Announcement

Collapse

Civics 101 Guidelines

Want to argue about politics? Healthcare reform? Taxes? Governments? You've come to the right place!

Try to keep it civil though. The rules still apply here.
See more
See less

Church & State Case At Supreme Court

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Originally posted by Psychic Missile View Post
    Anti-catholic bigotry simply doesn't exist in the US to any noticeable degree.
    True! The religious groups need to unite to survive.
    “He felt that his whole life was a kind of dream and he sometimes wondered whose it was and whether they were enjoying it.” - Douglas Adams.

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by Psychic Missile View Post
      Anti-catholic bigotry simply doesn't exist in the US to any noticeable degree.
      Today? Sure. But the lawyer was talking about the time those amendments were made.

      At question is what's called a "Blaine Amendment." Long story short, there was the following proposed amendment to the US constitution in 1875.
      "No State shall make any law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; and no money raised by taxation in any State for the support of public schools, or derived from any public fund therefor, nor any public lands devoted thereto, shall ever be under the control of any religious sect; nor shall any money so raised or lands so devoted be divided between religious sects or denominations."

      This failed to pass, but a lot of states adopted either this or something similar to it into their state constitutions.

      While on the surface it seems to have nothing to do with Catholicism, as it targets religious funding in general, it's not quite that simple. You see, public schools back then were largely Protestant, and so Catholics (the Catholic population was increasing at this time) started setting up their own schools. And thus the Blaine amendments were passed in order to deny them government funds while still funding the public Protestant schools.

      ...or so many claim. There's debate on how much these were actually made to target Catholics (Sotomayor noted that in the transcript). But this was a time when there was a good amount of anti-Catholicism--one need only look at the popularity of the KKK for a demonstration of that--so one is hardly a "moron" for suggesting that was the reason for the amendments.
      Last edited by Terraceth; 04-20-2017, 11:28 PM.

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by Psychic Missile View Post
        Anti-catholic bigotry simply doesn't exist in the US to any noticeable degree.
        Except in the media who despises them for their opposition to abortion and gay marriage (the two things the media cares the most about). This comes through in how they never miss a chance to flog the Catholic church for the sex scandals that took place decades ago as if they were still current news stories.

        I'm always still in trouble again

        "You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
        "Overall I would rate the withdrawal from Afghanistan as by far the best thing Biden's done" --Starlight
        "Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman

        Comment


        • #19
          The issue I see here is that the school in question (not far from me) receives state day care vouchers. If they wanted to keep church and state seperate and deny the playground funds they should also be denying state funds for the day care and preschool
          A happy family is but an earlier heaven.
          George Bernard Shaw

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by Terraceth View Post
            Today? Sure. But the lawyer was talking about the time those amendments were made.

            At question is what's called a "Blaine Amendment." Long story short, there was the following proposed amendment to the US constitution in 1875.
            "No State shall make any law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; and no money raised by taxation in any State for the support of public schools, or derived from any public fund therefor, nor any public lands devoted thereto, shall ever be under the control of any religious sect; nor shall any money so raised or lands so devoted be divided between religious sects or denominations."

            This failed to pass, but a lot of states adopted either this or something similar to it into their state constitutions.

            While on the surface it seems to have nothing to do with Catholicism, as it targets religious funding in general, it's not quite that simple. You see, public schools back then were largely Protestant, and so Catholics (the Catholic population was increasing at this time) started setting up their own schools. And thus the Blaine amendments were passed in order to deny them government funds while still funding the public Protestant schools.

            ...or so many claim. There's debate on how much these were actually made to target Catholics (Sotomayor noted that in the transcript). But this was a time when there was a good amount of anti-Catholicism--one need only look at the popularity of the KKK for a demonstration of that--so one is hardly a "moron" for suggesting that was the reason for the amendments.
            That's a good point. I was thinking of the modern application of those laws, but that's not what was being talked about. I was wrong.

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by rogue06 View Post
              Except in the media who despises them for their opposition to abortion and gay marriage (the two things the media cares the most about). This comes through in how they never miss a chance to flog the Catholic church for the sex scandals that took place decades ago as if they were still current news stories.
              Abortion and gay marriage opposition aren't specific to the Catholic Church and sex scandals are still an issue.

              Comment


              • #22
                As a note, the Alito misquote I identified earlier has been corrected in the originally linked article now.

                Comment


                • #23
                  This grant nonsense is a perfect example of what I meant in Gerbil's "what would you change" thread. Why is this something the state is handing out money for?
                  I'm not here anymore.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Originally posted by Carrikature View Post
                    This grant nonsense is a perfect example of what I meant in Gerbil's "what would you change" thread. Why is this something the state is handing out money for?
                    While I agree with the expressed doubt that this is something the state should be doing, that does not seem to answer the question in discussion. If the government is going to blow money on this sort of thing the fact we need to ask why. And if the point is to make playgrounds safer for kids, how does the fact that a church is involved have any significance? Kids do not need to be safer on church playgrounds? This is not a First Amendment issue at all. There is no support going to a church, only support for safer playgrounds.

                    On the issue of safer playgrounds, these folks should have seen the playgrounds I grew up with. Somehow I survived, and I do not recall any injury worse than a skinned knee or elbow among my peers.
                    Micah 6:8 He has told you, O man, what is good; and what does the LORD require of you but to do justice, and to love kindness, and to walk humbly with your God?

