Faith-Based Groups and Public Funds

“High Court Likely Will Be Forced to Decide Church-State Boundary” (Jan. 30) states that Chief Justice William Rehnquist and Justices Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas support government neutrality so that no branch of government can favor or disfavor religion. Those of us committed to church-state separation truly wish that this interpretation were correct. If we look at their dissent in Lee vs. Weisman (1992), these three justices maintain that government bodies, at all levels, may show overt favoritism to religion over nonbelief. If they obtain just two more allies on the court, their view will become the law of the land. Then we will have a Supreme Court openly allowing all levels of government to turn nonbelievers into second-class citizens.

Justice Sandra Day O’Connor declares that no branch of government should be permitted to favor anyone because of the God or gods the person believes in or doesn’t believe in. If President Bush replaces her and Justice John Paul Stevens, this concept, embracing all Americans regardless of religious beliefs, will be nullified.

EDWARD TABASH, Chair

National Legal Committee

Americans United for Separation of Church and State, Beverly Hills

* Re “America’s Way Is to Help Thy Neighbor,” Commentary, Jan. 31: It is now an established fact that a patient’s personal faith plays a significant positive role in his or her ability to recover from illness. Furthermore, records show that this faith need not be in any one specific creed. If faith in a higher power plays an important role in physical healing, why not apply this same force to the heretofore intractable social problems our nation faces?

I endorse President Bush’s call for the inclusion of faith-based organizations in government-funded services to the poor and suffering.

MARIAN BLAKE

Winnetka

* The Republicans, who have been telling us for years that the government should get out of the business of giving aid to the poor, now want to give money to religious groups so that they can, guess what--give aid to the poor. It seems to me that if they want to give money to the poor, the most efficient way is to give money directly to the poor. Why do they need religious groups to act as disbursing agents for a government welfare program?

SANFORD THIER

Los Angeles