High Court: OK to Deny Aid to Divinity Students

Discussion in 'Off-Topic Discussions' started by Charles, Feb 26, 2004.

Loading...
  1. Charles

    Charles New Member

    http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,112441,00.html
     
  2. Dennis Ruhl

    Dennis Ruhl member

    Separation of church and state - fine.

    Just what kind of politician or snivel servant would create or administer the law in such a fashion?
     
  3. Jeff Hampton

    Jeff Hampton New Member

    For those who are opposed to this ruling: Would you also be outraged if funding were denied for someone studying to become a Muslim cleric? Or a pagan priestess?
     
  4. Charles

    Charles New Member

    Jeff,

    Yes.
     
  5. Deb

    Deb New Member

    Psyhics college

    Yes, there are several state funded degrees I would object to - including one here in Florida that is for psyhics. I know someone who pushed it through by claiming discrimination against her being Wiccan.
     
  6. mighty mouse

    mighty mouse New Member

    Perhaps those denied taxpayer-funded scholarships because they are studying for the ministry should not be required to pay taxes on income earned from being in the ministry.
     
  7. Guest

    Guest Guest

    What's interesting about the arguments concerning the taxpayer and tax dollars used for such is that Christians are taxpayers too!

    The Separation of Church and State is bogus. It's the Separation of Christian and State that exists in the land today.

    Taxpayer dollars go to all sorts of non-Christian, religous functions and groups.

    Muslim studies in the public schools are funded by tax dollars.

    Wiccan studies are funded by tax dollars.

    I am not anti any religion outside my own faith. I believe all religions contain elements of truth.

    The issue here is fairness, pure and simple.

    But a good study of American history shows the the pendulum always swings back to common sense and order after experimenting with extremes.
     
  8. uncle janko

    uncle janko member

    Hi Deb: we agree entirely. I am delighted by this ruling.
    This is one of several areas where ultraconservative Lutherans differ sharply from many other Christians. Our reason is that whoever pays the piper calls the tune. We refuse to do public "fund-raisers" at our churches for the same reason; we do not want to be beholden to pop culture or what public opinion might want to be taught.
    I don't want my tax dollars going to fund heresy, either. Where there is an anti-religious or anti-Christian or anti-whoever bias in public education, that's wrong, too. Of course, there are some people who will claim that anything less than domination by them is persecution of them.
     
  9. Jeff Hampton

    Jeff Hampton New Member

    Re: Psyhics college

    Where is this degree offered?

    (By the way, do you object to it on the grounds of funding a religious program, or on the grounds that it is bogus science?)
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Feb 26, 2004
  10. Jeff Hampton

    Jeff Hampton New Member

    Well said.
     
  11. Deb

    Deb New Member

    Religion and psyhics

    I object to the degree on both grounds - that it is bogus and that it is religious. If a religion, any religion, wants to train it's ministers, then that religion should pay for it.

    I will have to call my friend and find out about where she is taking the classes. I will get back to you on it.
     
  12. Jeff Hampton

    Jeff Hampton New Member

    Re: Religion and psyhics

    I suspect that a "psychic degree" would only be religious in the way that some people consider a "biology degree" to be religious (i.e., it clashes with their religious views, so it must be religious.) But I certainly couldn't say without more information. In fact, I have absolutely no idea what might be included in a degree for psychics.

    Anyway, thanks. Could you also ask if they have a DL option? I would greatly appreciate it.
     
  13. BillDayson

    BillDayson New Member

    I'm unaware of any "Wiccan" studies programs. Of course, I haven't conducted a search for them.

    But tax dollars do go to studying Christianity. Many religious studies programs treat the Judeo-Christian tradition in detail, including courses in Christian history, in Biblical languages and books, and so on. Many of these programs are offered by state universities. What distinguishes them is that at least theoretically, they study Christianity from an "arm's length" scholarly perspective rather than teaching Christianity from a confessional perspective. It's a subtle difference. It's what the explicitly religious schools are trying to distinguish themselves from when they proudly emphasize their statements of faith.

    I think that the issue here wasn't a student studying Christianity, per se, it was state funding going to the preparation of clergy.

    And please realize that if the state is expected to fund the preparation of clergy, then it can also be expected to regulate it. The same 'separation' theory that makes public funding for seminarians problematic is what justifies religious exemptions.

    Here's another thing to consider:

    Preparation for religious vocations in colleges and universities is pretty much a Christian thing. It's a culture-specific idea to prepare for the clergy by earning an academic degree. In other traditions, people prepare for religious vocations in different ways. In most forms of Buddhism, monastics have traditionally served as clergy and they are prepared in monastic settings. I really can't imagine state higher education funding going to subsidize shaved-headed berobed monastic novices at Hsi Lai Temple. But state funding does go to the University of Hawaii which is unusually strong in Buddhist philosophy. It's the same kind of distinction as it is with the Christians.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Feb 26, 2004
  14. Bruce

    Bruce Moderator

    Re: Religion and psyhics

    Regardless of what you may think, Theology is a legitimate academic field. If you believe in the court decision, that's fine, but Theology is no more "bogus" than Sociology or Psychology.
     
  15. Jeff Hampton

    Jeff Hampton New Member

    Re: Re: Religion and psyhics

    Deb's use of the word "bogus" was in response to my question about having Psychic Studies as a legitimate academic field. Neither of us were referring to Theology as "bogus."

    Still no coffee?
     
  16. nosborne48

    nosborne48 Well-Known Member

    What's worse, the plaintiff gave up theology in favor of LAW SCHOOL!

    Actually, I thought that the most interesting thing was the split. Thomas and Scalia (described by an old professor as being"joined at the hip") dissented, making a barely credible argument that Washington State was somehow discriminating against religion. That meant that old Darth Vader himself sided with the majority on this one.

    Actually, I haven't read the Thomas/Scalia dissent but I am willing to prejudge it unfairly as "barely credible" because their opinions are rarely anything else...:D
     
  17. Bruce

    Bruce Moderator

    Re: Re: Re: Religion and psyhics

    Too much at this point!! :D
     
  18. Jeff Hampton

    Jeff Hampton New Member

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Religion and psyhics

    Perhaps you should consult Too Much Coffee Man.
     
  19. Deb

    Deb New Member

    Bogus psyhics

    Thank you for clearing that up, Jeff. I did indeed mean the psyhic study, not theology.
     
  20. nosborne48

    nosborne48 Well-Known Member

    WOW!! Darth Vader wrote the majority opinion himself! Even MORE amazing is that the Supremes reversed the so-called ultra liberal Ninth Circuit (think California) The Ninth wanted to force Washington State to PAY to scholarship to the plaintiff!

    I read the dissent; it is barely credible, as I thought it would be.
     

Share This Page