The Supreme Court distorted a Missouri law. Now taxpayers will fund religious schools

[Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin]

The Supreme Court’s assault on public education escalated yet again Tuesday.

-snip-

Roberts based his opinion, in part, on a Missouri case from several years ago. In that case, a religious day care center applied for a state program that distributed shredded tires for playgrounds. The court said the tires could be distributed to the private religious day care center, an opinion we supported.

We thought, unwisely, that protecting all kids on the playground would be the end of it. We were wrong. Roberts and his colleagues now distort that decision beyond recognition, threatening the very concept of free public education.

It’s a long road from shredded tires on a playground to requiring taxpayers to support private religious schools. It’s hard to imagine a more direct assault on the separation of church and state, and the First Amendment.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/supreme-court-distorted-missouri-law-174328185.html

[madaboutharry]

1. The gang of 6 has no respect for The Constitution.

They will twist it into a pretzel in order to advance a reactionary right-wing ruling to their liking. They are Constitution abusers.

[Lovie777]

2. They have to fund not just Christian school but other religions . . .

again, the 6 fucked up justices are too blinded in their religious zealous.

Thomas needs to resign.

[Talitha]

8. Yes I agree, it had better apply to ALL religions.

But of course, the 'supremes' will likely put up a stink about it when cornered.

[Picaro]

3. It's all part of the plan

[Diamond_Dog]

4. Taxpayer funded vouchers for religion schools drain money from public schools.

Period.

Of course that’s what the right wing wants.

[Zeitghost]

5. It not that big of a stretch at all

The court is saying that if you have a publicly funded system that supports private organizations, be it grants to make playgrounds better and safer or funding private school education, you can't prohibit organizations from participating based on religious affiliation.

I have no problem with that and I'm not sure why anyone would. If you don't want to fund private religious organizations, don't fund secular ones who serve a similar role either. Anything else would be religious discrimination.

[Ferrets are Cool]

6. I am so angry about this. They have appointed themselves the RULERS of America

[GoodRaisin]

7. But, but...but

her e-mails.