No one seems to be writing opinion pieces quite the way I would, so I decided to do it myself.

The name? Taverns are places where one goes to discuss the interesting events and things in the world, so this is my tavern.

I will offer my views on politics, economics, and whatever else strikes my fancy.
I will occasionally publish the entire article from another journal for purposes of causing discussion.

 
This New York Times article was refered to in Josh Marshall's Talking Points Memo.

This is the lead paragraph:

The Spanish government has begun formal discussions on a proposal to expand financing to religious institutions, and security officials say that one intention is to subsidize mosques to make them less dependent on money from militant groups abroad.

My first thought is "Never happen here." Even if it is an effective way to minimize the diversion of religious money to terrorists (not a proven proposition itself, of course.)

However, what if religious organizations were required to publicly report all funds received and disbursed, with sources? No government money to religious organizations, but complete transparency?

It would have to apply to ALL religious organizations, of course. Christian, Muslim, Buddhist, Hindu, whatever.

Would it be of any value?

Is there a compelling need for maintaining privacy in donations?

What downsides would there be?

Dunno. Just some questions triggered by that article.
posted by Richard at 10:05 AM