Tips For Writing

On July 17, THE DAY THAT COUNTS campaign hopes to mobilize hundreds of thousands of Atheists, Freethinkers, Humanists and others of "no belief" to flood Capitol Hill with a loud, clear message -- we oppose public funding of faith-based social programs! We are asking you, as one of the 27 million Americans who has no religious belief, to contact your elected officials, speak out against this legislation and stand up and be COUNTED!

Here's how you can help...

• Send a fax or "snail mail" to your Congressional Representative and U.S. Senator, or make a personal phone call. We suggest sending your letters so that they arrive on or near July 17.

• Officials receive millions of e-mail messages every year. Unfortunately, e-mail does not carry the "weight" or impact which personal letters -- especially when handwritten -- do. Faxes are given more consideration than e-mail, but less than regular postal communications.

• Be sure to include your name, return address and phone number in your letter. Sign your letter at the bottom.

• Be polite and concise. Tell your elected representative that you oppose public funding of faith-based social programs. (Check out "Talking Points" section for background). We suggest that your letter not exceed more than one or two pages in length, at the maximum.

• Ask your Representative or Senator to respond, and give his or her position on this important constitutional and legislative issue.

(continue)

Contact Congress You don't know your representative's postal mailing address? Not the fax number either? The links in this section will help you find this information. Capitol Advantage runs congress.org. The site has current information on how to contact your federal (and state) representatives. Enter your zip code in the box below and click "go". The Whitehouse, the US Senate and the House of Representatives each have their own web sites. FirstGov is a web portal for US Government websites.

• Consider including some of the following points in your letter...
  • Public funding of faith-based social programs violates the constitutional separation of church and state, and forces millions of Americans who are Atheists, Agnostics, Freethinkers and others with no religious beliefs to fund organized religion.
  • Already, there is evidence that "public" money cannot be separated from the religious mission of many groups eager to accept government funding for faith-based social programs.
  • Faith-based initiatives and "partnerships" allow groups to discriminate in hiring and other practices on the basis of religious belief.
  • Evidence is lacking to support claims that faith-based social programs are more effective than their secular counterparts. Even if these programs WERE more effective, though, they still amount to the imposition of a "Religion Tax" on the American people.

Together, we can defend the First Amendment separation of church and state. Stand up and be COUNTED!

see below for a sample letter

Background, "Talking Points" On The Faith-Based Initiative

"Because religious belief, or non-belief, is such an important part of every person's life, freedom of religion affects every individual. State churches that use government power to support themselves and force their views on persons of other faiths undermine all our civil rights."

-- Letter to the Virginia Baptists, 1808
Thomas Jefferson

In January, 2001, newly elected President George W. Bush signed two Executive Orders creating a new White House Office of Faith-Based and Community Initiatives, and ordering major U.S. government agencies to establish their own offices in order to further involve religious groups in the operation of social programs. Enabling legislation has been introduced in the U.S. House of Representatives and the Senate which expands so-called "charitable choice," and encourages through tax incentives and other public policy donations to private and religious institutions.

While Bush's proposal has attracted considerable scrutiny, a number of states and even municipalities are already operating "faith-based partnerships" with religious groups. Public money -- your money -- is given to social agencies and outreaches operated by churches and other sectarian organizations.

The programs violate the constitutional separation of church and state! The First Amendment of our Constitution -- which includes the "establishment clause" -- was designed by the Founders of our nation to end a practice rampant in early Colonial times. Then, an "official church" was often supported by public funds. One usually had to be a member of this institution in order to exercise certain rights such as owning property or holding an office of public trust. Thomas Jefferson was a vehement opponent of "established" churches, and in 1786 drafted the historic Act for Establishing Religious Freedom. It declared that in Virginia, "no man shall be compelled to frequent or support any religious worship, place or ministry whatsoever, nor shall be enforced, restrained, molested, or burdened in his body or goods, nor shall otherwise suffer on account of his religious opinions of belief..."

The Day That Counts! takes the position that NO American -- including the millions who profess no belief in religious creeds or deities -- should be taxed to support any program of any church, temple or mosque.

The faith-based initiative and other legislation is dismantling the few controls which exist concerning the way religious groups may use public money.

