You asked a simple direct question, I gave a simple direct answer. Anything else you read into it came from your own imagination.
Given that your advanced understanding of our Constitution has now been indisputably established, perhaps you can enlighten the whole forum as to where in The Constitution the enumerated power of the Feds to fund and regulate education can be found.
It does not exist, IMO. James Madison flat out said the power of Congress to regulate commerce among the several States was intended as a negative and preventive provision against injustices between States, rather than a power to be used for positive purposes of the central government - source
The text you quote is accurate, but it entirely has to do with the right to property, and not at all to do with education.
I did not know that! /sarcasm
My turn - Do you think the federal war on drugs is constitutional?
When you see something coming down the pike that you really don’t want to deal with, you can first try changing the subject before you simply refuse to respond. Instead of either, let’s try staying more or less on topic.
”You asked a simple direct question, I gave a simple direct answer. Anything else you read into it came from your own imagination.”
A direct question surely. But, hardly simple. The fundamental law of a government may be, and probably should be, written in simple and direct language, but the concepts and understandings it defines can be anything but simple. And, I don’t need imagination, merely experience, to understand that a gapping contextual hole in a propounded principle must be viewed with suspicion at least until a clarification is provided. You had interjected a constitutional fragment into a dispute over the issue; Science - a religion or no. The cited constitutional language left doubt that it was relevant to the issue. Providing the proper context removed all doubt, establishing indeed that it had no relevance.”
I did not know that! /sarcasm”
Now how could I possibly know that you did know that the constitutional text you quoted had entirely to do with the right to property when you interjected it into a dispute over science, religion, and education?
In any event I’m glad to hear that your opinion is that the Feds have no constitutional power to fund or regulate education. On that point, at least, we are in agreement. That that point might suggest to you certain other conclusions, or at least some other points meriting examination, is probably too much to expect.