High Court: OK to Deny Aid to Divinity Students

Fox News ^ | 02/25/04 | AP

[Modernman]

WASHINGTON

[jwalsh07]

It's not consistent, the statute only singles out Theology.

[gdani]

Get real, the same court decided Lawrence v Texas in opposition to states rights. Sodomy isn't specifically protected in the Constitution but religion is. States rights? Come on.

Do you think it's the job of the Supreme Court to tell states how to spend their money?

[jwalsh07]

Do you think it's the job of the Supreme Court to tell states how to spend their money?

Certainly not but I do think its the SCOTUS job to uphold the Constitution.

Do you think the state of Washington can tax clergy at a higher rate than its other citizens?

[jwalsh07]

And by the way, was Lawrence properly decided?

[goldstategop]

Funny but this was the same Court that said states can't outlaw sodomy. Liberals are for state's rights when its convenient for their agenda.

[Modernman]

Liberals are for state's rights when its convenient for their agenda.

That doesn't mean we should deride a SCOTUS decision that upholds the doctrine of states rights.

[Modernman]

Do you think the state of Washington can tax clergy at a higher rate than its other citizens?

A state probably could impose additional taxes on different professions, or impose different rules. For example, the states requires lawyers to belong to certain organizations and to pay certain fees every year.

[goldstategop]

Then why is it all the pro-state rights decisions out of the SCOTUS these days seem to be in areas liberals can applaud while its against the Constitution for there to be law or programs that promote or defend traditional values? Seems to me there is a pattern here.

[Hodar]

Do you mean to tell me that only clergy study Theology?

Well, I would guess Clergy and some night managers at McDonalds. There just isn't much you can do with a Theology degree, it's intended target is the religion for which it is taught.

Theology graduates pay taxes just like anybody else. I don't know what your degree is in but whatever it is in you have not benefited me an iota.

Really? Gosh, I guess my work at AMD, Intel and Cray was all just a waste of time, then. Engineers, Medical doctors, Roadway Engineers, Lawyers, Pharmacists, Mechanical Engineers, Nurses, Teachers, Dentists and thousands of other careers all exist because of your tax dollars. I would say that your statement was naive in the extreme. There is more than even money that you wouldn't even be alive if it weren't for a sub-set of these folks. I know I would have died about 5 years ago without the services of a skilled surgeon. The surgeon went to a school, and this school was funded in part by tax dollars. No tax dollars, no school. No school, no surgeon. No surgeon, no Hodar. Pretty straightforward.

The Constitution is not concerned with cost/benefit at any rate, it is concerned with equal protection under the law and the First Amendment explicitly acknowledges that religion is to be exercised freely.

And we agree 100% here. However, by granting $x to the Lutheran Theologies that the Mormons/Buddhist/Wiccan/Atheists are ineligible to participate in is discriminatory. This falls into the same clause as the tax dollars that went to 'Male Only' cadet schools. You can't fund specific groups, without making the attempt to fund all groups. You can't provide federal funding to the Boy Scouts, and deny the Girl Scouts, or the Elks Club, or the VFW, KKK or NAMBLA. Now, if this student had decided to study Theological history, I doubt that there would be a problem.

I feel no need to pursue a Theology degree but I certainly feel the need to defend those who adhere to a religion from the secularists.

Thus, you would want to take tax dollars to fund Muslim students for their 'Mullah' training, and for their Hajj? If you fund one religion, you must fund them all. I would rather chose to have the church fund their own. I do know of several churches who do send members to Seminary, and fund the costs from within their church. Again, this is as it should be.

[BSunday]

Impeach all supreme court and start over!

I agree with that sentiment in a general sense, but they made exactly the Right decision in this case.

[jwalsh07]

Really? Gosh, I guess my work at AMD, Intel and Cray was all just a waste of time, then. Engineers, Medical doctors, Roadway Engineers, Lawyers, Pharmacists, Mechanical Engineers, Nurses, Teachers, Dentists and thousands of other careers all exist because of your tax dollars. I would say that your statement was naive in the extreme. There is more than even money that you wouldn't even be alive if it weren't for a sub-set of these folks. I know I would have died about 5 years ago without the services of a skilled surgeon. The surgeon went to a school, and this school was funded in part by tax dollars. No tax dollars, no school. No school, no surgeon. No surgeon, no Hodar. Pretty straightforward.

Are you a socialist? Because I pay for the services I recieve. In your country, is everything "free". Sort of one for all and all for one kind of thing?

[gdani]

And by the way, was Lawrence properly decided?

IF you believe that the Bill of Rights should apply to the states and

IF you believe that the Bill of Rights provides for personal privacy

Then, yes, Lawrence was properly decided.

That said - in general - I don't think that states or the feds have any business prohibiting what consenting adults do in the privacy of their home

[jwalsh07]

You'll understand if I don't reply any time soon, I'm sure.

[BSunday]

Bad ruling. "RELIGIOUS DISCRIMINATION OK -- SUPREMES"

No. Let's get past the knee-jerk phase, shall we? They are saying it's not okay to force me to pay for YOUR religion, and vice versa. I am a ministry student so I have a personal interest in this, and I whole-heartedly agree with the court

[jwalsh07]

LOL, states rights my behind.

[BibChr]

Since I think you're wrong, I also think I'll pass on "getting past" the truth.

If I have to pay for this guy going into abortion, but the state says "no" to the other guy going into religion... that's religions discrimination.

Let's get past religion discrimination, either by not doing it, or by not subsidizing anything on a state level.

Dan (M.Div.)

[jwalsh07]

Thus, you would want to take tax dollars to fund Muslim students for their 'Mullah' training, and for their Hajj? If you fund one religion, you must fund them all. I would rather chose to have the church fund their own. I do know of several churches who do send members to Seminary, and fund the costs from within their church. Again, this is as it should be.

You can repeat this canard until the cows come home. Theology is NOT, I repeat, NOT, the study of any one religion. Do you have a problem with that concept?

What can one do with a Theology Degree?

[Modernman]

If I have to pay for this guy going into abortion, but the state says "no" to the other guy going into religion... that's religions discrimination.

Not at all. How is it religious discrimination if the state pays for things you don't approve of?

[BSunday]

If I have to pay for this guy going into abortion, but the state says "no" to the other guy going into religion... that's religions discrimination.

Okay, since when did abortion become a religious ceremony ? Hmm?