Reply #20: We fund "arts" for the greater good so we should fund churches? [View All]

[bluedawg12]

Church do good for the community.

But, other than the issue of monitoring how the funds are used, are they for the poor, housing, shelters, food drives,etc. there are other problems more subtle than actually seeing whee the money went?

There is another problem, arts speak with no authority, churches claim to represent another authority and, in fact, in civil life many now claim their church speaks with a higher authority than man made laws. Ex cathedra, so to speak.

So, while art may be jingoistic, patriotic, or even subversive, it does not speak in any real organized way and it does not speak with a moral authority rivaling law.

I don't argue that churches don't do good, but I do argue that their good acts reflects on themselves and ties in with proselytizing.

Ultimately you can get an accounting of how many items for the poor were provided by federal funds given to a church but you can not monitor the message from the pulpit.

I remember that in our community,the parish priest told voters that they should vote for shrub, and that good people of faith could not for a man who believed in abortion. How do you monitor that speech and the power that he gained from tax payers money that made him and his church important to the needy. You cannot.

There are NGO's, but they should not include tax payers money to RO's- let the faithful do their duty with their donations.