Reply #44: That doesn't make it good or constitutional or healthy or anything of the sort

[PurityOfEssence]

Yes, he advertised his proclivity for theocracy quite openly during the campaign and he used religion for leverage whenever convenient. It's still a bad idea, and it's still unconstitutional.

How is it unconstitutional? Congress has to appropriate funds for these initiatives and these employees, and passing legislation authorizing those payments flies in the face of Article One of the Bill of Rights. Quibbling about what constitutes "establishment of religion" can go on and on, but to endorse religions by paying members of certain faiths to perform governmental functions SPECIFICALLY BECAUSE OF THEIR FAITH, whether they refrain from proselytizing while doing so or not, seems pretty damned far over the line. Giving money to these organizations does too.

Just because he was clear about it doesn't make it any more acceptable than if he said he was going to take all of your possessions when he became president.