Posted on 06/09/2015 6:34:38 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
Is the Obama administration moving to require Christian nonprofits that receive government grants to follow LGBT non-discrimination rules in hiring?
A May 29 blog post by Austin Ruse, president of the Center for Family & Human Rights (C-Fam), claimed that an "unnamed source within the federal government" informed him that "the White House is quietly moving forward" with an LGBT non-discrimination policy for nonprofit organizations receiving government grants.
Since then, however, a White House official has assured another religious freedom organization that no decisions have been made about federal grantees.
The White House, Ruse wrote, "has recently directed federal agencies to include the 'sexual orientation and gender identity' clause in all grant agreements. The U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) has agreed to make this change and is said to be weeks away from implementation.
"The source added that federal agencies are being pressured to make this change without a subsequent executive order and that the State Department legal office has advised the White House that this is not a legal matter but a matter of policy," he continued.
The potential policy change is similar to one for government contractors that Obama made last year. That executive order required contractors to not discriminate against LGBT individuals in hiring and firing practices. There was no blanket religious exemption but a religious hiring exemption remained in place, which left the actual implications for faith groups a bit murky.
There are not many faith-based government contractors, but there are a large number of faith-based organizations that receive government grants to provide important social services. So a policy affecting grantees would have more far-reaching consequences than a policy affecting contractors.
Stanley Carlson-Thies, founder and senior director of the Institutional Religious Freedom Alliance, reached out to Melissa Rogers, executive director of the White House Office of Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnerships, to find out if this was true.
In a Friday IRFA blog post, Carlson-Thies wrote that while C-Fam believes a policy for grantees has been made, "there is good reason to doubt that it has been or can be made."
If the Obama administration were "quietly" making this change, he explained, it would show up in grant announcements and application forms. Since IRFA advocates on behalf of faith-based groups, it would likely be one of the first to know about the change.
Second, unlike federal contractors, the hiring rules for grant recipients are set by Congress, not the president. So if Obama attempted to intrude upon congressional authority, there would likely be an executive/legislative power struggle.
Third, Rogers assured Carlson-Thies that "the White House has made no decision to extend the restrictions on contractors to grantees."
Ruse posted another blog post on Friday noting what Carlson-Thies found. He also noted that a World article quoted a National Security Council spokesperson saying that the Obama administration is not extending its LGBT hiring policy for federal contractors to federal grantees.
Carlson-Thies does acknowledge that he cannot verify whether a policy change is being made in secret. And he advises faith-based groups to prepare for the worst while hoping for the best.
"Faith-based organizations must take a deep and careful look at their operations and take deliberate action to ensure that there is a strong alignment between their religious beliefs, their operational policies, and their actual practices. Their religious identity ought to be clear to everyone, inside and outside the organization, and the religiously based rationale for their policies and practices ought to be evident to anyone who takes a look," he wrote.
If you take the government’s money (which they stole from real workers), you also have to take their sh!t with it.
Don’t take the money and you can tell them to stuff their demands.
no shekels, no shackles
What is the profit of being a "Christian non-profit" if that organization is taking government money? I would contend that when they do so they're no longer Christian and they're no longer non-profit.
They're just another way to suck up tax dollars.
And meanwhile Congress just sits on its fat....
Why? Can’t imagine he would want to work with a Christian group after his Presidency.
—yep—lay down with dogs , get fleas-—
This is the crux of the confrontation to come...requiring those with privately held religious (or even philosophical) beliefs to bow to government action contrary to those beliefs. Conscientious objection, for example, has long been a part of the American tradition and should not change due to the aggressiveness of a small minority and a present government tending to totalitarianism. There will be some very real resistance if this continues.
Not if. When.
Christian organizations shouldn’t solicit or accept government money to begin with, if you take the Devils money you have to dance to his tune...
This is what happened to the Boy Scouts, but mostly with corporate money.
Exactly. Don’t take government money... it’s dirty, with strings attached.
The moment SCOTUS sides with the LBGTABCDEF mafia, there will be campaigns to shut down the 501(c)(3) status of the churches that preach against them. Watch. It IS coming.
Despite the work and intentions of most any group or organization, the basic problem is that the ‘administrators’ and managers of said group see this government money as free money. The ability to hire more people to do the work they are supposed to do. The ability to buy things the budget won’t allow, take that outreach trip or attend that conference or buy that armored black MRAP.....all they have to do is kneel before the tyrant.
Congress is packed with perverts.
The advice is obvious. No “church related” organization should take a thin dime from the government. Get out now! Those who ride on the back of the tiger are doomed to end up inside!
That is the only logical explanation.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.