Welcome to StudentsForum.net!
FAQFAQ      ProfileProfile    Private MessagesPrivate Messages   Log inLog in

SC decision backs vouchers

 
   Your Students Forum and Resource Site! (Home) -> College Scholarships RSS
Next:  Major setback for religious right  
Author Message
K C

External


Since: Feb 25, 2004
Posts: 110



(Msg. 1) Posted: Wed Feb 25, 2004 4:10 pm
Post subject: SC decision backs vouchers
Archived from groups: alt>education, others (more info?)

In the recent Supreme Court decision against Davey, the court gave
wording that indicates it supports giving funds to religious schools
for vouchers.

Here is the wording from the summary of the majority position...

"Moreover, the entirety of the Promise Scholarship Program goes a long
way toward including religion in its benefits, since it permits
students to attend pervasively religious schools so long as they are
accredited, and stu-dents are still eligible to take devotional
theology courses under the program's current guidelines. Nothing in
the Washington Constitu-tion's history or text or in the program's
operation suggests animus towards religion."

Thus, the Supreme Court would not have a problem with the state giving
funds to schools that were clearly religious, NOR would it have a
problem with those in the state program taking religious courses, ONLY
using those courses for vocational purposes.

http://beingone.20m.com/providence.html

 >> Stay informed about: SC decision backs vouchers 
Back to top
Login to vote
Bob LeChevalier

External


Since: Feb 20, 2004
Posts: 4011



(Msg. 2) Posted: Wed Feb 25, 2004 9:45 pm
Post subject: Re: SC decision backs vouchers [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)

writingken.RemoveThis@yahoo.com (K C) wrote:
>In the recent Supreme Court decision against Davey, the court gave
>wording that indicates it supports giving funds to religious schools
>for vouchers.

Not in the least. The following discusses college level education
which is a different thing than K/12 education.

lojbab

>Here is the wording from the summary of the majority position...
>
>"Moreover, the entirety of the Promise Scholarship Program goes a long
>way toward including religion in its benefits, since it permits
>students to attend pervasively religious schools so long as they are
>accredited, and stu-dents are still eligible to take devotional
>theology courses under the program's current guidelines. Nothing in
>the Washington Constitu-tion's history or text or in the program's
>operation suggests animus towards religion."
>
>Thus, the Supreme Court would not have a problem with the state giving
>funds to schools that were clearly religious, NOR would it have a
>problem with those in the state program taking religious courses, ONLY
>using those courses for vocational purposes.

Of course not. That is the status quo in colleges today. But K/12
public schools can't offer religious classes.

lojbab
--
lojbab lojbab.RemoveThis@lojban.org
Bob LeChevalier, Founder, The Logical Language Group
(Opinions are my own; I do not speak for the organization.)
Artificial language Loglan/Lojban: http://www.lojban.org

 >> Stay informed about: SC decision backs vouchers 
Back to top
Login to vote
Gray Shockley

External


Since: Jan 29, 2004
Posts: 1066



(Msg. 3) Posted: Thu Feb 26, 2004 12:53 am
Post subject: Re: SC decision backs vouchers [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)

On Wed, 25 Feb 2004 15:10:56 -0600, K C wrote
(in message <e88a6c8b.0402251310.39a4384d.TakeThisOut@posting.google.com>):

> In the recent Supreme Court decision against Davey, the court gave
> wording that indicates it supports giving funds to religious schools
> for vouchers.
>
> Here is the wording from the summary of the majority position...
>
> "Moreover, the entirety of the Promise Scholarship Program goes a long
> way toward including religion in its benefits, since it permits
> students to attend pervasively religious schools so long as they are
> accredited, and stu-dents are still eligible to take devotional
> theology courses under the program's current guidelines. Nothing in
> the Washington Constitu-tion's history or text or in the program's
> operation suggests animus towards religion."
>
> Thus, the Supreme Court would not have a problem with the state giving
> funds to schools that were clearly religious, NOR would it have a
> problem with those in the state program taking religious courses, ONLY
> using those courses for vocational purposes.


My goodness, gracious me; you seem to have left out the concluding coupla
paragraphs. Let's see if we can't use our Ouiji Board to make them appear.
Ay, yes; the letters are coming in:
<http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=US&vol=000&invol=02-
1315>

Let's go back one sentence as it is always just /so/ difficult to bridger
legal works:

--------------------------------------------------------

Nothing in the Washington Constitution's history or text or in the program's
operation suggests animus towards religion. Given the historic and
substantial state interest at issue, it cannot be concluded that the denial
of funding for vocational religious instruction alone is inherently
constitutionally suspect. Without a presumption of unconstitutionality,
Davey's claim must fail. The State's interest in not funding the pursuit of
devotional degrees is substantial, and the exclusion of such funding places a
relatively minor burden on Promise Scholars. If any room exists between the
two Religion Clauses, it must be here. Pp. 4-12.

299 F. 3d 748, reversed.

     Rehnquist, C. J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which Stevens,
O'Connor, Kennedy, Souter, Ginsburg, and Breyer, JJ., joined. Scalia, J.,
filed a dissenting opinion, in which Thomas, J., joined. Thomas, J., filed a
dissenting opinion.
--------------------------------------------------------

Heck, might as well copy'n'paste the whole thing.

Next message.



Gray Shockley
--------------------------------------------------------
I hope it's not too durned long.
 >> Stay informed about: SC decision backs vouchers 
Back to top
Login to vote
Display posts from previous:   
   Your Students Forum and Resource Site! (Home) -> College Scholarships All times are: Pacific Time (US & Canada) (change)
Page 1 of 1

 
You can post new topics in this forum
You can reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum



[ Contact us | Terms of Service/Privacy Policy ]