Editor,
I never thought I’d ever agree with Jeremy Reynalds on anything political, but he’s right about keeping government and faith-based charities separate.
First of all, where there is financing, there is control. When the federal government started offering highway funds to the states, a few old-timers warned that federal control would follow, and they were dismissed as paranoid. Then we had a decades-long experiment with the national speed limit, enforced through fear of losing federal highway funds. National drunk driving laws — as good as those might be — soon followed.
With any sole-source funding, you lose the flexibility needed to go at it alone. You end up watching the shifting moods of your funding agency as carefully as Little Orphan Annie’s friends watched Miss Hannigan. Anyone who has ever been financially dependent on another person or agency knows that.
Finally, I’ve seen grass-roots charities, founded by individuals and small groups, flourish, while the organizations which exist to lobby politicians produce little except direct-mail solicitations. The Rape Crisis Center, the Shelter for Victims of Domestic Violence, the Displaced Homemakers’ program and several others were all founded locally and individually and became recognized social services only after they had proved themselves, and we get true value for our donations.
For all those reasons — even ignoring the separation of church and state — I agree with Reynalds. The government should not fund or be involved in faith-based charities.
-Patricia Mathews
Daily Lobo reader
