Skip to comments.
Tempers flare at Supreme Court over religious liberty case
Washington Examiner ^
| 04/19/2017
| Ryan Lovelace
Posted on 04/20/2017 1:51:22 PM PDT by ForYourChildren
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-39 last
To: PSUGOP
Once we have socialism it is a question about what part churches should have in it.
I’d advise churches to go easy here. Scandal can be caused that obscures a church’s heavenly mission.
21
posted on
04/20/2017 2:53:40 PM PDT
by
HiTech RedNeck
(Embrace the Lion of Judah and He will roar for you and teach you to roar too. See my page.)
To: ForYourChildren
the preschool might choose to provide religious instruction to the children "outside on a sunny day" on the playground resurfaced with government funding.What a maroon!
The Wise Latina thinks religious cooties will jump off the children unto the gubmint cement and contaminate it.
To: NutsOnYew
Caesar pretty well gets to choose where his benevolences go. That said, Sotomayer has made mountains out of molehills. It would be like saying no publicly paved street might have the gospel preached on it. That falls under free exercise and free speech.
23
posted on
04/20/2017 2:58:40 PM PDT
by
HiTech RedNeck
(Embrace the Lion of Judah and He will roar for you and teach you to roar too. See my page.)
To: ForYourChildren
Missouri's Constitution includes a provision that prevents public funds from directly or indirectly assisting any church, sect or religion. 1. It's Missouri, they can amend the Constitution if they want. (2) If they don't change the Constitution, the legislature should eliminate all forms of public spending disbursed in a manner that directly or indirectly discriminates against any church, sect or religion.
24
posted on
04/20/2017 2:59:17 PM PDT
by
Pollster1
("Governments derive their just powers from the consent of the governed")
To: NutsOnYew
I expect to see a “significant religion blind public purpose” criterion applied in the end. The religious part is de minimis here.
That said if Missouri won’t pave a parochial playground I could think of far worse hindrances to church missions. This isn’t the hill to die on.
25
posted on
04/20/2017 3:03:39 PM PDT
by
HiTech RedNeck
(Embrace the Lion of Judah and He will roar for you and teach you to roar too. See my page.)
To: mountn man
Actually Kegan sounded like she was in favor of the church’s position.
26
posted on
04/20/2017 3:09:11 PM PDT
by
Mercat
To: HiTech RedNeck
No one’s talking about this being a federalism case where someone is suing in federal court in order to force a state to give them money in violation of state law.
27
posted on
04/20/2017 3:09:48 PM PDT
by
Bubba Ho-Tep
("The rat always knows when he's in with weasels."--Tom Waits)
To: sauropod
28
posted on
04/20/2017 3:13:37 PM PDT
by
sauropod
(Beware the fury of a patient man. I've lost my patience!)
To: Yo-Yo
How about the almost billion federal dollars given to church groups to resettle muslim refugees to the USA???????
29
posted on
04/20/2017 3:17:32 PM PDT
by
lizma2
To: ForYourChildren
The Humanist Manifesto, adopted and supported by the government educational bureaucracy since its first version in 1933, calls for the removal of Christianity from public education. That definitely is not separation of church and state.
The parents of the students who attend those type schools pay the same taxes as everyone else.
30
posted on
04/20/2017 3:32:09 PM PDT
by
odawg
To: RatRipper
Will the government deny me social security benefits because I might give some of them to the church I attend????If Hillary had been elected, I believe that argument would have eventually been made.
31
posted on
04/20/2017 3:56:08 PM PDT
by
free-in-nyc
(Freeping from the heart of the occupation)
To: PSUGOP
IMHO, the problem here is not about religious schools vs public schools. The question here is should the Fed or State government, be funding playgrounds? Books, classrooms, teachers, computers. Sports, music, playgrounds.....have a bake sale, beg from rich people. It is a local issue.
That is a policy question for the people of the sovereign State of Missouri to decide either directly or through duly elected representatives.
The problem is, if they choose to do so, the Federal Constitution mandates that they must be religiously neutral, instead they actively discriminate against religious schools.
32
posted on
04/20/2017 4:02:29 PM PDT
by
drop 50 and fire for effect
("Work relentlessly, accomplish much, remain in the background, and be more than you seem.)
To: ForYourChildren
Senator Grassley, not a glib individual, said that there were rumors of a court retirement as early as this June.
So, of the likely candidates, there is Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Steven Breyer, and Anthony Kennedy.
Who is it going to be is the $64 question.
33
posted on
04/20/2017 4:03:48 PM PDT
by
yefragetuwrabrumuy
(Leftists aren't fascists. They are "democratic fascists", a completely different thing.)
To: Yo-Yo
Religious organizations are getting federal contracts to resettle refugees. Lets terminate that under the “separation of church and state” doctrine.
34
posted on
04/20/2017 4:08:10 PM PDT
by
SauronOfMordor
(Socialists want YOUR wealth redistributed, never THEIRS!)
To: PSUGOP
The question here is should the Fed or State government, be funding playgrounds?Whatever they do should be done equitably and without discrimination.
.
35
posted on
04/20/2017 4:25:43 PM PDT
by
Vlad The Inhaler
(Best long term prep for conservatives: Have big families & out-breed the illegals & muslims.)
To: MeanWestTexan
Liberals twist the Constitutional separation of religion and government to say there will not be a state religion to mean the state must discriminate against religious groups.
Ironically, they use federal funds to build mosques abroad as “outreach” and teaching Islam in a positive manner in the public schools.
36
posted on
04/20/2017 6:01:18 PM PDT
by
tbw2
To: ForYourChildren
Reading through the transcripts on this was actually kind of interesting. I didn't see any big flaring of tempers as described in the article. Breyer actually had a really interesting line of questioning to the attorney representing the state. You can't really read too much into oral arguments, because a lot of it is, as Justice Thomas calls it, "theater", but I thought there were even some valid questioning by Kagen, and Ginsberg. I'll be interested in reading whatever decisions come out of the case. (There appears to be some small chance that the court will actually punt on it as well).
For those interested in reading it for yourself, as opposed to some folks begging for clicks, you can go here for the transcripts.
All Oral Argument transcripts can be found here
37
posted on
04/20/2017 8:02:22 PM PDT
by
zeugma
(The Brownshirts have taken over American Universities.)
To: ForYourChildren
First and only time I’ve ever clicked on the WashExam link. I was interested to read the whole story, but the ads almost locked up my PC and my ISP had to reboot the browser. Never again!
38
posted on
04/21/2017 3:28:02 AM PDT
by
octex
To: ForYourChildren
A playground is not a function of a Religion but totally secular in nature. Of course they should get funding.
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-39 last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson