Will the religious school use government money to teach children that they will go to hell if they do not believe the religious program? This is one example of why we have separation of church and state.
I can't think of anything more "establishing" than forcing me, a tax payer, to fund a religious school of a religion different from my own in a circumstance where the school board has no control over the curriculum. No one is suggesting that parents can't choose to send their children to a religious school "School choice" is always available. The only question is whether my tax payer dollars should fund that choice.
Is there any chance that the Court will find that public funding is OK but that any religious entity that accepts such funding loses their tax-exempt status?
If this shakes out as predicted, it will be incumbent on all kinds of minority religions, from Jews to Rastafarians, to set up their own charter schools and claim a piece of the pie.
I originally trained to be a high school teacher, back when teaching to the test was just getting started. I saw it early enough to bail. Now I am fantasizing about a nationwide solarpunk Satanic Temple Virtual School with better-than-standard classes, no standardized testing, plus a religious curriculum centered on emotional intelligence, community building, and societal cohesion.
I'm not surprised but I am profoundly disappointed.
I will NOT allow any of my taxpayer money to go towards religious indoctrination. If I wanted to give to a church, I'd attend the church, and drop money into the collection plate.
At a minimum, I hope there are Muslim, Atheist, and Jewish kids asking to go to this school and then filing for religious discrimination when they're forced to attend Catholic indoctrination.
The right didn't stop when Roe v Wade was decided and looked what happened.
Well, now...the shoe is on the other foot isn't it? I think we could clutter the courts for YEARs challenging religious schools on public money.
I initially misread the last sentence as "ADF and aligned groups will keep testing the limit until the Supreme Court’s religious supremacy majority tells them there is none." Perhaps a distinction without a difference.
The form of conservatism that has taken hold in this country doesn't believe in any such thing as public education, but that if we're going to have it, they should get their hands on as much taxpayer money as possible. It's the same thing as states banning reproductive health care and then giving millions to religious anti-abortion centers (the so-called 'crisis pregnancy centers') under the guise of helping women and families, when they do no such thing. And this administration is as pro-corruption as it is possible to be.
"[I[f forced to allow public funding of religious schools, some states could choose to end their charter school program altogether."
If SCOTUS rules the way we expect them to, I hope this is the outcome. Charter schools are a really excellent way to defund public schools and bring back segregation in education, particularly along class lines.
Well, when the government agrees to fund a charter school organized to promote the tenets of Satanism — whatever they may be — and some Christians find themselves excluded from admission for educational opportunities, how will these vast legal minds on this bizarre SCOTUS navigate the implications of that nexus of “principles” surrounding “religious freedom?”
The right to free exercise only precludes the government from preventing one from practicing their faith. It doesn't guarantee that religious institutions are entitled to public tax dollars; tax dollars that are compelled from the public under threat of force. My first amendment and free exercise rights are not forfeit just because of someone else's "strongly held religious beliefs". Compelling people to fund religious activity that is different from their own faith (or any faith at all) is wrong. If the church wants to open a school, they should do so with their own tax-exempt revenue stream. I don't want to see my property tax dollars siphoned away from public schools that my kids attend to subsidize religious based instruction of any kind, no matter how small or insignificant a part of the program it may be.
To me, there is a very important question that has not been asked and I wonder why it hasn't: If they were asking to implement an exclusively Muslim charter school, would that change their argument? Would the conservative christian justices have a different stance?
Will the religious school use government money to teach children that they will go to hell if they do not believe the religious program? This is one example of why we have separation of church and state.
I can't think of anything more "establishing" than forcing me, a tax payer, to fund a religious school of a religion different from my own in a circumstance where the school board has no control over the curriculum. No one is suggesting that parents can't choose to send their children to a religious school "School choice" is always available. The only question is whether my tax payer dollars should fund that choice.
Is there any chance that the Court will find that public funding is OK but that any religious entity that accepts such funding loses their tax-exempt status?
