SC just ended separation of church and state.

[Eliot Rosewater]

https://www.cnn.com/2022/06/21/politics/supreme-court-religious-schools/index.html


But hey, Hillary would not have been a PERFECT candidate so we will bash her nonstop

The Supreme Court said Tuesday that Maine cannot exclude religious schools from a tuition assistance program that allows parents to use vouchers to send their children to public or private schools.

The 6-3 ruling is the latest move by the conservative court to expand religious liberty rights and bring more religion into public life, a trend bolstered by the addition of three of former President Donald Trump’s nominees.

That scumbag got 3 completely unqualified liars on the SC...But hey, she would not have been perfect so we had to WHINE about her and say "hold my nose" and vote

[Hassler]

1. Next up: Brown v Board

[Eliot Rosewater]

2. And on and on and on...

And I blame these disgusting fascists but also I blame a certain group on the left.

[Just A Box Of Rain]

8. You are not alone.

[Stinky The Clown]

42. " . . . . . but also I blame a certain group on the left"

AMEN!!!!

[Bettie]

25. Is there a case to challenge it winding through the courts?

because if there is, yeah, we'll be back to segregation by the end of next year.

[Casady1]

3. Private school kids

rule in favor of private schools.

[TheBlackAdder]

36. Eliminate vouchers, set up regional schools and bus the kids 90 minutes each way to them.

.

Give them remote access so they can telecommute 3 days a week, so busing is on Tues & Thurs.

Or jam the families and school M-W-F and telecommute on Tues &Thurs. This way they don't get extended weekends.

.

[edhopper]

4. And destroyed the public school system

We will soon have the Christian equivalent of Islamic Madrases.

[SouthernDem4ever]

30. Speaking of Islamic Madrases,

do they get funding too? Does the SC specify what type of religion?

[edhopper]

35. They would

But somehow I feel the Red Xian States will find a way not to give it to them.

[czarjak]

51. John Birch Society's dream come true.

[Eliot Rosewater]

83. Somebody bookmark this page for the minute Transgender Ministries, Inc. starts a school and applies

Somebody bookmark this page for the minute Transgender Ministries, Inc. starts a school and applies for government funds.

(above remark is from a friend of mine on another board)

There is a REASON the 3 patriotic SC justices voted the other way. Note EVERY PERSON on this board MAKING EXCUSES for these FUCKING RIGHTWING TRAITOR JUSTICES

[Lovie777]

5. True, I have not read the whole ruling . . .

but initially it opens the door to any religion, not just Christian, which will be a total mess, just like abortion ban.

Right now it's Maine. If these religious schools charge tutition, many residence who pay taxes ain't gonna appreciate this decision.

The US SC 6 assholes GQP has caused it's expansion.

[Novara]

6. I want to scream at Roberts: WHAT PART OF SEPARATION BETWEEN CHURCH AND STATE...

...DON'T YOU UNDERSTAND?!?!?!?!?!?!?

For fuck's sake! You people are supposed to UNDERSTAND THE CONSTITUTION.



These motherfuckers are re-writing the Constitution by fiat.

[Evolve Dammit]

31. Agreed. This is very blatant.

[C_U_L8R]

7. Time to start the Church of the Democratic Underground?

[Emile]

9. So now is it okay for tax dollars to fund abortions?

[SouthernDem4ever]

32. An abortion religion is a good idea since

the SC is protecting everyone's religious rights. MORONS!

[Eliot Rosewater]

46. No, any funding for any other religion will not be tolerated or for any other group

unless they are white supremacists.

This is the new America...the one we were guaranteed to get back in 2016 when a whole bunch on the left could not stop bashing Hillary.

[neoconn]

10. WOW!

What happened to separation of church and state? That is so fundamental to this conversation. Its clear the rules are slowly drifting toward BIG guv subsidizing religious activities. (Not sure how "Fundamentalist's" agree with this but you gotta fight fire with fire.


