Again, the clergy's degree would go only to serve the congregation to which he belongs. All other groups would be denied his services, as they would run counter to their religion. A History Teacher, Artist, Engineer, Lawyer, MD, Pharmacist benefit everyone.
In my opinion, specialized groups (Lutherns, Catholics, Buddists, Wiccans, etc.) should fund their own clergy. I do not feel compelled to pay for a Catholic Priest, as I am not Catholic. Same thing with Voodo, Buddist, Methodist, Luthern, or others. These clergy ONLY benefit their congregation, thus the members of that particular group should be expected to fund their schools.
On the flip side; if you take taxpayer money to fund your religion, then it would only be fair for the taxpayers to approve what you are teaching.
Wow. That is the flip side of the coin, isn't it?
My taxes fund degrees for people who will never 'help' me in any way, yet I am required to fund them none the less. So what's the difference? Because one is religion and one is secular? Does that mean I can refuse to fund any secular degree that I object to on a religious basis? No, of course not. I still do not see a reason to single out divinity degrees.
"On the flip side; if you take taxpayer money to fund your religion, then it would only be fair for the taxpayers to approve what you are teaching."
No one is being asked to fund religion. They are being asked to fund education.
Hardly but no more or less than a degree in Theology depedning on the individuals capacity to make good use of it.