Supreme Court rules that voucher-like program cannot discriminate against religious schools

The government can't make college free.
It can only redistribute wealth, from those with means to those with needs, to pay for it.

Whatevers. Until they make college free, they are picking and choosing education. If they make it all free then I will support vouchers. If they don't, screw the Jesus parents.
 
We are entering new territory with this court. Speculation is all we have, that and the lessons of history. One of the things that have kept us free is that we have a defense against the church ladies down at the first baptist church deciding what we can do for fun and copulation.
Yeah, this isn't that.
 
Whatevers. Until they make college free, they are picking and choosing education. If they make it all free then I will support vouchers. If they don't, screw the Jesus parents.
They can't make college free. They can only make other taxpayers fund it. 1-12 isn't free, either. It's funded primarily via property taxation.
 
One more little chip struck from the establishment clause. It's going to be interesting to see Christian types still try to keep money away from schools ran by other faiths.

Oh look who's playing with cartoon characters in his head again
 
We are entering new territory with this court. Speculation is all we have, that and the lessons of history. One of the things that have kept us free is that we have a defense against the church ladies down at the first baptist church deciding what we can do for fun and copulation.

Now we have the blue haired church ladies demanding we use the pronouns for them that they found last night on TikTok. But those pronouns might change by lunchtime; they will wear a bracelet to let you know. And then screech at you if you "deadname" them.

Dude.

Your Baptist church ladies thoughts are decades and decades behind. Please locate the Stupid Century's church ladies at their church. Social media. These women don't play. They will cancel your whole life if you hurt their fee fees.
 
One more little chip struck from the establishment clause. It's going to be interesting to see Christian types still try to keep money away from schools ran by other faiths.
Please show us which private schools are working to prevent other schools from being funded.

If you can't or won't, why are you making such an allegation?

Why do you believe that only upper income households should have their choice of schools?
 
Last edited:
Tax money going to religious institutions obviously means their existence is to some degree maintained and might even enlarge. How does that escape establishment?

Because you aren't forced to be a member of the Church, tithe to them, or follow their practices.

What is the real difference between a sectarian private school and a religious one based on the program in question?
 
We are entering new territory with this court. Speculation is all we have, that and the lessons of history. One of the things that have kept us free is that we have a defense against the church ladies down at the first baptist church deciding what we can do for fun and copulation.

No, we just have SJW scolds saying jokes can be considered acts of violence....

You lefties are now the prudes, deal with it.
 
Because you aren't forced to be a member of the Church, tithe to them, or follow their practices.

What is the real difference between a sectarian private school and a religious one based on the program in question?
One is religious, and Constitutional excluded from government subsidy.
 
One is religious, and Constitutional excluded from government subsidy.

So discriminated against by the government due to their religious affiliation?

The 1st amendment isn't supposed to be hostile to Religion, despite the lefts desire for it to be so.

Denying them the ability to participate in a program other private schools can participate in solely because they are Religious is far more against the purpose of the 1st amendment than allowing them to participate.
 
Because it is a religion, not due to which flavor. Giving funds is helping to establish. Of course, the Constitution only counts to people today when it agrees with what they want. Otherwise, it is disposable.
Congratulations for the victory against the first amendment, however, will not be forthcoming.
 
Because it is a religion, not due to which flavor. Giving funds is helping to establish. Of course, the Constitution only counts to people today when it agrees with what they want. Otherwise, it is disposable.
Congratulations for the victory against the first amendment, however, will not be forthcoming.

You are funding the Student to be able to attend a private school, not the religion in question. If you deny their choice to attend a religious one instead of secular one, you are interfering with THEIR 1st amendment rights.

The was a victory for the first amendment, not against it.
 
The choice of sending a child to a religious school is not denied simply because the state doesn't pay for it. That would be like saying the second amendment is being "infringed" because the purchase is not subsidized.
The first amendment's prohibition of supporting religions is being undermined in this issue.
 
The choice of sending a child to a religious school is not denied simply because the state doesn't pay for it. That would be like saying the second amendment is being "infringed" because the purchase is not subsidized.
The first amendment's prohibition of supporting religions is being undermined in this issue.

The program was designed to give vouchers to families to pay for schools where no public school options were available. Private schools take up the slack, but Religious ones were discriminated against in the program simply because they were religious.

Allowing them to compete with secular schools isn't establishment.

Is paving a road in front of a Church establishment?
 

Forum List

Back
Top