With its typical anti-faith spin, the New York Times attacks religious groups for feeding at the federal trough via congressional earmarks. I?m opposed to earmarks as much as or more than the New York Times, but let?s be fair. Several of the examples — including two of the extended examples — discussed by Diana Henriques and Andrew Lehren are subsidies for higher education, not religious groups per se. Specifically, the reporters expatiate about grants to St. Vincent College (Pennsylvania), Malone College (Ohio), Fuller Theological Seminary (California) and Vanguard University (California). These schools’ connection to a Christian denomination probably had little to do with their lobbying goals or their success. But stressing their religious connection helps make religion look bad. I expect to wait a long time for a New York Times article that pinpoints earmarks won by secular universities, which are plentiful as well.