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Originally posted by Jedidiah View Post
                      While I agree with the expressed doubt that this is something the state should be doing, that does not seem to answer the question in discussion. If the government is going to blow money on this sort of thing the fact we need to ask why. And if the point is to make playgrounds safer for kids, how does the fact that a church is involved have any significance? Kids do not need to be safer on church playgrounds? This is not a First Amendment issue at all. There is no support going to a church, only support for safer playgrounds.

                      On the issue of safer playgrounds, these folks should have seen the playgrounds I grew up with. Somehow I survived, and I do not recall any injury worse than a skinned knee or elbow among my peers.
                      At my old playground other kids broke the stupid "safety" bar* on top of the swings so they could do 360 degree spins on it. Never heard of anybody dying from it. I dunno what swings were like when you were a kid but I never saw anything other than baby swings with those plastic diapers you're supposed to sit in in Canada.

                      *if you tried to do a 360 with the bar there the kid on it would almost certainly be stunned by the sudden impact and fall off, risking serious injury or death so it obvious no genius was involved in designing it in the first place
                      "As for my people, children are their oppressors, and women rule over them. O my people, they which lead thee cause thee to err, and destroy the way of thy paths." Isaiah 3:12

                      There is no such thing as innocence, only degrees of guilt.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Originally posted by Jedidiah View Post
                        While I agree with the expressed doubt that this is something the state should be doing, that does not seem to answer the question in discussion. If the government is going to blow money on this sort of thing the fact we need to ask why. And if the point is to make playgrounds safer for kids, how does the fact that a church is involved have any significance? Kids do not need to be safer on church playgrounds? This is not a First Amendment issue at all. There is no support going to a church, only support for safer playgrounds.

                        On the issue of safer playgrounds, these folks should have seen the playgrounds I grew up with. Somehow I survived, and I do not recall any injury worse than a skinned knee or elbow among my peers.
                        https://youtu.be/Rqv38fP7cr0
                        Geislerminian Antinomian Kenotic Charispneumaticostal Gender Mutualist-Egalitarian.

                        Beige Federalist.

                        Nationalist Christian.

                        "Everybody is somebody's heretic."

                        Social Justice is usually the opposite of actual justice.

                        Proud member of the this space left blank community.

                        Would-be Grand Vizier of the Padishah Maxi-Super-Ultra-Hyper-Mega-MAGA King Trumpius Rex.

                        Justice for Ashli Babbitt!

                        Justice for Matthew Perna!

                        Arrest Ray Epps and his Fed bosses!

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Originally posted by Jedidiah View Post
                          ... if the point is to make playgrounds safer for kids, how does the fact that a church is involved have any significance? Kids do not need to be safer on church playgrounds? This is not a First Amendment issue at all. There is no support going to a church, only support for safer playgrounds..
                          If the Church wants to provide educational facilities for its children, so as to ensure a Christian education as opposed to the godless education provided by the State, then it must also be responsible for the infrastructure of their facilities...including playgrounds. Otherwise you end up with the state supplementing religious education, which is contrary to the First Amendment.
                          “He felt that his whole life was a kind of dream and he sometimes wondered whose it was and whether they were enjoying it.” - Douglas Adams.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Originally posted by Tassman View Post
                            If the Church wants to provide educational facilities for its children, so as to ensure a Christian education as opposed to the godless education provided by the State, then it must also be responsible for the infrastructure of their facilities...including playgrounds. Otherwise you end up with the state supplementing religious education, which is contrary to the First Amendment.
                            On the other hand - it would be reasonable to assume that churches could claim an equivalent amount for the education of children as is made available to other facilities for children. Assuming of course, that the church in question doesn't reserve its facilities for the members of its own group to the exclusion of others.
                            1Cor 15:34 Come to your senses as you ought and stop sinning; for I say to your shame, there are some who know not God.
                            .
                            ⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛
                            Scripture before Tradition:
                            but that won't prevent others from
                            taking it upon themselves to deprive you
                            of the right to call yourself Christian.

                            ⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Originally posted by tabibito View Post
                              On the other hand - it would be reasonable to assume that churches could claim an equivalent amount for the education of children as is made available to other facilities for children. Assuming of course, that the church in question doesn't reserve its facilities for the members of its own group to the exclusion of others.
                              The problem is that Church schools exist to reinforce and promote the teachings of the faith. And Govt. funding of this agenda is clearly against the First Amendment.
                              “He felt that his whole life was a kind of dream and he sometimes wondered whose it was and whether they were enjoying it.” - Douglas Adams.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Originally posted by Tassman View Post
                                And Govt. funding of this agenda is clearly against the First Amendment.
                                No, no it is not. At least according to the men who wrote it.
                                Atheism is the cult of death, the death of hope. The universe is doomed, you are doomed, the only thing that remains is to await your execution...

                                https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jbnueb2OI4o&t=3s

                                Comment

                                Related Threads

                                Collapse

                                Topics Statistics Last Post
                                Started by little_monkey, Yesterday, 04:19 PM
                                16 responses
                                106 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post One Bad Pig  
                                Started by whag, 03-26-2024, 04:38 PM
                                53 responses
                                306 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Mountain Man  
                                Started by rogue06, 03-26-2024, 11:45 AM
                                25 responses
                                109 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post rogue06
                                by rogue06
                                 
                                Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 03-26-2024, 09:21 AM
                                33 responses
                                196 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Roy
                                by Roy
                                 
                                Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 03-26-2024, 08:34 AM
                                84 responses
                                357 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post JimL
                                by JimL
                                 
                                Working...
                                X