Post columnist E.J. Dionne Jr. is, among other things, a professional moderator of BBI panels (another D.C. term: "Boring But Important"). He was performing that role today. "Murray gave us our title for the day," said Dionne, referring to a throwaway line by Friedman: "God's floating crap game." Dionne then sucked up to DiIulio with a passion not seen since Bill Clinton left town (well, the White House). Dionne mentioned the Post profile and praised the "In Good Faith" report. "I think of this document as clearing the underbrush in this debate," said Dionne.
DiIulio, too, lavished praise on the report, calling it the most important document since the Hatfields and McCoys signed a truce. "I marvel at the fact that it only took three years," he said, having taken to the podium for a cameo after the formal presentation.
I have to agree with both guys. Any Washington debate that can be compressed into only 16 pages is something to be thankful for. And the three years of talk did produce some important points of agreement. "The government should not require a St. Vincent de Paul Center to be renamed Mr. Vincent de Paul," the report boldly declares. (The report still skirts the difficult issues, such as whether the Catholic Church can require Georgetown University to hang crucifixes on classroom walls.)
"We did a lot of suffering when writing this document," said Heidi Rolland Unruh, an FBO enthusiast. Still, even after three years, much disagreement remains over such things as whether there should be a charitable choice law in the first place.
This area is certainly fraught with perils inside conundrums, all expressed in parables. Unruh, who's a policy analyst at Evangelicals for Social Action, said that faith-based groups have to have the right to do things their way. They have to be able, she offered, to fire witches, even if they are doing a good job, and even if they are only answering the phones. "I think the receptionist is one of the most important jobs in an organization," said Unruh.
"We were not engaged in a mutual conversion enterprise," said the American Jewish Committee Richard T. Foltin. Foltin pointed out that there is an inherent conflict between the government's need to ensure that witches are employed and leaving an anti-witch church free to serve the community with money from the federal treasury, which, to be fair, is probably partly theirs anyway. Foltin also worries about religious symbols in social service settings and erosion of the separation of church and state.
In such moments, I couldn't help thinking: To hell with this FBO junk. Why not just double the tax cut to $3.2 trillion, cut government, and let people use their own money to help whomever they want?
Such unholy sentiments only grew as two religious social service providers said they were all for getting government money, especially if the pie is growing. Unlike Foltin, I started to fret less about the separation of church and state and more about the separation of me from my paycheck. The FBO initiative smells like just one more political scheme designed to get yet one more group -- pastors and congregations of small and mid-sized churches -- hooked on the government dole. Some things you can just take on faith.
Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time.
nfl jerseys|11.14.10 @ 9:22PM|#
jxfb