What is Digg?Sponsored by Best Buy
He sings, he strums, and he works at Best Buy. view!
youtube.com - Musician and Best Buy employee, Keith Parsons, rocks his Best Buy holiday campaign audition.
166 Comments
- AriKant, on 02/06/2009, -7/+181Why do we have any federally funded religious groups?
- radicaldementia, on 02/05/2009, -6/+77I am an atheist, and I can assure you that I could care less about someone's religion when I am feeding them to lions. The lions don't care either.
- thaprinze, on 02/06/2009, -1/+39You forgot this... "/s"
- Subiklim, on 02/06/2009, -1/+34First of all, the shouldn't be federally funded, secondly when they're not being federally funded, they should be able to hire whomever they want.
Follow the first rule, and you save a TON of taxpayer time, and allow congress and the president to work on FAR more pressing tasks. - soonermandan, on 02/06/2009, -5/+38Atheism is the only non-prophet organization.
- ThinkBox, on 02/06/2009, -24/+56Huffington Post - my favorite site on the net for non-partisan reporting and fair commentary! And it always has original content. Too bad it doesnt frontpage that often
- dapike624, on 02/05/2009, -18/+46This is a good thing, how well will the other half of the democracy take it?
- Cerialthriller, on 02/06/2009, -2/+29please stop spending my tax dollars on religion. its bad enough you spend it to bail out failing companies, enough is enough
- cowboy86, on 02/06/2009, -0/+24I don't think this means anything bad for Scientology.
But I can hope. - winterus, on 02/06/2009, -1/+22This is a joke right?
- idavidtang, on 02/06/2009, -8/+29Hey Digg community, it's my birthday today!
- StupotAce, on 02/06/2009, -0/+17Great. You just broke my sarcasm meter. Do you have any idea how much these things cost?
...jerk. - floridiot2, on 02/06/2009, -2/+18"Great, go to work. Who gives a *****"
-Patton Oswalt - legendofea, on 02/05/2009, -13/+29I just hope that the religious fanatics don't start getting any ideas....
- LawScholar, on 06/25/2009, -9/+23This is a welcome departure. I embrace the idea of free religion in the United States, though I don't practice personally, but I also embrace the concept of separating church and state. In my opinion Bush allowed religion to run his White House far too much.
- c010rb1indusa, on 02/06/2009, -1/+15New Rule: If religious organizations don't pay taxes, they can't receive federal funding. That sounds like a completely reasonable solution.
- BTime, on 02/06/2009, -1/+14Read the article. There's more to it than faith-based initiatives
- VitriolAndAngst, on 02/06/2009, -2/+13The simple way to deal with this is NO MONEY TO CHURCH's. There isn't any good way to do with without corrupting both.
IF something in our society needs fixing, then we should vote on it or our representatives should deal with it. We don't need to be having bake sales to rescue people stranded by Katrina or helping our service men get bicycles for their kids -- that is shameful. - BuzzFriendly, on 02/06/2009, -1/+12For something like this I look to Thomas Jefferson and his letter to the Danbury Baptist. Separation of Church and state. The philosophy was good then and would be good now. There is no reason to fund those organizations nor should they have any sort exemption from taxes. Let these religious group fund their own endeavors.
- blank816, on 02/06/2009, -1/+11church & state should be separate
synagogue & state should be seprate
mosque & state should be separate
temple & state should be separate
religion & government don't mix - HowitZer25, on 02/06/2009, -0/+10What the hell is my government doing?
- technolinguist, on 02/06/2009, -1/+11It's also an organization with no invisible means of support.
- jshhmr, on 02/06/2009, -8/+18It is time to start TAXING churches! Their asses have gotten a free ride long enough!
- emkaysmith, on 02/06/2009, -0/+9@alaocu -- I assume you're a Christian, because only a Christian would assume that atheism = persecution of Christians. I assure you, as a thorough atheist, I really don't care what you believe -- as long as you keep it to yourself and don't attempt to force it on me through avoidance of taxes on the money raised and invested by your congregation, or special legal privileges for your church, or demanding that my children study your scriptures or pray to your deities in school, or demanding that my children not be allowed to study real science because the facts offend you.
In other words, I'll mind my own business if you will. But experience shows you won't. - AlienMushroom, on 02/06/2009, -4/+12Oh really? You must have just joined Digg.
- BTime, on 02/06/2009, -1/+9Read the article
- silent128, on 02/06/2009, -0/+8I don't know how they could properly manage this. I am fine with giving any group money as long as its to help the community at large, but i see a lot of this money being used to push viewpoints instead of helping people. While i think its a good idea in theory i don't see it playing out correctly.
- Namakemono, on 02/06/2009, -0/+7*couldn't* care less even.
- inactive, on 02/06/2009, -1/+8Ya because Liberals have such a long record of suppressing cultural agendas.
Yours wins the backwards ass comment of the day award. Turn around, your heads up your ass. - alricsca, on 02/06/2009, -3/+9No entity that receives my money should be allowed to discriminate against me or anyone else for that matter. No matter how you feel about a group to which you might belong, imagine a group to which you do not doing such a thing. As a general rule, I am not in support of religious groups get government money, but at the very least such money should only be used to pay for programs that stay within federal and state employment and anti discrimination laws.
