So much for separation of Church and State

Nobody attending any Christian Schools wants to.

 

Do businesses pay taxes?
Do private schools pay taxes?
Do religious schools pay taxes?

If they all pay taxes and all abide by State discriminatory laws, then they can all get the same public monies.
But pvt businesses rarely get public money, and if they do, they have to abide by the laws that govern said money.

If a State says a school or business can not discriminate in any way, and one of those business do, they can or should lose public money.

AFAIK, religions are tax exempt.

EDIT:
Hasn't there been cases where pvt businesses were sued and lost due to failing to follow State discriminatory laws.

 

Shouldnt be worried then

 

"Public schools get to indoctrinate kids in the totalizing ideology of “wokeness” because even though it serves as a lousy replacement for religion, it claims to be secular. So it’s only fair that those who prefer their religion to the state-sanctioned one get the opportunity to take their tax dollars elsewhere."

So tough crap. You want to attract students, you will need to persuade parents.

Fenced Because Crazed Among The Left Threaten Violence If They Don't Get The Decision They Demand.
​

"when state and local governments choose to subsidize private schools, they must allow families to use taxpayer funds to pay for religious schools."

Government cannot form a subclass and then treat them as unequals. Some Dems have had a real problem with this going all the way back to slavery. So after the Republican defeated the Democrats in the civil war, in order to make sure that Dems never again created a sub class and abused them, the 13th, 14th and 15th amendments were passed by Republicans, and ratification was required in order for the conquered Democrat States to resume statehood and elected representation.

But, many Dems still chaff over the Equal Protection Of The Laws Clause of the 14th Amendment.

"Maine’s “nonsectarian” requirement for otherwise generally available tuition assistance payments violates the Free Exercise Clause."

Prior to 1981, all was well, but then in 1981 the State is changed policies and no longer allowed tuition assistant to be used at non secular schools. Did the 1st Amendment and the 14th Amendment suddenly change in 1981? No.
What changes is that one single clown, the Maine attorney general falsely claimed that public funding of private religious schools violated the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment. Of course that certainly would have been news to those that drafted and ratified the First Amendment, but, these radical clowns make these claims and then demand them as coercive policy, without even blushing.

"Maine pays tuition for some students to attend private schools, as long as the schools are not religious which is discrimination against religion.”

Another awesome day for equality!

SUPREME COURT STRIKES DOWN MAINE’S UNCONSTITUTIONAL BAN ON USING PUBLIC FUNDS AT RELIGIOUS SCHOOLS.

 

There are satanists in America. I am sure they would send their kids to their version of a religious school.

 

Yes.

Yes.

Yes.

Churches (including schools in that church) are exempt from paying taxes. Private schools, are a business, even when religious, and as such pay taxes.

Only if that business is open to the public. Private schools are not opened up to the general public.

 

Most religious schools are attached to a church, hence according to you they don't pay taxes.

If a business isn't open to the public, then they should not be eligible for public money.
The public doesn't have to fund discrimination.

And laws could/should be stated as such.
Public monies open to businesses that are open to the public. And follow State discrimination laws.

 

They have to literally be a part of a church. There are TONS that are not. Also, generally, the ones that are in churches are lower grades.

And yet, the public funds discrimination all the time. To the tune of billions.

Fine. Then stop taxing those businesses that pay taxes. Because as long as they pay taxes, then they have every right to that money that you do.

 

Not likely

 

Well, the real worry from this will be the funding of Muslim schools. Because they have a tendency to promote extremism.

I was worried about the separation of church and state too. But, then I realized that they aren't teaching much at public schools nowadays anyway. Instead, I'm hearing a lot about how math is racist (not going there), reading is white supremacy (all the classics are written by white people), and writing is old-fashioned (loss of cursive writing).

 

If you have that many kids and need to suck off the gubmint teat to edumacate them then you should have been forcibly fixed after say, the first two.