Islamic schools and other rites of indoctrination have to take advantage. That will cause them to slow their roll.. Heck .. Atheist school? Would love to see their face with that in play...

[Fullduplexxx]

11. Get enough dems elected and the s.c. wont matter

[gldstwmn]

17. This is what we are going to be told. Unfortunately with gerrymandering that's going to be

difficult.

[Eliot Rosewater]

47. Fingers crossed that the, wait for it

ONE

HUNDRED

MILLION

who saw NO REASON to vote in 2020, wake the fuck up!

Think about that number, they saw NO PROBLEMS worth their time to vote.

You and I, we here cant make them vote. If they decide not to participate, white supremacists fascist killers take over.

[dwayneb]

60. Say it loud Eliot

I've been screaming this for years. What do we have to do to wake them up? Billboards? Protests? Riots?

I used to think that SURELY one day these fools would wake up to the reality that their apathy was going to lead to a ring in their nose.

But as we get closer and closer to the elections of 2022 and 2024 I'm not seeing it.

[PXR-5]

12. Will this be enforced outside of Gilead? NT

[Roisin Ni Fiachra]

68. +1

[Haggard Celine]

13. I basically agree with the ruling.

If the state is giving parents vouchers to pay for their children's schools, they should be able to take those vouchers to the school of their choice.

I would think, however, that the state would have standards for the schools they fund. I've read articles about some of these religious schools who basically do nothing but have the kids study the Bible.
A school like that should not be allowed to participate in a voucher program.

Around here, some of the best schools are the Catholic schools. They have rather high academic standards and their graduates are generally well-educated. I don't have a problem with people taking vouchers to those schools. But if you're going to have a voucher program, you also need some sort of accreditation for schools to meet.

[rockfordfile]

19. Not if my tax dollars pay for those vouchers. I don't want my tax money given to bigots

[Haggard Celine]

23. If parents want to indoctrinate their children,

we really can't stop it. They'll eventually grow up and make up their own minds about all of it, just like I did. The state should be concerned with making sure the kids are getting a quality education. They'll also be taught things that are important to that religion, but I don't think the state should be concerned with that.

[SouthernDem4ever]

33. no but at least make them pay for it.

Not me.

[Skittles]

80. we can't stop it

but it should NOT be funded with taxes

[Dr. Strange]

40. We shouldn't give any public money to private schools, religious or otherwise.

Use the money to build public schools for these kids instead of sending them off to private schools.

[Haggard Celine]

58. I generally agree with that.

Public money is there to be shared in common, not to doled out to different private entities. Sometimes, though, an unusual solution has to be applied.

Some school districts are horrible. There's crime and corruption and it seems like nothing can ever be done about the bad schools or police department or whatever.

In a way, voucher programs are intended to help the smart kids who can't get an education at the out-of-control public school. Something has to be done in some circumstances to help the talented kids.

This sort of solution should not be the norm, however. Public schools should be supported in the biggest number of times. There have to be creative solutions in some cases. Just a fact of life.

[Dr. Strange]

70. Agreed.

This sort of solution should not be the norm, however. Public schools should be supported in the biggest number of times. There have to be creative solutions in some cases.

That might be the (hopefully rare) situation, in which case, we're kinda stuck with rulings like this.

[James48]

37. You are not representative of schools elsewhere.

Here in Michigan we have sone Catholic schools, but we also have whacko fundamentalist schools that teach that men rode dinosaurs. Seriously.

Private religious schools are not required to meet state public school standards, do not disclose their funding streams, have no oversight.

[Lonestarblue]

54. The problem is not just that the SC negated the separated of church and state.

They also established the right of an extremist religious school that discriminates against LGBTQ to be funded by taxpayers. This school refuses to accept LGBTQ students, refuses to hire LGBTQ teachers, and refuses even to admit heterosexual students of same-sex parents. They have now been authorized by the SC to continue their hate and indoctrination of what should be public school students who will now be forced to have lessons on hate. Nothing has been written about the school leaders’ attitudes toward abortion, but I can imagine that students will be brainwashed into believing that life begins with even the thought of having sex, that sex is a perversion before marriage, that women are nothing more than chattel who must obey every whim of their husbands, and that a woman should accept any man who offers to marry her, no matter how disgusting or cruel he is. It is their God’s will that women must suffer through eternity for the sins of Eve. No taxpayer dollars should ever go to religious schools.

[Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin]

73. This 👆

[uponit7771]

76. But they also included the school of Satan the Religious Arc Of LGBTQ Teachers and Mosques ...

... which of course the MAGA SCJ didn't think would make a fuss over funding ... OR... like Eastman said they'd just not take those cases and rule over them.

Buncha hacks at the USSC

[NickB79]

14. Wait until they figure out there are *gasp* Islamic religious schools in the US

The pearl clutching will be epic.

"My tax dollars are funding MUSLIMS!!!"

Or almost as good, tell some Evangelicals that their tax dollars fund Catholic schools 🤣

[Lovie777]

18. Protestants vs. Catholics . ....

That should be fun.

[badhair77]

20. Exactly. They think it's limited to their religion,

whatever that may be. Plus these people aren’t always inclusive.

[uponit7771]

77. +1,

[gldstwmn]

15. Clarence Thomas must go. Gorsuch, Kavanuagh and Coney Barrett all lied at their confirmation

hearings.

[NutmegYankee]

16. Look at it this way, it dissuades government from doing vouchers for private school.

The argument could be quickly raised that this ruling means government funding of a madrassa. The righties will go ape-shit and switch back to public provided schools, which frankly Maine should do.

[Shermann]

21. Maybe it is time for the School of the Flying Spaghetti Monster! nt

[Generic Brad]

29. Better yet, the Church of Satan

If the rules apply to everyone, then everyone should actively participate.

[xocetaceans]

39. Is it time for a School of Baphomet? n/t

[Zeitghost]

22. So long as all religious schools are treated equally

I don't see an establishment clause issue. I think they got it right on this one.


Voucher programs have pros and cons, but that's not what this ruling really deals with. If you're going to have a voucher system, any accredited school that meets state, local and federal guidelines should be eligible.

[Haggard Celine]

26. Yeah, I don't really like voucher programs.

I understand why they were created, though. Some public school districts are terrible, and effort has been made to make them better, but no amount of money or attention seems to get them to improve. In general, though, I don't think they're needed. Most public school districts are at least decent, and money should not be taken away from those districts just because some parents can have an easier time paying for private school tuition. If they want to send their kids to private school, it should be on their dime, generally speaking.

[Aristus]

24. All you "Hillary has to EARN my vote!" types:

Sorry the most qualified Presidential candidate in American history didn't live up to your astronomical standards.

Foxtrot Uniform Charlie Kilo Yankee Oscar Uniform!

[progressoid]

43. Yeah...

sadly we don't elect people based on "most qualified."

[Eliot Rosewater]

44. Actually, Hillary Clinton was on record and in fact the most progressive and liberal

candidate to run for President.

An argument can be made that on the issues Bernie was more progressive, but if you give him that, he is the only one.

And yet, she was treated like some rightwinger. Disgusting.

[betsuni]

55. Her history and identity was erased, replaced with a cartoon villain.

Used to be that it only came from the right-wing, then they had a lot of help. Shameful. And now everyone says "Hillary was right about everything."



Why did so many people believe obvious propaganda about her, why the lust to viciously hate a life-long do-gooder Methodist who remembers everyone's birthdays and picks up the phone and gets things done?

[Eliot Rosewater]

56. Those same people reading what you said are DYING to argue with you and tell

you some bullshit they heard about her, that isnt true of course.

They are reading this now. The ONLY reason they arent STILL BASHING her is they fear repercussion, but I see them on the internet where they are free to say what they want and they still hate her.

