High court considers money going to r...

High court considers money going to religious schools

There are 10 comments on the DispatchPolitics story from Nov 4, 2010, titled High court considers money going to religious schools. In it, DispatchPolitics reports that:

The Supreme Court yesterday returned to a subject that produced a major decision eight years ago: How far may the government go in aiding religious schools? In 2002, in a 5-4 ruling, the court upheld a school-voucher system in Cleveland that parents used almost exclusively to pay for religious schools.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at DispatchPolitics.

an American

Burlington, NC

#1 Nov 4, 2010
The first amendment says the government shall not endorse one religion over another. So in the since that you can use the tuition voucher at any school, i don't see where the state is endorsing any one religion. Go ahead Arizona and show the rest of the country how to do it right.
bill carty

Reynoldsburg, OH

#2 Nov 4, 2010
Religeous schools should not recieve any tax money. They are

1: a religeous school,
2: a taxt empt organization.
3. If they want taxpayer support for their school they should go to a public school.

Other wise they should not get any tax money.
BelMarduk

Clarion, PA

#3 Jan 18, 2011
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

That's the first amendment.
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof. Thats the part in question. I dont see how school vouchers, which are exorcised by the parent of the school child, has Congress 'respecting an establishment of religion'...
just sayin'
Question Authority

Triangle, VA

#4 Feb 2, 2011
Here's the thing. When GOVERNMENT holds the purse strings, it can dictate where the money goes. That only makes sense. And our government is constrained to hold to our constitution.

NOW, when the funds change hands, it is no longer in the government, but in the hands of the person who has EARNED the money to pay the taxes to begin with. THAT person should be free to spend the money however he/she thinks is proper for his/her own family. It is THEIR responsibility.

I don't see where this is so hard to understand.

The problem is that once the money is taken from a person's paycheck for taxes to fund the government the government does not acknowledge a CHANGE OF HANDS.

It would be a dangerous precedent for the government to be able to allow funds IN THEIR HANDS to go to religious institutions. It would be unconstitutional. PUBLIC funding permitting monies to go to religious institutions would fit under that catagory.

A REFUND in these taxes is basically what a "voucher" is. Funds changes hands and once again, they are in the hands of the ones who PAID.
This does not violate the first amendment, but SUPPORTS it.
Question Authority

Triangle, VA

#5 Feb 2, 2011
bill carty wrote:
Religeous schools should not recieve any tax money. They are
1: a religeous school,
2: a taxt empt organization.
3. If they want taxpayer support for their school they should go to a public school.
Other wise they should not get any tax money.
O.k. No IRS refund for you.
Nanny State Losers

Columbus, OH

#6 Feb 2, 2011
bill carty wrote:
Religeous schools should not recieve any tax money. They are
1: a religeous school,
2: a taxt empt organization.
3. If they want taxpayer support for their school they should go to a public school.
Other wise they should not get any tax money.
They are not public schools - they are government schools. The public has very little say on what goes on in the government schools for about the last 40 years.

If you want any say on your child's education, the parents have to hold the purse strings. That is why the last thing the government wants is citizens or the public to have any say on how tax dollars are spent, especially when it comes to chidren.

“Only a fool says he knows all.”

Since: Jun 10

United States

#7 Feb 8, 2011
I'm all for the United States helping the Christian Church. Our founding fathers did and helped plant churches and supported missionaries as our country grew. So why do we say they believed in separation of Church and State, when they didn't?

Katie

UK

#8 Feb 8, 2011
To Aaron Weaver hello i am also for the state in helping Christian churches.The church does so much to help people who otherwise would not get any help.I believe in the one and only creator God help the church to help others-God bless.
Question Authority

Triangle, VA

#9 Feb 9, 2011
Aaron Weaver wrote:
I'm all for the United States helping the Christian Church. Our founding fathers did and helped plant churches and supported missionaries as our country grew. So why do we say they believed in separation of Church and State, when they didn't?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v =dlfEdJNn15EXX
I totally disagree with you. With government money comes government strings; and rightly so. This is NOT the 1700s.

According to our constitution we have religious freedom; the government is not permitted to make a state religion, and they cannot interfere with the "free exercise thereof" our religion.

Tell me, how do YOU feel about Muslim churches in this country getting government support? Well, if what you wanted occurred, you'd have to be FAIR to all. You can SAY you are a religion and according to dictionary definition, you can be, even though it has NOTHING whatsoever to do with the Christian God.

I've seen what government 'support' can do to anything. No thanks. We don't want to go there. By the way, I DO believe in the Christian God. I attempt to follow those ways and want NO government help thank you.
Question Authority

Triangle, VA

#10 Feb 9, 2011
Katie wrote:
To Aaron Weaver hello i am also for the state in helping Christian churches.The church does so much to help people who otherwise would not get any help.I believe in the one and only creator God help the church to help others-God bless.
Yeah right. I have visited the United Kingdom and am GLAD we don't have government help. You all have such a wishy washy 'Christian faith' there from what I've seen. It's all about ritual; not simple Christianity. The governments have various social organizations to "help people". That is the problem is while there is a Christian mandate to help people, it is NOT their main mission. Their main mission is to "preach Jesus Christ and him crucified".(along with his resurrection and our new life) Let's not forget that.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

School Vouchers Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News North Carolina's big school voucher problem Dec '17 Wondering 20
News Study Shows School Vouchers Hurt Students -- Bu... (May '17) Dec '17 This is forum for... 5
News School-voucher opponents clear key signature hu... (Aug '17) Aug '17 Solarman 1
News Secessionists push for South to break away from... (Aug '17) Aug '17 Hostis Publicus 1
News Texas Senate aiming to move divisive bills at b... (Jul '17) Jul '17 Fundi farts 8
News The Cynical Dishonesty of Anti-Choice - Educati... (Jun '17) Jun '17 Maltamon 1
News Nevada leaders deal blows to school vouchers, p... (Jun '17) Jun '17 Maltamon 1