"To compel a man to furnish contributions of money for the propagation of opinions which he disbelieves and abhors, is sinful and tyrannical." --Thomas Jefferson: Bill for Religious Freedom, 1779. Papers 2:545
That public funding of religious schools has no place in a secular society ought to be a no-brainer. But it evidently isn't given the conservo justices in the Supreme Court ruling Tuesday that a Montana scholarship program could not preclude its use to attend private religious schools. According to the opinion of Chief Justice John Roberts:
"A 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."
What's the problem here? It is violating Jefferson's "Wall of separation" and the First Amendment by enabling public tax payer monies to be used to fund private, religious educations. This doesn't fly, sorry! Worse, it uses money that might have gone to enhancing resources at public schools and puts it in private hands! This is an abomination.
When one also learns (WSJ, p. A16) that in 2018 the state Supreme Court struck down the program, given Montana's constitution "bans any direct or indirect payments to any schools or institutions controlled by any church, sect or denomination", it makes the 5-4 conservo decision even more appalling.
Of course, the WSJ editorial nabobs, as they are often wont to do, cast the state's constitutional prohibition in terms of "prejudice" i.e.
"Many states passed such provisions, often called Blaine Amendments, amid the anti-Catholic fervor of the late 1800s."
Evidently forgetting or discounting Jefferson's cornerstone principle of the wall of separation as articulated in his letter to Danbury Baptists (1802), in which he wrote:
“I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their Legislature should 'make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,' thus building a wall of separation between Church and State."
Thereby providing an abiding, unwritten principle that has been practiced on multiple judicial levels since. The most famous ruling arising? The 1962 case brought by Madalyn Murray -O'Hair which has kept prayer out of the public schools, as it should be. This is irrespective of the Journal's bloviations that -- never mind the Chief's sometime "missteps" - John Roberts "sides with the angels in disputes over religious liberty".
The truth is he sides with the religious extremists (Christian nationalists, Trump-worshipping evangelicals, Opus Dei Catholics etc.) still seeking a Theocratic state where none is warranted or justified. So it is not a case of "protecting" religious liberty but enabling religious transgression and hegemony over the secular state. For those who believe this is over the top maligning of the religious I invite you to check out Americans United for Separation of Church & State's short video about the Christian extremist program to take over the country, "Project Blitz".
Meanwhile, the court's four liberal justices disagreed with the conservo majority opinion, but on different grounds. As a separate opinion written by Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg pointed out (joined by Justice Elena Kagan, WSJ, p. A2) "no constitutional violation occurred because the Montana court decision treated religious and secular schools equally."
Clearly, the Roberts' conservo lapdogs are more invested in pandering to the Religious Right's malcontents and others than they are in respecting the constitution or separation of church and state.
Yes, I myself benefited from a private (Catholic parochial) high school education, however, I paid for it myself. I asked no state or government to take from the taxpayer's till to fund the education I wanted. I negotiated a contract with the Marist Brothers who ran the school (Monsignor Edward Pace High in Carol City, FL ) to work after class hours, to clean classrooms, science labs etc. This provided just enough to pay the tuition.($200/month).
My argument is if any of these kids desiring escape from public schools want the same kind of private education, then fine, but find a way to pay for it themselves! (Or let their parents!) But under no conditions, rob the public schools and taxpayer monies to pay for it. In the words of Anna Maria Chavez, executive Director of the National School Boards Association (WSJ, ibid.):
"States historically have committed themselves to supporting public education by restricting the use of taxpayer funds for religious schools. State legislatures everywhere should act now to erase the long sought loophole opponents of public schools have gained by rescinding short sighted voucher programs and tax credit schemes aimed at redirecting public to private schools with no accountability."
See Also:
No comments:
Post a Comment