[betsuni]

65. I'd like those people to explain why Hillary, a horrible corrupt monster who only

thinks about money and is worse than the worst Republican according to them, isn't sailing around the world on one of her several luxury yachts wearing furs and jewels enjoying caviar and champagne with fellow oligarch buddies, cackling about destroying the American working class and starting world wars, or fondling her Imelda Marcos-expensive shoe collection in one of her dozen luxury houses right now.

Where's the yachts and houses and all the oligarch corporatist establishment coastal elite stuff? Where's all that money that supposedly corrupted her? Why is everybody saying "Hillary was right all along" now? Why is she still, as she always has been, a liberal? I'd like an explanation for why so many people were convinced she was corrupt. Because some guy said so? People are idiots.

[Eliot Rosewater]

69. Great post

[betsuni]

81. And if both sides are the same, why doesn't Obama have a nice cushy right-wing think tank job?

We're assured millions of times that Democrats are both sides neoliberals instantly corrupted by a campaign contribution. Why not a lobbyist? Nina Turner was a lobbyist. Somehow this was perfectly fine, no problem, lobbyist okay. Where are the Obama's yachts and luxury houses and establishment neoliberal loot? Now that I'm on the topic. Throughout the Obama administration it was Obama-drones-Obama-drones-Obama-drones. Why did concern about drones disappear?

Also, Obama gave a speech at Goldman Sachs. Disappointed the conspiracy theorists were too lazy to make a big deal out of it. A Hillary speech is more potentially diabolical? I really want an explanation for all of that bullshit. Prove the constant accusation that Democrats are corrupt. Enough is enough.

[betsuni]

53. One of my favorites: She received payment for speeches at Goldman Sachs, OMG disqualifying.

Goldman Sachs, evil cartoon Hillary and The Establishment are plotting to take over the world! Conspiracy! How dare a former First Lady, Senator, and Secretary of State get paid for her time, the going rate for a speech. WALL STREET DIABOLICAL BAD WALL STREET!

"It must be a fantastic speech, a brilliant speech which you would want to share with the American people. It must be Shakespearean!"



Ironic that people are mentioning the assault rifle ban included in the 1994 crime bill like it was a good thing when the bill has been used to hammer Democrats like Hillary and Joe Biden as racists wanting to put everyone in jail.

[kelly1mm]

27. So long as the court does not limit the religious schools (to only christian/jewish/islamic) there

is no establishment clause violation. The USSC got this one right I believe. A state does not have to provide funding for private k-12 education at all. If it does it cannot discriminate against religious schools. If you don't like it then have your state end its voucher programs in toto.

[Dorian Gray]

67. That's how I read their decision

and I'm not quite getting the anger at this one. If a state offers private school vouchers, they can not discriminate based upon religion or other ideology. They would have to be used for schools of any ideology. Or they need to rid themselves of the vouchers.

[Tree Lady]

28. Then I guess it's time to tax

The churches.

[Evolve Dammit]

34. Yes. Cannot remain exempt if accepting taxpayer funding?

[cloudboy07]

38. can't say what I feel - might be not politically correct!

get so tired of a government that me & my buddy's fought for ! what a fucking waste!

[dwayneb]

59. Thank you for your service

This is what makes me physically sick. To watch these scumbag Fascists piss on the graves of all the men and women that fought and died to protect our freedoms and our Constitution.

Do you think they will simply bulldoze Arlington when they take over in 2024? That would be better in a way that some disgusting lying faux goose-stepping past all those white crosses.

[cloudboy07]

61. thank from me & my friends in the military!

V.N. we were disgraced & now we disgraced by a damn draft dodger ! As sucker's & loser's ! treason rate's as a hanging offense ! Drafter dodger said that he would take care of our girl friends for us ! read that 1967 star's & stripe's in V.N. ! no joke !

[barbtries]

41. so i am about ready to stop paying taxes.

taxation without representation. I should not be asked to FUND assholes who brainwash children and teach them bullshit.

ETA: Expand the Court! the country is being victimized by these assholes.

[AdamGG]

45. The right claims to be all about wanting local government sovereignty rather than federal control

But, above all they're just fucking hypocrites and they just want things their way, however they get it.

