[Hodar]

So, if I'm athiestic, agnostic, or belong to a church that does not require a Divinity degree in order to be a minister; I'm required to sponsor the education of a member of the clergy for someone else's religion?

Or, in other words .... If people should have their taxdollars used to fund the education of clergy for Christians, then the same amount of funds should be made available for Muslum, Buddist, Wiccan, Satanic and any other religous schools across the board.

I have to agree with the majority on this one.

[Modernman]

Some stories on this case seemed to imply that Oregon was trying to ban money from going to any type of religious studies. That doesn't seem to be the case- if this guy had wanted a degree in religious history or whatnot, I think he would have been fine.

I agree with the majority, too. This ruling seems to be very limited in how much effect it has on students wanting to study religion in universities.

[CMAC51]

Or, in other words .... If people should have their taxdollars used to fund the education of clergy for Christians, then the same amount of funds should be made available for Muslum, Buddist, Wiccan, Satanic and any other religous schools across the board.

The money was available and the person qualified for it apart from any religious considerations. He was subsequently denied access to it solely on the basis of religion. Had he not been denied the funds, it would not place any further requirement to provide funds for any other religious activity because religion had nothing to do with qualifying for the funds in the first place.

[MEGoody]

"If people should have their taxdollars used to fund the education of clergy for Christians, then the same amount of funds should be made available for Muslum, Buddist, Wiccan, Satanic and any other religous schools across the board."

I have no problem with this. If aid is offered for one type of degree, it should be offered for any type of degree. Why a degree from a divinity school is singled out is beyond me.

[Wonder Warthog]

"Or, in other words .... If people should have their taxdollars used to fund the education of clergy for Christians, then the same amount of funds should be made available for Muslum, Buddist, Wiccan, Satanic and any other religous schools across the board."

Wrong logic. If the states are providing scholarships based on academic criteria only (which, as I recall, was the purpose of this specific scholarship), then the choice of curriculum should be left to the scholarship recipient.

And yes, that includes allowing the student the choice to study ANY of the religions/"religions" you listed.

[MrsEmmaPeel]

So, if I'm athiestic, agnostic, or belong to a church that does not require a Divinity degree in order to be a minister; I'm required to sponsor the education of a member of the clergy for someone else's religion?

With that same logic, why should childless couples have to pay taxes for schools at all?