- groo68, on 02/06/2009, -1/+7Does the government fund all religions equally or just christian/catholic religions?
- CylonsOfTheLamb, on 02/06/2009, -1/+7The government doesn't fund ANY religions. The government does partially fund certain activities by religious groups. Church based soup kitchens for feeding the homeless can receive assistance funds from the government. Church based schools can receive funds.
Community based initiatives also fall under the umbrella of the faith based initiative program. The health clinic providing free or low cost immunizations for children in low income families gets some of it's funds from the faith based initiative program.
Seven federal agencies (Justice, Labor, Health and Human Services, Housing and Urban Development, Education, Agriculture, and USAID) receive funds for distributing to community groups under the faith based initiative program.
Calling it Faith Based Initiative is misleading, because it's not about religion. It just so happens that a lot of the grass roots community programs are organized, started, and financed by religious groups. The government is simply acknowledging that the efforts of those groups are having a positive effect, and it's sharing some of the financial burden with them. - groo68, on 02/06/2009, -3/+9I'm an atheist and I dont want to feed them to the lions, i want to save them from themselves.
- inactive, on 02/06/2009, -0/+6This is not your opinion, it is recorded fact.
- stuffradio, on 02/06/2009, -1/+7He's not spending it on Religion.
FTA "Obama's advisers want to be certain tax dollars sent to the faith-based social service groups are used for secular purposes, such as feeding the hungry or housing the homeless, and not for religious evangelism."
You should have no problems with this. - SQLserver, on 02/06/2009, -8/+14Come on, Obama just get rid of this ridiculous faith based crap altogether.
Just think: The money that goes to the fanatical churches(or rather, the money they save) will be funneled into anti-Science and anti-homosexual hate activities.
(And considering the KKK is a conservative religious organization, possibly racist hate activities, too)
It is a disgrace that America is funding any faith based organizations, let alone the hateful ones. - tdempsey, on 02/06/2009, -1/+6I would digg this but I have to question Huffington as a source...
- Broschati, on 02/06/2009, -1/+6I believe that the faith based groups would be reaching out to the community through acts of community service and social aid. I don't think Obama intends for this to become some sort of conversion-machine or anything of the like. While I don't necessarily agree, I think he's making this decision with the best of intentions.
- PaisleyTeal, on 02/06/2009, -1/+6come over here so i can give you a spanking. ;o)
- KevekKerinth, on 02/06/2009, -2/+7I believe in Obama, and don't see a problem with this, though I myself am agnostic.
However, I would like to point out, being nit-picky, that the quote "There is no god who condones taking the life of an innocent human being" is just plain wrong. Obama has forgotten his Greek pantheon, and a dozen other religions. There are plenty of deities that don't give any value toward human life. - mst3kcrow, on 02/06/2009, -0/+5It's not a request.
- k3rfuffl3, on 02/06/2009, -0/+4I was under the impression they give all non-profit groups major tax breaks. If they're giving certain religious groups anything more than that it should definitely end.
- vexingmodstwo, on 02/06/2009, -1/+5Awesome.
- inactive, on 02/06/2009, -1/+5"Legal and Financial Separation IV: the state should not fund non-religious activities sponsored by religious organizations"
"* Separation of State Authority II: the state should not attempt to endorse or criticize any religious belief or practice."
"* Separation of State Authority IV: No state action should have the primary effect of engaging in religious practice. Any such appearance of a state religious practice must be unintentional and coincidental."
"Separation of State Authority VI: the state should not express any religious beliefs, or in any publication, speech, or other implement of state power such as currency, sworn testimony, oath of fealty to the state, or endorsements of national pride. The state should not imply any derivation of authority from any religious authority, nor should it express temporal supremacy in relation to religious belief or practice."
"* Separation of Religious Authority III: no church should actively endorse any political figure, and should confine itself to moral, ethical, and religious teaching. - secrity, on 02/07/2009, -0/+4Giving tax money to any religious group for any reason is wrong. The government should not be supporting the work of any "faith based" group.
- VitriolAndAngst, on 02/06/2009, -1/+5The Christian's were fed to lions in the Roman Empire.
Then it became the Holy Roman Empire and they threw the heathens to the Lions.
That may or may not be progress -- but that wasn't a history ascribed to Atheists.
Atheism doesn't preach anything. It isn't any sort of organization. So, crazies can join -- anybody. It's like blaming a group of people who believe in Gravity for anything that goes wrong -- is NOT believing in Gravity going to solve anything? - Manther, on 02/06/2009, -1/+5That means that Atheists are free to practice non-religion, or whatever you'd call it, without being persecuted as well. If religious groups would actually practice what they preach (turn the other cheek, love thy neighbor, be a good person and get into heaven......etc.) there probably wouldn't be an issue. As it is, far too many religious groups don't. You worry about your soul, and I'll worry about mine. As long as we're not causing harm to each other, it shouldn't matter what Gods we may or may not pray to....
- Manther, on 02/06/2009, -0/+4That is funny, especially since both groups would be better off.... scratch that, the whole world would be better off, if you worried about yourselves, and not about everyone else....
- KimmyGibbler, on 02/06/2009, -0/+4Actually no, the number of Diggs does; and you can comment without Digging. I know this because I just did
-
Show 51 - 100 of 171 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is