

When people of any ideologic viewpoint call each other names, it diminishes their own standing, imo.  Use your words, people!  Stop name calling and have intelligent debates about the issues.  That's much more fun anyway.  And I've never seen Ann Coulter be able to do that, hence my dislike for her.

have spoken out about the war in Iraq over and over and over again and just recently there was an attack on a military recruiting center by a man who said the reason for his attack was for "political and religious" reasons and his disagreement over military operations.  Gee....sounds to me like he did something because he kept hearing the libs on TV disagreeing with military operations in Iraq. Hmmm....if you want to spin something, it can be spinned both ways.....just remember that.

The only people to blame are the people who do the crime.  I can't blame libs for this guy opening fire on a recruiting center just as you can't blame Bill O'Reilly for that nut job who opened fire on Tiller.  So give it up, give me break, and get a clue.

feel a scintilla of sympathy for them, they lunge at ya with the retracted lips and missing, yellowed teeth.

People can raise this question over and over again but what I would like to know is this:  Has anyone ever raised the same questions regarding white candidates in this and/or past elections and why people voted for them? Of course not...I wouldn't care if Obama were multicolored - people are going to vote for whomever they choose and I for one am weary of the constant references to race...

Even mr. So? cheney admitted they were going to do it whatever the results of inspections were, let people drown in Katrina, let the terrorists kill 2000 people -- but dodge that shoe, and my, my what a great leader you are.  Groan.  I am so glad the majority of citizens woke up.

Even mr. So? cheney admitted they were going to do it whatever the results of inspections were, let people drown in Katrina, let the terrorists kill 2000 people -- but dodge that shoe, and my, my what a great leader you are.  Groan.  I am so glad the majority of citizens woke up.