SCOTUS agreed to hear the case of publicly funded religious-based charter school. Should tax $ support religious charter schools?

[DrPepper12]

The Supreme Court agreed on Friday to consider a high-profile case that could open the door to allowing public dollars to directly fund religious schools.

The widely watched case out of Oklahoma could transform the line between church and state in education, and it will come before a court whose conservative majority has broadly embraced the role of religion in public life.

The case centers on a proposal for the nation’s first religious charter school, St. Isidore of Seville Catholic Virtual School. The school would be online, and its curriculum would embed religious teachings throughout lessons, including in math and reading classes.

As a charter school, it would be run independently from traditional public schools. But public taxpayer dollars would pay for the school, and it would be free for students. The question of whether the government can fully finance a religious school has proved especially divisive within the school choice movement and across Oklahoma.

They urged the Supreme Court to take up the case, believing the conservative-leaning court would decide in the school’s favor.

A coalition of religious leaders, advocates of public schools and some other state Republicans say the proposal is unconstitutional. Oklahoma’s Republican attorney general, Gentner Drummond, argued it would “open the floodgates and force taxpayers to fund all manner of religious indoctrination, including radical Islam or even the Church of Satan.”

The OK SCOTUS wrote in a majority opinion that the school would “create a slippery slope” that could lead to “the destruction of Oklahomans’ freedom to practice religion. Still, as more Republican state legislatures move to support school vouchers and other options for parents to use public money to educate their children in private schools, including religious schools.

The case will present new education questions for the 6-to-3 conservative majority, which has shown an openness to religion in the public sphere.

I support tax $ to ALL religious or public schools

I support tax $ to public & CHRISTIAN schools only

I support tax $ to SECULAR PRIVATE schools & public only

I support tax $ to PUBLIC only; any other is YOUR problem!

It's complicated... I'll explain:

[WindAtMyBack]

50 years ago when I was in high school this was an issue. I'm surprised it hasn't been decided yet. In our government class, we did almost this same scenario in our mock Congress. The difference was that in our mock Congress, the parochial schools were not fully paid for, but got the same amount per student as public schools.

I was liberal then and conservative now, but my opinion has not changed on this one. I don't have a problem with it. They are paying for the students education, not for the school, and not for religion. In high school I think I was in a slight minority with that opinion.

At the time, the local parochial school accepted non-Catholic students. Even though it was fully private, the non-Catholic students were not required to take the religious classes. They took other classes.

If the schools in this court case are teaching religion, with no option for other classes, I don't think the government should pay for it. But I'm borderline on that. As long as the students are getting a good education, I'm not sure if I care if they teach religion.

One argument against this is that it siphons funds from public schools, meaning that the public schools get worse and worse. But this was an issue 50 years ago, and probably was long before that. There are probably "studies" on both sides. My own inclination is that it doesn't hurt public schools in any significant way, and maybe even makes them better through competition. The large majority of people still go to public schools.

[DrPepper12]

Charters are unaccountable por profit parasites on the public schools and yield worse results. It's death of public education by attrition. Starve it if funds until it can't work

[WindAtMyBack]

I don't believe for a minute that the money drain is significant. If so, it just means the pubic schools need to do a better job.

[Cormac995]

As far as I'm concerned, the moment someone is paid a living talking about God it's a cult and a scam. Doesn't matter if you're a priest or the pope all men are capable of abuse of authority when money and I hierarchy form in a religion it's not a religion anymore in my opinion.

Also, since America is supposed to have separation of church and state priests should have to pay taxes, but they get special exemptions and since I believe private schools should be taxed since they're for-profit enterprises I think religious ones should too.

[Gwendoline]

Largely depends. In America there are catholic schools and colleges everywhere yet you do not have to be a Catholic to attend.

Religion should be taught in school but more of a subject like maths, science, geography etc but actual religious education in a particular religion such as Catholicism or lutherism or methodism should be offered but not obligatory and is probably better taught by parents at home or by the actual church.

Catholic schools have a well deserved reputation in America and Britain for delivering a very high standard of education while mostly not being a private school, maybe that should be encouraged. If some of these religious schools can in fact deliver higher standards of academic education than failing us public schools then maybe they should be funded by the state.

[DrPepper12]

But the vast majority don't. Just siphon public taxes to private profits.

[Gwendoline]

There's a reason so many parents are trying to get their kids into these schools.

[onedarkcloud]

Every child in America is allotted a certain amount of money for education each year. let the parents take that money and use it in a public school trade school secular school and anything beyond the amount given is to be paid for by the family, not the government

[DrPepper12]

Ok but using the property tax instead of income tax is so regressive it's unsustainable. Would you alter the tax base to accomplish this? Nationalize it?

[onedarkcloud]

I think you are on the right path. It would have to be discussed by all to find a way to fund a great education system whether private, public, or religious that meets. the same strict standards. FUNDING may be a national lottery for education ONLY. Making Everyone get the same amount from the homeless to Musk. OPEN TO MORE DISCUSSION

[DrPepper12]

Very cogent. TY

[NaultD]

The totally of of USA constitution and government body is diametrically opposed to the Christian commandments.

With freedom of religion being the first amendment and the first Christian commandment no false idols. Both can't be respected our government is only for Christian faith.

To be honest it would be consistent if the Christian religion as a whole fundamental rejected the United States government.

[Friendlybro79]

@naultd The U. S. Constitution and Christian commandments are not necessarily diametrically opposed, but they serve fundamentally different purposes and operate in distinct realms: one is a secular legal framework, and the other is a spiritual and moral guide.

Remember the constitution allows anyone to practice their religion and does not infringe on you or Christian followers to have to do things that you find immoral in the constitution. For ex like have an abortion or same sex marriage.

It also aligns with the Bible in ways for ex.
The First Amendment protects religious freedom, which allows individuals to live out their faith without government interference. This aligns with the biblical principle that faith must be freely chosen (Joshua 24:15: "Choose this day whom you will serve.").

Protection of the vulnerable:

Both emphasize caring for the marginalized:

Constitution: Equal protection under the law (14th Amendment).

Bible: Commands to care for the poor, widows, and orphans (James 1:27; Isaiah 1:17).

This last one Republicans totally abandoned, and funny enough most of them are Christian but it is in the constitution and that is the Bible verse.

My point is it's not exactly diametrically opposed to Christian values or commandments.

If you want to reject the government should it reject you?

[Anonymous]

if you truly believe in separation of church and state, should the government stay out of marriage?

[DrPepper12]

No. The state has an interest in the civil contract that marriage is at its heart.

Anything ceremonial is of course NUNYA for govt.

[Twalli]

Private schools should not receive federal funding. I went to a private highschool. The tuition was over $20k per year. That didn't include the costs for books each year. They were fully funded by donations and the $ for tuition and books.

[Likes2drive]

It should just be for public schools because it’s just going to increase taxes to support other schools with tax money

[Hispanic-Cool-Guy]

No. Tax money is for public projects and public expenses only.

Religion is for private religious schools, religious temples and at home.

[Pterodon]

Better than spending it on illegal aliens

[DrPepper12]

Deflection

[Anonymous]

Absolutely.