 

just in time for no abortions, time to move to that state and push em out, $$$

 

they were referring to math word problems in a text book only using basic names

but obviously that cause some names just to complex to put in a math problem, anyone can pronounce jack and jill

the bible was middle eastern, it was Americanized, even Jesus was renamed to make it more English sounding

 

Whether you like it or not, virtually all of the people in leadership roles with regard to the DOI, the Revolution itself, the Articles of Confederation, and it's replacement, The Constitution were in fact white males. There were certainly exceptions, and under similar circumstances today it would certainly be different, but that is how things worked in the latter half of the 1700s. You are entitled to your own opinions, but not your own facts, and that fact that I just outlined is the reality, for better or worse.

 

The First Amendment shall be infringed.

 

When public funds are provided to a school, it is necessarily at least partly public. That is why tax dollars have no place being paid to schools that teach a religion.
All schools should teach about religion, but that is different.
The first amendment is clear; apparently some of the understanding of it is not.

 

Careful.
I said while I don't like them, they have a right to exist.
But the state should not pay for them anymore than any other sélective school.
They should finance themselves.

 

Mind pointing it out to me? Cause I don't see it.

Bold: And that is what SCOTUS decided. Maine can no longer provide school choice vouchers to private schools while discriminating against religious private schools. They both have to be treated equally.

 

If public funds are being used for private schools the State cannot discriminate against a religious private school because of their religion.

You say that the 1st Amendment is clear, make a comment about some not understanding it. Yet you display that you don't understand it.

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;"

Shall make no law "respecting it", meaning it cannot promote religion. "or prohibiting" meaning it cannot discriminate against it. IE: The State cannot promote religion or discriminate against religion. It must be treated equally with the non-religious. So if you treat the non-religious one way, then you must treat the religious the same way. If you allow the non-religious to have a public place to speak then you must do the same with the religious. If you spend funds on the non-religious then you must do the same for the religious.

It has always been this way.

 

No more tax money to any business or educational institution practicing affirmative action? Interesting. Good luck. Income and capital gains taxes on labor unions? Interesting. Good luck.

 

From the Court: A benefit program under which private citizens “direct government aid to religious schools wholly as a result of their own genuine and independent private choice” does not offend the Establishment Clause. Zelman v. Simmons-Harris, 536 U. S. 639, 652 (2002).

So there's the precedent. Lefties are yuge fans of precedent. It's a private citizen directing the funds, so, no problemo.

"a school voucher system that simply returns public funds back to parents for their own choice of education cannot discriminate on the basis of religion. Once it sets up a voucher program for parents to manage the state cannot then discriminate on the basis of religion."

“State need not subsidize private education. But once a State decides to do so, it cannot disqualify some private schools solely because they are religious.”

 

This is illogical. Does a private Christian University become a public university if they receive a Pell Grant? Does a grocery store become a public retail establishment if they accept WIC funding? The first amendment says nothing about a state giving an educational voucher for students they refuse to educate themselves, but there is lots of precedent against religious discrimination.

 

Paying for a religion to teach its religion is endorsing the religion. Tax dollars doing that is against the first amendment. If vouchers make the first amendment null, vouchers should be ended.

 

I pay taxes to the school district, altho' I have no children in school, I would like to, at least, see my contribution directed to Christian students.

 

It is only endorsing if it is only paid to one specific religion while discriminating against all other religions. You do not understand the 1st Amendment. This has been litigated ad nauseum. So much so that I wonder why it keeps coming up as controversial. Its not. Its settled by so many case laws AND SCOTUS decisions that the only reason to not understand this by now is to either be ignorant, or intentionally ignorant, or to be outright lying. The 1st amendment does not forbid the government from giving money to religion. It ONLY prevents the government from giving money to one specific religion.

1st Amendment: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;"

IE: The government can neither endorse OR discriminate for/against a religion. It MUST treat religious businesses the same as any non-religious businesses. If it gives money to non-religious businesses, then it must also allow for giving of money to religious businesses. It cannot promote. It cannot discriminate. It MUST remain neutral.