Does Bush's religious faith inappropriately dictatate policy

the crusades all over again

Quote:

Does George W. Bush's religious faith inappropriately dictate policy?

Yes. Church and state are supposed to be separated.

No. What's wrong with bringing morality to the White House?

COMMENT:

Just what does Dubya's "faith" have to do with "bringing morality" to the White House?

i have faith that there is no morality in the white house

Dubya often covers up the shallowness of his policies by cloaking them in a mantra of religiousity. This type of cover-up was perfected by another Republican president, Ronald Reagan.

Sad thing that the majority of the country buys into this rubbish.

Perhaps the Bush Faith Based initiatives reflect Laura's religious point of view and of course the religious are right.

Religion the scourge of mankind has found it's way to the seat of power in a form of an evangelist preacher called George the younger. Religion has never done anything for mankind but create divisiveness, war, killing, ethnic cleansing, massacres and etc. It is not Eve's eating of the apple or the opening of Pandora's box that brought evil to the world. It was mans obsession with religion. Now we have sitting in the White House a religious freak who is intent on using his power in the name of that evil.

um well i tend to think of the religions right as the religious wrong

au, You forgot to mention, that the intent also includes 1) killing inocent Iraqis, 2) spending billions for a war that can be better spent at home to a) improve our infrastructure, b) improve our schools, c) improve our health care, d) feed and house the homeless, and e) help other poor countries with food and health care, and 3) he ignores the peacemakers of the world. c.i.

whats-his-name, our current president, gives any speech in the cadence of a bible-thumping minister. he appeals to those who do not trust and accept that it is human to have natural proclivity toward darkness. in other words, we feel hate, anger, lust, but we don't necessarily act upon it. he uses his christianity in the most superficial and controlling sense of the word.

hard for me to opine since i have an attitude to begin with regarding religion of all makes and models.

Joanne

You wrote: "Perhaps the Bush Faith Based initiatives reflect Laura's religious point of view and of course the religious are right."

COMMENT:

Could you flesh that out a bit.

Drawing on the divine
Listening to President Bush's religious rhetoric, some Americans may wonder if they elected a president or a pastor. Critics describe his use of explicitly Christian language and imagery as divisive and exclusionary. But many who share Bush's evangelical brand of Christianity point out that presidents throughout history have given voice to their faith, some far more pointedly. Evangelical leaders see a man who not only talks the talk but walks the walk. "President Bush is comfortable using the language of faith," says Richard Land, head of the Southern Baptist Convention's Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission, "because it's who he is."


http://www.usnews.com/usnews/issue/030310/usnews/10bush.b.htm

Here's a link to GWBush's "Scoreboard of Evil." It's backed up by our major media. http://www.wage-slave.org/scorecard.html
c.i.

"because it's who he is." pretty scary

I don't think our government should be giving money to churches, for any reason. In the past churches have never had a problem raising funds to do what they're supposed, care for the widows and their children. So, what are the churches doing with the money raised by donation?

I've only lived in TX for 3 years, but in Michigan the churches were growing to be gigantic, offering indoor tennis courts, workout rooms, basketball, not to mention counseling and adult ed classes -- all without govment money. What goes?

A second topic here is the war question. Welll, we aren't fighting a war as of yet, but Saddam is getting rid of some weapons. We do seem to have, for the first time, international checks & balances.

I think you all are way off base. I am no apologist for GWB or his adminstration. I think it is attacking his religion is wrong.

First of all, Bush, like the rest of us, has the right to choose his own religion. Like the rest of us, his religious beliefs will inform his values and perhaps give him inspiration. This does not at all interfere with or contradict his duties to uphold the constitution and act as our commander and chief.

The Constitution insists that freedom of religion is protected and that no state religion is established. Only the most politically biassed among us will argue that this is happening. Bush should be granted the same freedom.

As president Bush must make decisions about the polices and values he will support. Any one of us will be informed by our faith. This is not a constitutional problem.

You may not like his religion. Don't argue he shouldn't be in the White House because of it.

Secondly, Bush is responsible for his policies actions regardless of his religion. I personally feel his mad rush into war is horrible. I also think his science policies are harmful. I oppose these policies regardless of his religion.

It is interesting to note the head of Bush's denomination opposes the war.

It is far too easy to attack a person based on his religion. There is never an excuse for this. It never adds to the discussion. Please stick to the real issues.

Brown
No one cares whether he has religion or not. What many do not appreciate is his following the dictates of his religion in the fulfilling the duties of the office of president. The US is a secular nation with separation of church and state being a defining principal

brown, what au said.

ebrown_p- I have no problem with Bush practicing his religion. What I DO object to is that many of the decisions that he has made are obviously geared towards spreading the precepts of his particular religion to the rest of us!