If this shakes out as predicted, it will be incumbent on all kinds of minority religions, from Jews to Rastafarians, to set up their own charter schools and claim a piece of the pie.
Coming soon to a neighborhood near you...
Madrassas R Us. And paid for with your taxes.
Oh wait, that's not what was meant by this? Taxpayer-supported religion for one, for all. Can't discriminate, right?
This was a missed opportunity to highlight the Pastafarians. May you be blessed by his noodley appendage.
I originally trained to be a high school teacher, back when teaching to the test was just getting started. I saw it early enough to bail. Now I am fantasizing about a nationwide solarpunk Satanic Temple Virtual School with better-than-standard classes, no standardized testing, plus a religious curriculum centered on emotional intelligence, community building, and societal cohesion.
I'd support that!
I'm not surprised but I am profoundly disappointed.
I will NOT allow any of my taxpayer money to go towards religious indoctrination. If I wanted to give to a church, I'd attend the church, and drop money into the collection plate.
At a minimum, I hope there are Muslim, Atheist, and Jewish kids asking to go to this school and then filing for religious discrimination when they're forced to attend Catholic indoctrination.
The right didn't stop when Roe v Wade was decided and looked what happened.
Well, now...the shoe is on the other foot isn't it? I think we could clutter the courts for YEARs challenging religious schools on public money.
Oh and I can't wait when the religious schools, accepting public money, discriminate about who can attend.
Can't SCOTUS see the stupidity of this? Other than the only three intelligent members on the court?
They are about to come across the Law of Unintended Consequences.
And, I just can’t understand how a for profit school can be considered a public school…
I initially misread the last sentence as "ADF and aligned groups will keep testing the limit until the Supreme Court’s religious supremacy majority tells them there is none." Perhaps a distinction without a difference.
The form of conservatism that has taken hold in this country doesn't believe in any such thing as public education, but that if we're going to have it, they should get their hands on as much taxpayer money as possible. It's the same thing as states banning reproductive health care and then giving millions to religious anti-abortion centers (the so-called 'crisis pregnancy centers') under the guise of helping women and families, when they do no such thing. And this administration is as pro-corruption as it is possible to be.
This is a disgrace to the constitution and our founding fathers!! TAX THE CHURCHES NOW SINCE THERE IS NO LONGER A SEPARATION!!
"[I[f forced to allow public funding of religious schools, some states could choose to end their charter school program altogether."
If SCOTUS rules the way we expect them to, I hope this is the outcome. Charter schools are a really excellent way to defund public schools and bring back segregation in education, particularly along class lines.
Well, when the government agrees to fund a charter school organized to promote the tenets of Satanism — whatever they may be — and some Christians find themselves excluded from admission for educational opportunities, how will these vast legal minds on this bizarre SCOTUS navigate the implications of that nexus of “principles” surrounding “religious freedom?”
What collection of ignorant boobs!
For those unfamiliar, "Lemon" refers to Lemon v. Kurtzman (1971) concerning state aid to religious PK-12 schools..
The right to free exercise only precludes the government from preventing one from practicing their faith. It doesn't guarantee that religious institutions are entitled to public tax dollars; tax dollars that are compelled from the public under threat of force. My first amendment and free exercise rights are not forfeit just because of someone else's "strongly held religious beliefs". Compelling people to fund religious activity that is different from their own faith (or any faith at all) is wrong. If the church wants to open a school, they should do so with their own tax-exempt revenue stream. I don't want to see my property tax dollars siphoned away from public schools that my kids attend to subsidize religious based instruction of any kind, no matter how small or insignificant a part of the program it may be.
This article gets so much wrong, starting with the very spelling of St. Isidore.
Fuck them. Especially Alito, that inverted asshole.
Great strides for Christian white supremacy. Stop it now.
To me, there is a very important question that has not been asked and I wonder why it hasn't: If they were asking to implement an exclusively Muslim charter school, would that change their argument? Would the conservative christian justices have a different stance?