They're financing an organization in exchange for its labor - labor that serves a secular purpose, in accordance with the Lemon test (which takes the establishment clause to quite an secularist extreme to begin with).
[You first cited Turkey as an example of how democracy leads to religious control, and now you're saying it's an example of how to work against it]
I said secularism works against it. Stop trying to distort what I wrote.
Actually you didn't say anything about secularism when talking about Turkey. All you said was, "Turkey is the only one that has withstood - somewhat - fundamentalist pressure." And that was right after you got through saying, "Where there is an strong and active fundamentalist movement, the universal experience has been that democracy leads to imposition of religious control of public life. This is evident in Turkey, in Algeria, and elsewhere in the Islamic world".
Those two statements are in complete conflict with each other. The only one doing any distorting here is you.
So you're OK with the government hiring the Klan to run day care centers then? There are no issues other than paying them for work done?
All you said was, "Turkey is the only one that has withstood - somewhat - fundamentalist pressure."
In response to, and directly after a paragraph where you talked about secularism in Turkey.
And that was right after you got through saying, "Where there is an strong and active fundamentalist movement, the universal experience has been that democracy leads to imposition of religious control of public life. This is evident in Turkey, in Algeria, and elsewhere in the Islamic world".
Fundamentalists have been quite successful in increasing Islamic influence in Turkey.
Since you're being obtuse here, let's go through it again. The experience of the Islamic world has been that democracy, in the presence of a strong fundamentalist movement, tends to lead to the imposition of fundamentalism on the society. This has happened in Turkey, in Algeria, in Pakistan, and elsewhere. In Turkey, official constitutional secularism has mitigated the effect of fundamentalism. In other societies, fundamentalism had to be turned back by dictatorship. In either case, none of this bodes well for the future of American democracy in the face of a strong fundamentalist movement, though we can hope the secularism of our Constitution, that you so deplore, can hold it back, as it has in Turkey.
Got it now?