tragic_pizza

<a href="http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,54115,00.html" target="_blank">Full story here.</a>

Emphasis added:

WASHINGTON — Attorney General John Ashcroft on Friday defended the FBI's reorganization plan against charges the new, proactive approach to fighting terror will infringe on Americans' constitutional rights.


"If you sit and wait for a crime to happen, and then you respond to it, that isn't a very good prevention strategy," Ashcroft said in an interview with Fox News. "You have to be able to develop or to get a lead from your own information, not wait for something to happen to trigger your activity."

Ashcroft has been criticized by civil libertarians who fear the FBI's new approach to fighting crime will infringe on a range of personal liberties.

Opposition to the plan to shift key parts of the agency from law enforcement to domestic intelligence came almost immediately after Ashcroft announced a draft outline Thursday that frees the bureau to conduct investigations without prior approval from headquarters.

The new guidelines also allow agents to enter public areas such as churches, libraries and meetings of political organizations, from which they were previously barred. Ashcroft maintained these new guidelines actually further enable the U.S. government to protect constitutional guarantees.

_______________________________

So how about it? Is the Separation Doctrine a one-way affair?

[ June 01, 2002: Message edited by: tragic_pizza ]</p>

GaryP

One has to wonder whether there will be more agents attending mosques or churches?

Does Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson have to worry about agents looking into their financial books? I bet there are some interesting things in those.

As for whether it is one way, I would think that in a "crisis" like this, the govt. is getting into everyone's private affirs more than ever and more than they should. Why should churches be any different?

All they have is tax-free buildings, no oversight as to their funds, a media which very rarely critisizes, politicians who kiss up to them, and their deity's name on OUR money, in the pledge to OUR flag,etc.

[ June 01, 2002: Message edited by: GaryP ]</p>

hezekiah jones

Maybe I'm thick, but what does this have to do with the government endorsing religion?

Perhaps you're thinking that the potential presence of FBI agents in your local mosque might infringe upon your free exercise rights?

tragic_pizza

That's exactly the point. Governement cannot endorse a religion, but niether can they hinder the free exercise thereof.

And nothing in the article says the agents will be just visiting mosques.

tragic_pizza

Or not. If you investigate, I think you'll find that Falwell and Robertson's books undergo an annual audit. This is standard practice with not-for-profit organizations.

Do your books undergo an annual audit? What might we find there?

GaryP

I have hearrd that churches must file forms to declare that they are doing work worthy of a non-profit but any accounting is done by them on a voluntary basis with firms which they hire.

It seems as if I remember a bunch of them (TV preachers)deciding to do this after the PTL scandal a few years ago.

It is my understanding that they are not required to file income tax reports as are other non-profits.

But I could be wrong. I would appreciate any info you or others may have.

And I try very hard not to cheat on my taxes. It is something my secular conscience requires of myself.

hezekiah jones

Actually it's "prohibiting," not "hindering." Big difference.

Anyway, so it does work both ways? That's not what your thread title says.

It was a hypothetical. Mosque, church, synagogue, whatever.

[ June 01, 2002: Message edited by: hezekiahjones ]</p>

tragic_pizza

Nonprofits are required to file a Form 990 every two years, if memory serves. I am, by the way, no fan of Falwell OR Robertson, but at least on the latter's part, his television network is accountable to an organization which has very stringent accountability requirements.

<a href="http://www.ecfa.org/ECFA/msMemberProfile.asp?MemberID=1040" target="_blank">Here's the reference for CBN</a>, and <a href="http://www.ecfa.org/ECFA/ContentEngine.asp?Page=Main" target="_blank">here is information about ECFA.</a>

I'll check on Falwell. The ECFA info was easiest to look up, and I don't think he's a member.

tragic_pizza

I am saying that the FBI, by utilizing this new authority, is by definition interfering in the free practice of religion. That the Government is violating the separation of church and state.

If you argue for it one way, surely you must support it in the other direction.

GaryP

Thanks for the info.