| Topic: |
Sociology > Education |
| User: |
"" |
| Date: |
28 Apr 2006 08:09:13 AM |
| Object: |
Maine Supreme Court Rejects School Vouchers |
Americans United Hails Maine Supreme Court Ruling Against Private Religious
School Vouchers
http://www.au.org/site/News2?abbr=pr&page=NewsArticle&id=8159&JServSessionIdr011=myxwpvu703.app13a
Wednesday, April 26, 2006
Ruling Is Latest In String Of Defeats For Voucher Advocates
Maine’s Supreme Judicial Court today rejected a challenge from parents who
demanded voucher subsidies to pay for private religious education, a
decision welcomed by Americans United for Separation of Church and State.
The 6-1 ruling marks the latest legal setback for voucher advocates.
Florida’s Supreme Court struck down that state’s voucher plan in January.
“Taxpayers should never be forced to pick up the tab for religious
education,” said Barry W. Lynn, executive director of Americans United.
“This decision is a welcome reminder that churches and church schools
should look to donations, not the government, for funding.”
Under a 1981 Maine law, parents who live in towns that do not maintain
public high schools may send their children to non-sectarian private
schools at taxpayer expense. The law excludes private religious schools
from the program.
Several years ago, parents who wanted to send their children to religious
high schools sued, seeking vouchers. The Maine high court rejected their
case. Not long after that, the U.S. Supreme Court upheld an Ohio voucher
plan in a 1992 case.
The Maine parents returned to court, insisting that the legal standard had
changed and they now deserved vouchers.
Maine’s highest court did not agree. The majority noted that while the U.S.
Supreme Court has ruled that states may extend voucher funding to religious
schools under certain conditions, it has never said that they are obligated
to do so.
“[T]he State may be permitted to pass a statute authorizing some form of
tuition payments to religious schools, but…it is not compelled to do so,”
observed the court in its ruling in Anderson v. Town of Durham.
Americans United joined with several coalition allies to intervene in the
case on behalf of Maine taxpayers who objected to being forced to support
religious schools.
Americans United is a religious liberty watchdo
Hails Maine Supreme Court Ruling Against Private Religious School Vouchers
.
|
|
| User: "fred" |
|
| Title: Re: Maine Supreme Court Rejects School Vouchers; Lynn being a hypocrite about taxes |
28 Apr 2006 01:08:10 PM |
|
|
wrote:
Americans United Hails Maine Supreme Court Ruling Against Private Religious
School Vouchers
http://www.au.org/site/News2?abbr=pr&page=NewsArticle&id=8159&JServSessionIdr011=myxwpvu703.app13a
Wednesday, April 26, 2006
Ruling Is Latest In String Of Defeats For Voucher Advocates
Maine's Supreme Judicial Court today rejected a challenge from parents who
demanded voucher subsidies to pay for private religious education, a
decision welcomed by Americans United for Separation of Church and State.
The 6-1 ruling marks the latest legal setback for voucher advocates.
Florida's Supreme Court struck down that state's voucher plan in January.
"Taxpayers should never be forced to pick up the tab for religious
education," said Barry W. Lynn, executive director of Americans United.
"This decision is a welcome reminder that churches and church schools
should look to donations, not the government, for funding."
Barry Lynn is wrong about absolute c&s separation because even
Jefferson, Mr. "wall of separation" himself, acknowledged that the 1st
and 10th Amendments reserved government power to legislate religion
uniquely to the state governments:
"3. Resolved that it is true as a general principle and is also
expressly declared by one of the amendments to the constitution that
'the powers not delegated to the US. by the constitution, nor
prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively
or to the people': and that no power over the freedom of religion,
freedom of speech, or freedom of the press being delegated to the US.
by the constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, all lawful
powers respecting the same did of right remain, & were reserved, to the
states or the people..." --Thomas Jefferson, Kentucky Resolutions,
1798.
Barry Lynn ignores that state legislators have never gotten their acts
together with respect to making tax laws that respect all religious
perspectives. For example, while religious related vouchers are flawed
because they include money collected in part from atheist taxpayers,
secularists like Lynn are wrong to ignore that Christians likewise
shouldn't be expected to help pay the salaries of evolution teachers,
teachers who tell Christian children that life originated by a chance
happening. So Lynn is not only being stupid about what the
Constitution actually says about the power of the state governments to
legislate religion, he is also ignoring the tyranny of unfair taxation
for Christians:
"To compel a man to furnish contributions of money for the propagation
of opinions which he disbelieves and abhors, is sinful and tyrannical."
--Thomas Jefferson: Bill for Religious Freedom, 1779. Papers 2:545
Under a 1981 Maine law, parents who live in towns that do not maintain
public high schools may send their children to non-sectarian private
schools at taxpayer expense. The law excludes private religious schools
from the program.