So, now the SCOTUS is telling a state that they HAVE TO fund religious education, and the opinion of the locally elected state government just doesn't matter. I hope they just trash the voucher program altogether, rather than being forced to give public money to religion.

[Midnight Writer]

48. Heard on NPR earlier: Anti-landmine activists blast Biden for his ban on landmines because

"he didn't go far enough".

Shit like this burns my bacon.

They realize, of course, that the alternative to Biden (TFG) said "What's the point of having all these nukes if we don't use them?"

[Eliot Rosewater]

50. We are a broken country.

[betsuni]

63. +1

[roamer65]

49. Get rid of the vouchers.

Period.

[appmanga]

52. Pardon me...

...but that's the judicial branch of the American Taliban.

[Tarc]

62. What this will lead to is Maine simply ending the tuition assistance program entirely

and getting the money to non-bible thumper parents in a different manner.

Endaround.

[Eliot Rosewater]

74. What it will lead to is another brick taken from the wall from another angle very soon

and before you know it, Christianity is the official religion of America.

[burrowowl]

64. Damn this ruling and the judges who agreed to it!

[onethatcares]

66. time to tax them

it's only logical. But, who ever said there was anything logical about religion.

[Zeitghost]

82. Tax them on what exactly?

We tax organizations/businesses on net profit, something a non-profit does not have.

[onethatcares]

86. after they pay their mortgages, salaries, and the rest

it's all profit. Or am I missing something here?

[Zeitghost]

87. They will just spend it all, which most more or less already do

A business has a motive to turn a net profit, which is to return that profit to the owners. Non-profits like churches don't have that motive as there is nobody that can financially benefit from it. Churches save excess money for long term projects and stability, but they don't issue dividends to owners.

If you tax them, excess income will simply be spent instead of saved to avoid the tax bill. They will use it to fund more missionaries, build and improve buildings, pad clergy salaries, or simply just return it back to the membership who donated it.

[Cuthbert Allgood]

71. If you are going to allow the vouchers to non-religious private schools,

you can't, then, eliminate religious schools.

And this was for a very limited situation.

Would I be more happy if they said no vouchers? Of course. But it IS unconstitutional to say some private organizations are OK but religious ones never are for receiving public funds like this.

[frogmarch]

72. How unconstitutional of them. nt

[SYFROYH]

75. With public funding of faith-based programs...

… they couldnt use the funding for teaching religion. Is that prohibition gone?

[Sympthsical]

78. The state can't discriminate in favor of religion - but it can't discriminate against it either

And that was the problem with the system in front of the Court.

You can't say, "Pick any private school you want. If the private school has a religious association, you can't pick that one." It's pretty open discrimination against an institution for its religious affiliation.

If the vouchers only applied to other public schools, this would not have been in front of the Court.

If people hate the idea of a religious school getting these vouchers, end the voucher program applicability to private schools.

[fescuerescue]

79. Well that sucks. The major news outlets didn't even seem to notice either.

[Ms. Toad]

84. This is not a significant change. I'm actually surprised there are dissents.

Separation of church and state means the state cannot further or hinder religion. Specifically, as to schools, for decades it has been interpreted to mean that once the school opens it's doors to private activity, it cannot open it doors only to secular activities. In this instance, the activity is giving vouchers to allow parents to use public money for private schools. Once it has made that decision, it cannot prohibit them from choosing a particular school merely because it is religious.

I don't t think public money should be going to private schools, period. But that ship has apparently sailed, making this decision entirely predictable.

Is no one aware of bussing to Catholic schools, textbooks paid for in religious schools, state scholarships which can be
used in religious schools, to name a few very old uses of public money to fund education in a private religious school.

[RANDYWILDMAN]

85. Still not about Hilary..it's about lying judges

keep it simple please.

This is a slope but does it go both ways , cause it if does not then it is a piece of crap decision !

Do private schools now have to make accommodations for students with IEP's and special education programs and do they have to share their financial endowments with students who flow back to a public school ???