A provision in the 1996 Personal Responsibility and Accountability Act permitted churches and other religious groups to compete with secular agencies for government contracts in order to administer social service programs, all the while without having to surrender or compromise their religious character. Prior to this, there were some token regulations which paid lip service to the notion that none of the public money being given to a church or other faith-based institution could be used for religious worship, proselytizing or materials. There was minimal over sight and accountability.

The faith-based initiative will only make this bad situation worse! A few religious groups and leaders such as Jerry Falwell oppose the Bush program, fearing that with government money will come regulations and demands for financial accounting. They have no qualms about compelling taxpayers to fund sectarian outreaches; but their attitude seems to be "we'll take the money only if no questions are asked..."

Claims that faith-based social programs are more successful and cost effective than secular counterparts lack credible evidence. Even supporters of these outreaches increasingly admit that there is a paucity of reliable, third-party studies to verify assertions that mixing religion and social programs benefits recipients, especially those in drug and alcohol rehabilitation.

(continue)

These programs often "pick and choose" their clients; and studies which support claims of success by religion-affiliated and faith-based agencies frequently rely on anecdotal accounts, or statistics provided by these same agencies. A story in the April 24, 2001 issue of The New York Times noted "there is little reliable research proving the effectiveness of religious programs."

A University of Pennsylvania criminologist commented on the federal faith-based initiative, noting: "We've created an office out of anecdotes..."

Even if faith-based programs WERE comparable, or more "effective" than secular counterparts, numerous legal and ethical problems remain. These outreaches still violate the separation of government and religion, and since they are publicly funded, millions of Americans who are Atheists, Agnostics, Secularists, Humanists and Freethinkers are being compelled to fund programs administered by churches and other houses of worship.

It's not just "mainstream" denominations that would receive public funding! Legal experts agree that if a federal faith-based program is funded, grants and other government resources must be made equally available to any and all religious groups. The state, under pressure from established religious groups and charities, may not "pick and choose" which organizations to fund simply because they represent a minority point of view. That means that fringe sects, unpopular and controversial religious groups may demand YOUR money in order to operate their faith-based outreaches. Scientology, the Moonies, racist Christian Identity churches -- all could qualify for public funding under federal and even state/local faith-based initiatives!

Are religious groups interested in legitimate social services, or proselytizing? Current regulations require that religion-affiliated service providers separate their doctrinal message from their social service mission. There is currently little oversight to guarantee this token separation; but "charitable choice" and faith-based program initiatives would further muddle this distinction between religious proselytizing and providing social services. The claim that government money would only be utilized for the "secular" component of a faith-based social program is disingenuous. Giving public resources to religious groups would inevitably mean that these outreaches would become even more prevalent; and it would be more tempting for churches, mosques and temples to use them as a pulpit rather than a way of providing "secular" social programs.

If religious groups TRULY wanted to help educate youngsters, provide medical care or engage in other worthy works, they could also surrender their tax-exempt status, or make contributions to existing secular agencies engaged in such programs! Instead, many religious activists speak of the "opportunity" the faith-based initiative will give them to spread their sectarian message and "bring people to God."

Religious groups which want government funding are asking for a "blank check" with no accountability and plenty of special privileges. Beginning with the 1996 welfare reform legislation, religious organizations were given the special right of bidding on government contracts, but flaunting civil rights laws and other anti-discrimination measures. They may use religious belief as a criterion in hiring practices. In Kentucky, for instance, a Baptist-affiliated program which receives millions of tax dollars a year fired a woman after she was identified as a lesbian. Secular providers, though, must abide by all government statutes, and they are held in strict accountability in how they spend funds. Religious groups fear that such accountability somehow "infringes" on their "free exercise of religion."

Americans should not be taxed for the repair or upkeep of dilapidated "houses of worship." Already, federal faith-based office director John DiIulio is proposing that taxpayers fund repairs and maintenance for inner-city churches that are engaged in social services. This further blurs the distinction between funding only "secular" programs, and giving tax money to religious organizations.

The rush to implement faith-based social programs at the federal, state and local level invites abuse and jeopardizes the separation of church and state in America. It is bad social policy, and it puts government -- using our tax money -- in the position of being a cheerleader and paymaster for organized religion.

No tax in any amount, large or small, can be levied to support any religious activities or institutions, whatever they may be called, or whatever form they may adopt to teach or practice religion. [Hugo L. Black, U.S. Supreme Court Justice, majority opinion in Everson v. Board of Education, 330 U.S. 1 (1947)]