Several years ago, parents who wanted to send their children to religious
high schools sued, seeking vouchers. The Maine high court rejected their
case. Not long after that, the U.S. Supreme Court upheld an Ohio voucher
plan in a 1992 case.
The Maine parents returned to court, insisting that the legal standard had
changed and they now deserved vouchers.
Maine's highest court did not agree. The majority noted that while the U.S.
Supreme Court has ruled that states may extend voucher funding to religious
schools under certain conditions, it has never said that they are obligated
to do so.
"[T]he State may be permitted to pass a statute authorizing some form of
tuition payments to religious schools, but...it is not compelled to do so,"
observed the court in its ruling in Anderson v. Town of Durham.
Americans United joined with several coalition allies to intervene in the
case on behalf of Maine taxpayers who objected to being forced to support
religious schools.
Americans United is a religious liberty watchdo
Hails Maine Supreme Court Ruling Against Private Religious School Vouchers
.
|
|
|
| User: "Cary Kittrell" |
|
| Title: Re: Maine Supreme Court Rejects School Vouchers; Lynn being a hypocrite about taxes |
28 Apr 2006 01:54:28 PM |
|
|
In article <1146247690.811070.155070@g10g2000cwb.googlegroups.com> "fred" <clarma1@gmail.com> writes:
buckeye-elo@nospam.net wrote:
Americans United Hails Maine Supreme Court Ruling Against Private Religious
School Vouchers
http://www.au.org/site/News2?abbr=pr&page=NewsArticle&id=8159&JServSessionIdr011=myxwpvu703.app13a
Wednesday, April 26, 2006
Ruling Is Latest In String Of Defeats For Voucher Advocates
Maine's Supreme Judicial Court today rejected a challenge from parents who
demanded voucher subsidies to pay for private religious education, a
decision welcomed by Americans United for Separation of Church and State.
The 6-1 ruling marks the latest legal setback for voucher advocates.
Florida's Supreme Court struck down that state's voucher plan in January.
"Taxpayers should never be forced to pick up the tab for religious
education," said Barry W. Lynn, executive director of Americans United.
"This decision is a welcome reminder that churches and church schools
should look to donations, not the government, for funding."
Barry Lynn is wrong about absolute c&s separation because even
Jefferson, Mr. "wall of separation" himself, acknowledged that the 1st
and 10th Amendments reserved government power to legislate religion
uniquely to the state governments:
I'm curious what Mr. "wall of separation" himself wrote about
the effects of the fourteenth amendment on the tenth?
-- cary
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Craig Pennington" |
|
| Title: Re: Maine Supreme Court Rejects School Vouchers; Lynn being a hypocrite about taxes |
28 Apr 2006 01:38:58 PM |
|
|
fred <clarma1@gmail.com> wrote:
buckeye-elo@nospam.net wrote:
Americans United Hails Maine Supreme Court Ruling Against Private Religious
School Vouchers
http://www.au.org/site/News2?abbr=pr&page=NewsArticle&id=8159&JServSessionIdr011=myxwpvu703.app13a
Wednesday, April 26, 2006
Ruling Is Latest In String Of Defeats For Voucher Advocates
Maine's Supreme Judicial Court today rejected a challenge from parents who
demanded voucher subsidies to pay for private religious education, a
decision welcomed by Americans United for Separation of Church and State.
The 6-1 ruling marks the latest legal setback for voucher advocates.
Florida's Supreme Court struck down that state's voucher plan in January.
"Taxpayers should never be forced to pick up the tab for religious
education," said Barry W. Lynn, executive director of Americans United.
"This decision is a welcome reminder that churches and church schools
should look to donations, not the government, for funding."
Barry Lynn is wrong about absolute c&s separation because even
Jefferson, Mr. "wall of separation" himself, acknowledged that the 1st
and 10th Amendments reserved government power to legislate religion
uniquely to the state governments:
"3. Resolved that it is true as a general principle and is also
expressly declared by one of the amendments to the constitution that
'the powers not delegated to the US. by the constitution, nor
prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively
or to the people': and that no power over the freedom of religion,
freedom of speech, or freedom of the press being delegated to the US.
by the constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, all lawful
powers respecting the same did of right remain, & were reserved, to the
states or the people..." --Thomas Jefferson, Kentucky Resolutions,
1798.
Actually, the above cited ruling was a ruling by a *State* supreme court
in support of a *State* law that excluded publicly funded vouchers from
going to religious schools; which is within the *State*'s authority
according to you, no?
http://pressherald.mainetoday.com/news/state/060427ruling.shtml
So you're OK with the ruling, yes?
[remainder snipped]
Cheers,
Craig
--
Corollary to Clarke's Third Law:
Any technology distinguishable from magic is insufficiently
advanced.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
