1. The Constitution makes reference to religion only twice. Article VI states that government officials shall be bound by an oath to support the Constitution, but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to an office or Public Trust under the United States. The other, of course, appears in the often misunderstood Establishment and Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment.
In no manner does it mention a separation between church and state.
a. Free exercise simply means that the citizen may practice whichever faith they so choose without government interference; there is no guideline for government to favor irreligion over religion.
b. Conservatives have continued to apply the Constitutions original intent.
c. This literal reading of the Constitution forms the basis of conservatisms defense of religious liberty.
2. Support for secularism has come, frequently, from the courts. In 1947, in Everson v. Board of Education, Justice Hugo Black wrote No tax in any amount, large or small, can be levied to support any religious activities or institutions, whatever they may be called, or whatever form they may adopt to teach or practice religion. And The First Amendment has erected a wall between church and state. That wall must be kept high and impregnable. We could not approve the slightest breach.
a. FDRs first appointee, Black, former KKK member was well known to be hostile to the Catholic Church. His personal hostility resulted in essentially rewriting the First Amendment, declaring exactly the opposite of what the Founders intended.
Levin, Liberty and Tyranny.
3. Chief Justice Rehnquist, in 1985, As its history abundantly shows, however, nothing in the Establishment Clause requires government to be strictly neutral between religion and irreligion, nor does that Clause prohibit Congress or the States from pursuing legitimate secular ends through nondiscriminatory sectarian means. And The Establishment Clause did not require government neutrality between religion and irreligion nor did it prevent the Federal Government from providing nondiscriminatory aid to religion. (Wallace v. Jaffree) Ibid.
In recent cases, Justices Scalia, Kennedy, and Thomas have rejected the notion of neutrality and taken positions consistent with nonpreferentialism, an Establishment Clause interpretation that Justice Rehnquist proposed in 1985. The nonpreferentialist doctrine states that government may aid religion and favor religion over nonreligion, so long as it does not establish a national church or discriminate among religions.
http://www.bu.edu/law/central/jd/organizations/journals/pilj/vol18no1/documents/18-1TerryArticle.pdf
4. If children in religion schools provably receive an academic education comparable to that of government schools, why shouldnt they receive equal funding from taxpayers? US Supreme Court cases have impacted the way in which the federal government and states may provide services and benefits to parents and students in private and religious schools.
a. 1925 - Pierce v. Society of Sisters of the Holy Names The decision affirmed the right of parents to choose the type of education they wanted for their children and also affirmed the right of the state to reasonably regulate private schools.
b. 1947 - Everson v. Board of EducationDecision upheld a New Jersey program that established the precedent that a state may provide, with public money, bus transportation services to and from school to students in parochial schools.
c. 1968- Board of Education v. Allen Decision upheld a New York textbook law authorizing the lending of textbooks free of charge to all children, including those attending parochial schools, in grades seven through twelve.
d. 1983-Mueller v. Allen Decision upheld as constitutional a Minnesota statute that allows an income tax deduction for tuition, textbooks, and transportation that benefited parents of children attending public, private and religious schools.
e. 2000-Mitchell v. Helms Decision upheld as constitutional Title VI of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act that provided allows the use of federal funds to supply computer hardware and software and library and media materials to religiously affiliated schools.
f. 2002 - Zelman v. Simmons-Harris The decision upheld the constitutionality of the Cleveland Scholarship Program that provides financial assistance to parents to use for tuition at private or out of district public schools or for tutoring services. US Supreme Court Decisions - National Catholic Educational Association
If religion and irreligion deserve the same treatment according to the Constitution ..then they deserve the same funding.
In no manner does it mention a separation between church and state.
a. Free exercise simply means that the citizen may practice whichever faith they so choose without government interference; there is no guideline for government to favor irreligion over religion.
b. Conservatives have continued to apply the Constitutions original intent.
c. This literal reading of the Constitution forms the basis of conservatisms defense of religious liberty.
2. Support for secularism has come, frequently, from the courts. In 1947, in Everson v. Board of Education, Justice Hugo Black wrote No tax in any amount, large or small, can be levied to support any religious activities or institutions, whatever they may be called, or whatever form they may adopt to teach or practice religion. And The First Amendment has erected a wall between church and state. That wall must be kept high and impregnable. We could not approve the slightest breach.
a. FDRs first appointee, Black, former KKK member was well known to be hostile to the Catholic Church. His personal hostility resulted in essentially rewriting the First Amendment, declaring exactly the opposite of what the Founders intended.
Levin, Liberty and Tyranny.
3. Chief Justice Rehnquist, in 1985, As its history abundantly shows, however, nothing in the Establishment Clause requires government to be strictly neutral between religion and irreligion, nor does that Clause prohibit Congress or the States from pursuing legitimate secular ends through nondiscriminatory sectarian means. And The Establishment Clause did not require government neutrality between religion and irreligion nor did it prevent the Federal Government from providing nondiscriminatory aid to religion. (Wallace v. Jaffree) Ibid.
In recent cases, Justices Scalia, Kennedy, and Thomas have rejected the notion of neutrality and taken positions consistent with nonpreferentialism, an Establishment Clause interpretation that Justice Rehnquist proposed in 1985. The nonpreferentialist doctrine states that government may aid religion and favor religion over nonreligion, so long as it does not establish a national church or discriminate among religions.
http://www.bu.edu/law/central/jd/organizations/journals/pilj/vol18no1/documents/18-1TerryArticle.pdf
4. If children in religion schools provably receive an academic education comparable to that of government schools, why shouldnt they receive equal funding from taxpayers? US Supreme Court cases have impacted the way in which the federal government and states may provide services and benefits to parents and students in private and religious schools.
a. 1925 - Pierce v. Society of Sisters of the Holy Names The decision affirmed the right of parents to choose the type of education they wanted for their children and also affirmed the right of the state to reasonably regulate private schools.
b. 1947 - Everson v. Board of EducationDecision upheld a New Jersey program that established the precedent that a state may provide, with public money, bus transportation services to and from school to students in parochial schools.
c. 1968- Board of Education v. Allen Decision upheld a New York textbook law authorizing the lending of textbooks free of charge to all children, including those attending parochial schools, in grades seven through twelve.
d. 1983-Mueller v. Allen Decision upheld as constitutional a Minnesota statute that allows an income tax deduction for tuition, textbooks, and transportation that benefited parents of children attending public, private and religious schools.
e. 2000-Mitchell v. Helms Decision upheld as constitutional Title VI of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act that provided allows the use of federal funds to supply computer hardware and software and library and media materials to religiously affiliated schools.
f. 2002 - Zelman v. Simmons-Harris The decision upheld the constitutionality of the Cleveland Scholarship Program that provides financial assistance to parents to use for tuition at private or out of district public schools or for tutoring services. US Supreme Court Decisions - National Catholic Educational Association
If religion and irreligion deserve the same treatment according to the Constitution ..then they deserve the same funding.
