Can Congress require AIDS service organizations to pledge fidelity to the government's view opposing prostitution as a condition of receiving funding? This term, the Supreme Court will decide whether the First Amendment permits such censorship in USAID v. Alliance for Open Society International (AOSI). The 2008 legislation reauthorizing the President's Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR) requires host countries to support “activities promoting abstinence, delay of sexual début, monogamy, and fidelity.” PEPFAR's “conscience clause” allows organizations with a moral (...) or religious objection to opt out of providing services to patients with a sexual orientation of which they disapprove. In addition, the law requires grantees to adopt “a policy explicitly opposing prostitution” and to refrain from any speech or activities the government deems “inconsistent” with that policy. The antiprostitution pledge extends not only to what a recipient says or does with PEPFAR funds, but even to what it says or does with its own private funds. The government, however, has not enforced the pledge against U.S.‐based nongovernmental organizations partly because of a preliminary injunction granted by the lower courts. That injunction is now at risk if the Supreme Court upholds the loyalty oath. (shrink)

In his January 2003 State of the Union Address, President Bush called for the U.S to commit $15 billion over five years to address the international HIV/AIDS epidemic. For several reasons, the President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief caught many people by surprise. The surprise quickly was followed by excitement, tempered by skepticism.

This article addresses the rise of faith-based emergency relief by examining the US President’s Emergency Plan for HIV/AIDS (PEPFAR), a public health intervention focused on the AIDS epidemic in sub-Saharan Africa. It argues that the theological turn in humanitarian aid serves to amplify ongoing dynamics in the domestic politics of sub-Saharan African states, where social services have assumed the form of chronic emergency relief and religious organizations have come to play an increasingly prominent role in the provision of such (...) services. In the context of an ongoing public health crisis, PEPFAR has institutionalized the social authority of the Pentecostal and charismatic churches, leading to a semantic confluence between the postcolonial politics of emergency and the Pentecostal/Pauline theology of kairos or event. Far from being confined to the space of foreign aid, however, the faith-based turn in humanitarianism is in keeping with ongoing reforms in domestic social policy in the United States. While on the one hand the sustained welfare programmes of the New Deal and Great Society have been dismantled in favour of a system of emergency relief, on the other hand the federal government has intensified its moral, pedagogical and punitive interventions into the lives of the poor. The wilful transfer of welfare services to overtly religious service providers has played a decisive role in this process. The article concludes with a critical appraisal of the links between African and North American Pentecostal-evangelical churches and questions the revolutionary mission ascribed to Pauline political theology in recent political theory. (shrink)

This chapter first considers how the right to be loved should be prioritized. It argues that even if children’s being loved is not as urgent as, for instance, being fed, it is still very urgent; that governments do not give absolute priority to whatever is most necessary for action; and that to develop institutional arrangements that can adequately provide for children’s various fundamental conditions, it is important to take into account all of their fundamental conditions, including their need for love. (...) This chapter then draws the book to a close by pointing out that the proclamation that children have a right to be loved is not merely empty rhetoric and that in fact this right can be justified in the same way as other rights. (shrink)