Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

internetworkers - Re: [internetworkers] Today's Supreme Court Ruling

internetworkers AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Internetworkers: http://www.ibiblio.org/internetworkers/

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: Michael Czeiszperger <michael AT czeiszperger.org>
  • To: "Internetworkers: http://www.ibiblio.org/internetworkers/" <internetworkers AT lists.ibiblio.org>
  • Subject: Re: [internetworkers] Today's Supreme Court Ruling
  • Date: Thu, 26 Feb 2004 07:52:12 -0500


On Feb 25, 2004, at 10:19 PM, Alan MacHett wrote:
Speaking as someone who adamantly opposes "so help
me god" in public oathes and "in god we trust" on our currency, I see
absolutely nothing wrong with public funds going towards someones
education, even if that education is religious, so long as the State does
not discriminate in it's dispensation of those funds. To withhold funds
based on a student's particular religion of study would be wrong, but so
is withholding funds simply because that student wants to study religion.

In this particular case the state's constitution was at issue since it prohibits the use of public money to support "any religious worship, exercise, or instruction". Paying the expenses for a religion to train priests or ministers falls under "instruction" in my book. Note that this ruling does not cover state grants to students who simply want to attend a school with a religious affiliation, which is still up in the air.

The question before the supreme court was not "can the state fund religious education?" The question this time around was wether the state *must* fund religious education for ministers and clergy, and the answer to that is "no".

The reason this was being pushed was to force the voucher issue now that there's a supreme court ruling saying vouchers are constitutional in general. The only problem is 36 states have constitutions which bar the use of public money for religious instruction, and the voucher movement is being pushed primarily by religious groups who want the government to fund the religious instruction of their children. Were this ruling to go the other way, voucher supporters could then force voucher use for religious instruction in those states.

___________________________________________________________________
michael at czeiszperger dot org
Chapel Hill, NC





Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page