Bush-lite Obama sells out Constitution on ‘faith-based’ issues

A 2005 diary of his on The Orange Pseudoliberal Monster talks about how he’s OK with government-backed, Republican-created “faith-based” initiatives:

I think the whole “centrist” versus “liberal” labels that continue to characterize the debate within the Democratic Party misses the mark. … I do think that being bold involves more than just putting more money into existing programs and will instead require us to admit that some existing programs and policies don't work very well. And further, it will require us to innovate and experiment with whatever ideas hold promise (including market- or faith-based ideas that originate from Republicans). (Emphasis added.)

But, he is probably backing a one-trick pony.

Over at Free Inquiry, Tom Flynn says that in 40 years, maybe less, nobody will even remember the “faith-based initiative.”

The magazine has a more in-depth takedown of Democrats’ kowtowing to the Religious Right’s attempt to enter government by the back door on this issue, too.

Hillary Clinton sees no contradiction between “our constitutional principles” and “faith-based initiatives.” And Barack Obama depicted faith-based programs as a “uniquely powerful way of solving problems,” especially for substance abusers.

I can refute Obama directly on that one.

A boatload of longitudinal studies show that Alcoholics Anonymous, the original “faith-based program” for substance abuse, is no more successful for long-term sobriety, than other treatment, self-help or group support modalities.

For more, see my refutation of Arianna Huffington.

Of course, Obama doesn’t stop there, as he also sounds Republican-like in setting up this straw man:

Barack Obama claims to be “a devout Christian” and asserts that “secularists are wrong when they ask believers to leave their religion at the door before entering into the public square.”

First, here’s a very good riposte:

National Organization for Women president Kim Gandy complained, “I don’t want a progressive evangelical movement any more than I want the conservative one we have right now.”

And, here’s an even more telling one — The Constutution:

“No religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.”

I believe “public Trust” would include any entity getting government funds.

In addition to all the other reasons not to vote for Obama, such as concerns about how liberal he is, this one has weighed hard in my mind for quite some time.

That said, as Free Inquiry also notes, Obama is far and away from being alone among Democratic leaders on this issue.