https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=166&v=iuJTsQ_QcYM&feature=emb_logo
https://www.oann.com/supreme-court-strikes-down-mont-court-decision-on-religious-schools/
I don't think public funds should go to religious institutions. There's supposed to be a separation of Church and State.
Quote from: joesixpack on July 02, 2020, 06:46:50 PM
I don't think public funds should go to religious institutions. There's supposed to be a separation of Church and State.
You don't even know what "Church and State" means!
Read the Constitution, then the First Amendment and why we even have a bill of Rights, then get back to me.
Quote from: Solar on July 02, 2020, 07:04:51 PM
You don't even know what "Church and State" means!
Read the Constitution, then the First Amendment and why we even have a bill of Rights, then get back to me.
You're free to express yourself however you'd like religiously. It doesn't have to be subsidized by the government/citizens, though.
Quote from: joesixpack on July 03, 2020, 05:07:38 PM
You're free to express yourself however you'd like religiously. It doesn't have to be subsidized by the government/citizens, though.
Again, do you understand what "Separation of Church and State" even means?
By the way, I have no use for religion, but SCOTUS was Right, regardless!
Quote from: joesixpack on July 02, 2020, 06:46:50 PM
I don't think public funds should go to religious institutions. There's supposed to be a separation of Church and State.
for when you get back, separation of church and state is not in the constitution.
Supreme Court hands a doubled-barreled win to religious liberty on schools, Obamacare mandate
The Supreme Court on Wednesday gave President Trump and religious freedom a double win.
In Little Sisters of the Poor v. Pennsylvania, the court ruled 7-2 in favor of an administration regulation that allows religious employers to opt out of providing contraceptives to their employees.
In Our Lady of Guadalupe School v. Morrissey-Beru, the justices by the same 7-2 margin prohibited employment discrimination suits against religious organizations where the employee served a religious function.
The Affordable Care Act stipulates that health insurance provided by employers must include birth control as a preventative service at no cost. The Trump administration sought to expand the moral and religious exemptions to that mandate.
With today's ruling in Little Sisters, employers are free to opt out of the contraception mandate if they have a religious or moral objection. This is the third time the high court has ruled on the issue.
https://justthenews.com/government/courts-law/scotus-rules-employers-can-opt-out-obamacare-birth-control-mandate
Quote from: Possum on July 08, 2020, 02:43:03 PM
for when you get back, separation of church and state is not in the constitution.
Damn, you gave him the answer. :lol: :lol: :lol:
He has no clue what the Bill of Rights means.
Quote from: Solar on July 08, 2020, 03:58:32 PM
Damn, you gave him the answer. :lol: :lol: :lol:
He has no clue what the Bill of Rights means.
I have seen this term misused more than I have seen it used in the right way.
Before Joe gets back and starts claiming he does not understand the point or direction or ignores questions or just being himself,
https://time.com/5103677/church-state-separation-religious-freedom/
QuoteJefferson wrote back that religious liberty, free from state tampering, would be a key part of the American vision. The Constitution, he wrote, would "restore to man all his natural rights." In this same letter, Jefferson explained the intent of the Establishment Clause and Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment to the Constitution, which reads: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof..." This, he said, built a "wall of separation of church and state."
Jefferson was not suggesting that religious people or religious motivations should be exiled from public debate. As a matter of fact, the letter was from a religious people appealing to an elected official for their rights — an elected official who, by the way, attended church services during his administration inside the United States Capitol.
Jefferson was guaranteeing that government would be restricted from interfering into religion, not guaranteeing religion would be shut out of the government. The founding Fathers knew a persons religion was part of who they were, and was something to be respected, not left behind closed doors. Once again the liberals have turned history into something it was never meant to be.
This sums it up pretty good, ""Unlike many places in the world, our government is not prohibited from referencing or accommodating religion, nor is the government compelled to scrub all religious references from the public square. Rather, the First Amendment ensures both that the government does not show preference to a certain religion and that the government does not take away an individual's ability to exercise religion. In other words, the church should not rule over the state, and the state cannot rule over the church. Religion is too important to be a government program or a political pageant.""
In other words, if you can receive the government money to help pay for a school of your choice, you can pick a religious school with that money.
Quote from: Possum on July 08, 2020, 04:58:20 PM
I have seen this term misused more than I have seen it used in the right way.
Before Joe gets back and starts claiming he does not understand the point or direction or ignores questions or just being himself,
https://time.com/5103677/church-state-separation-religious-freedom/
Jefferson was guaranteeing that government would be restricted from interfering into religion, not guaranteeing religion would be shut out of the government. The founding Fathers knew a persons religion was part of who they were, and was something to be respected, not left behind closed doors. Once again the liberals have turned history into something it was never meant to be.
This sums it up pretty good, ""Unlike many places in the world, our government is not prohibited from referencing or accommodating religion, nor is the government compelled to scrub all religious references from the public square. Rather, the First Amendment ensures both that the government does not show preference to a certain religion and that the government does not take away an individual's ability to exercise religion. In other words, the church should not rule over the state, and the state cannot rule over the church. Religion is too important to be a government program or a political pageant.""
In other words, if you can receive the government money to help pay for a school of your choice, you can pick a religious school with that money.
Good find! This underscores the entire meaning behind the Bill of Rights as a whole! That Govt is prohibited from interfering with what had been know as Gods Law, not govt law, which is why we built a wall around govt.
This is the problem with kids today, they haven't a fuckin clue what OUR Rights are, so they "Feel" compelled to trample the ones they don't like or understand.
Quote from: Solar on July 08, 2020, 06:19:11 PM
Good find! This underscores the entire meaning behind the Bill of Rights as a whole! That Govt is prohibited from interfering with what had been know as Gods Law, not govt law, which is why we built a wall around govt.
This is the problem with kids today, they haven't a fuckin clue what OUR Rights are, so they "Feel" compelled to trample the ones they don't like or understand.
His post should be put into the Library.
If I had to choose between government/public funds going to ALL religious organizations or NO religious organizations, I choose NO.