Obama hearkens back to his community-organizer past, when he and Father Michael Pfleger trod the streets of Chicago, spreading love, charity, and radical Democratic politics. He can't wait to get his hands on the President's program, so that he can turn it into nothing more than another source of funding for politicized agencies masquerading as charities. Considering how Chicago runs its own distribution of largesse system (via bribery and clout), one can only image what a nightmare a federal agency given the full Chicago makeover might potentially be.

We know it won't be all that concerned about "faith." You can tell this from two simple points in his comments.

First, Obama:

chose a different emphasis for why religious charities are an important answer to solving poverty and other social problems: because they better know the people who are hurting, instead of Bush's argument that religion itself is a transforming power the government must not be afraid to harness.

But this entirely negates the purpose of the faith-based ministry. The uniqueness of ministry is that it is a face-to-face meeting with someone who is acting out of love, ready to be compassionate, and committed to a cause much greater than himself. To pick "location, location, location" as the most important aspects of ministry is to miss the point entirely.

More disturbingly, Obama seeks to follow the path of gay-rights activists within past Congresses who tried to force religious providers of charity to conform to non-discriminatory hiring regulations--which would make it impossible for such ministries to retain their religious character.

The FBCI (Faith-Based and Community Initiative) grows out of a provision of the 1996 "welfare reform" act, known as "charitable choice," specifically Section 104(d) of the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996:

(d) RELIGIOUS CHARACTER AND FREEDOM-

(1) RELIGIOUS ORGANIZATIONS- A religious organization with a contract described in subsection (a)(1)(A), or which accepts certificates, vouchers, or other forms of disbursement under subsection (a)(1)(B), shall retain its independence from Federal, State, and local governments, including such organization's control over the definition, development, practice, and expression of its religious beliefs.

(2) ADDITIONAL SAFEGUARDS- Neither the Federal Government nor a State shall require a religious organization to--

(A) alter its form of internal governance; or

(B) remove religious art, icons, scripture, or other symbols;

in order to be eligible to contract to provide assistance, or to accept certificates, vouchers, or other forms of disbursement, funded under a program described in subsection (a)(2).

In brief, it levels the playing field in such a way as to enable religious organizations to compete with other helping organizations for federal grants, without having to relinquish their uniquely religious character. In other words, if you come to the soup kitchen, the church doesn't have to remove the cross on the roof, the Ten Commandments, on the wall, or the minister's religious apparel.

More importantly to the ministries, retaining their religious character means using employees who agree with the mission of the ministry--which is usually religious in and of itself. Thus, the FBCI allows ministries to hire...well, ministers. And others who are of a like mind as to the importance of faith.

Obama, however, has other ideas:

And while Bush supports allowing all religious groups to make any employment decisions based on faith, Obama proposes allowing religious institutions to hire and fire based on religion only in the non-taxpayer-funded portions of their activities — consistent with current federal, state and local laws. "That makes perfect sense," he said.

Does it, Senator?

You know who it doesn't make any sense at all to?

The people who run faith-based organizations.

If a ministry cannot hire those who share their faith, it becomes nothing more than a social agency--exactly the problem President Bush's program was meant to address.

To force a ministry to hire people who are inimical to its own best interests is to lose that ministry--either to the clients, or to the government. We have already seen this two years ago, in Boston, when Catholic Charities stopped providing adoption services rather than comply with Massachusetts' demand for gay adoption.

Have no fear, activists. Under an Obmaa regime, you won't be bothered at all by the federal dollars going to the religious, as Obama will make sure to negate the "religious" part of the whole thing. In Barack's capable hands, the only charities left in the FBCI program will be the gullible, the financially desperate, and the religiously illiterate.

It's the perfect trick to turn religious ministry dollars back into plain old social agency handouts.

The rest of Obama's promises on the FBCI are nothing more than a continuation of what President Bush has already done:

He would increase spending on social services, starting with a $500 million-a-year program to keep 1 million poor children up to speed on their studies over the summers. He would increase training for charities applying for funding and make it a grass-roots effort. He would elevate the program to be "a critical part of my administration," a reference to criticism that Bush paid barely more than lip service to his effort.

Whoever wrote that is either kidding, or has no idea what he's talking about. Increase training? Lip service?

As an active member of a faith-based ministry, I can assure you that the President has done everything possible to help religious organizations find their way through the labyrinthine process of applying for and retaining federal grants. While ministries have often been wary or unwilling--or, frankly, in some cases incompetent--it's not because the White House hasn't offered enough training. And, except for the travel expense, these seminars--from day-long to weekend--are invariably free, and studded with high-level government functionaries helping ministers and leaders of faith-based programs learn what they can and cannot do with federal money.

Moreover, the idea that FBCI is not a "critical part" of President Bush's administration is laughable. There is FBCI representation within the majority of federal Cabinet departments, and the programs cover a wide variety of ways to help. President Bush can barely start a speech--from the Naval Academy to the factory floor--without praising some "soldier in the armies of compassion" he found hanging around the place when he got there. So Obama's promising nothing new--except stripping the "faith" out of "faith-based" organizations.

We've already seen that game. In the bad old days before charitable choice, many were the ministries asked to scrub their buildings clean of any offending religious display. I know of a ministry that jumped through all the right hoops, was awarded a federal block grant--then lost the money after being told it had to remove the steeple from the building before it could receive the funding.

So, were Obama's new regulations to be put into place, we should all say what the head of this homeless shelter did: Thanks, but no, thanks. Keep your money.

And we'll keep our souls.