PAF
Member
- Joined
- Feb 26, 2012
- Messages
- 13,615
What's between my Lord God and me is my personal business. Not yours. Not some politician. Certainly not government. And I don't need any law to legislate my morality.
Government, religion, and "secular" vs. "religious"
- Thread starter PAF
- Start date
What's between my Lord God and me is my personal business. Not yours. Not some politician. Certainly not government. And I don't need any law to legislate my morality.
Absolute and unlike Jesus no forgiveness
Invisible Man
Member
- Joined
- Dec 9, 2019
- Messages
- 4,376
I don't see anyone in this thread opposing the display of the 10 Commandments.
PAF
Member
- Joined
- Feb 26, 2012
- Messages
- 13,615
That's one of planks of the Heritage Foundation's Project2025 - Doing away with the separation of church and state. You know, the same group who wrote Obam-ney-Care for Romney. And Obama.
- Joined
- Nov 5, 2010
- Messages
- 40,064
The belief in "government neutrality" [1] (which, if it actually existed, would be as miraculous as the wine at Cana) is every bit as "religious" in nature as the expression of any other articles of any other faiths.
It just comes from a different "sacred text" - e.g., a grade-school civics-class textbook (instead of a Talmud, Bible, Quran, Bhagavad Gita, etc.) - and is conveyed to new generations via different "temples" - e.g., "public" schools (instead of synagogues, churches, madrasas, etc.).
Plus ça change ...
[1] Or the endorsement of the imposition of that supposed "neutrality" upon others under threat of force (in the form of either mandates or prohibitions).
Last edited:
Swordsmyth
Member
- Joined
- Apr 14, 2016
- Messages
- 74,737
Swordsmyth
Member
- Joined
- Apr 14, 2016
- Messages
- 74,737
Swordsmyth
Member
- Joined
- Apr 14, 2016
- Messages
- 74,737
PAF
Member
- Joined
- Feb 26, 2012
- Messages
- 13,615
The Oklahoma Supreme Court Just Rejected the Nation’s First Religious Public Charter School
June 25, 2024
The creation of a Catholic public school violates the separation of church and state.
In a win for the separation of church and state, the Oklahoma Supreme Court ruled that Oklahoma’s approval of the nation’s first religious public charter school violates the state constitution and charter-school statute, as well as the U.S. Constitution. The decision affirms what we already knew: A religious school can’t be a public school, and a public school can’t be religious.
Last year, St. Isidore of Seville Catholic Virtual School applied to the Oklahoma Virtual Charter School Board to become a public charter school. The school, which would have been managed by the Archdiocese of Oklahoma City, proclaimed in its application that it would carry out “the evangelizing mission of the [Catholic] Church” by fully embracing its religious teachings and incorporating those teachings “into every aspect of the School.” The school also acknowledged that it would discriminate in admissions, student discipline, and employment, as necessary to satisfy the Catholic Church’s religious doctrine, and that it would not accommodate a student’s disability if doing so would violate the school’s Catholic beliefs.
Despite warnings from the Oklahoma attorney general, education groups, and civil rights organizations that public schools—including charter schools—cannot legally teach a religious curriculum or discriminate against students and employees, the Virtual Charter School Board approved St. Isidore’s application and entered into an agreement allowing the school to begin operating for the upcoming school year. Today, in ordering the state board to rescind its contract with St. Isidore, the Oklahoma Supreme Court sent a pointed message: Our public schools are for education, not evangelizing.
The court held that charter schools, which are funded by the state, created as government entities, and expressly characterized in state law as “public schools,” are, of course, just that – public schools. As a result, the court explained, a religious public charter school violates not only the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment, but also Oklahoma’s charter school law and constitution, which forbid public schools from imposing religious teachings on students. “Enforcing the St. Isidore contract would create a slippery slope and what the [state constitution’s] framers warned against—the destruction of Oklahomans’ freedom to practice religion without fear of governmental intervention,” the court stated.
The ruling comes in response to a petition filed with the Oklahoma Supreme Court by the Oklahoma attorney general, who sought to rescind the Charter School Board’s contract with St. Isidore. Although some people may be surprised that a Republican attorney general would object to the nation’s first religious public charter school, safeguarding the separation of church and state is not, and never should be, a partisan issue.
That’s why the ACLU, along with Americans United for Separation of Church and State, Education Law Center, and the Freedom From Religion Foundation, filed a friend-of-the-court brief in the case supporting the attorney general. Even before the attorney general filed his petition, we brought suit in Oklahoma state court on behalf of parents, faith leaders, and public-school advocates who don’t want their tax dollars used to fund a religious public school that discriminates against students and staff and promotes religious doctrine.
Church-state separation is a cornerstone of our democracy. It’s critical to preserving the right of every person to decide for themselves—without pressure from the government—which religious beliefs, if any, to hold and practice. It also ensures that the government doesn’t undermine religion either by co-opting it for political purposes or rendering religious institutions dependent on the state to spread their faith. Indeed, the U.S. Supreme Court has repeatedly emphasized that the separation between religion and government is particularly crucial in our public schools, which, by design, freely serve all students equally regardless of religious background or preference.
St. Isidore is, and has always been, free to open as a private religious school that taxpayers would not be forced to support. It is not free, however, to assume the mantle of a public school—including all the associated legal and financial benefits—while flouting the Oklahoma and U.S. Constitutions. The Oklahoma Supreme Court recognized as much, explaining, “What St. Isidore requests from this court is beyond the fair treatment of a private religious institution receiving a generally available benefit…It is about the state’s creation and funding of a new religious institution violating the Establishment Clause.”
https://www.aclu.org/news/religious...nations-first-religious-public-charter-school
June 25, 2024
The creation of a Catholic public school violates the separation of church and state.
In a win for the separation of church and state, the Oklahoma Supreme Court ruled that Oklahoma’s approval of the nation’s first religious public charter school violates the state constitution and charter-school statute, as well as the U.S. Constitution. The decision affirms what we already knew: A religious school can’t be a public school, and a public school can’t be religious.
Last year, St. Isidore of Seville Catholic Virtual School applied to the Oklahoma Virtual Charter School Board to become a public charter school. The school, which would have been managed by the Archdiocese of Oklahoma City, proclaimed in its application that it would carry out “the evangelizing mission of the [Catholic] Church” by fully embracing its religious teachings and incorporating those teachings “into every aspect of the School.” The school also acknowledged that it would discriminate in admissions, student discipline, and employment, as necessary to satisfy the Catholic Church’s religious doctrine, and that it would not accommodate a student’s disability if doing so would violate the school’s Catholic beliefs.
Despite warnings from the Oklahoma attorney general, education groups, and civil rights organizations that public schools—including charter schools—cannot legally teach a religious curriculum or discriminate against students and employees, the Virtual Charter School Board approved St. Isidore’s application and entered into an agreement allowing the school to begin operating for the upcoming school year. Today, in ordering the state board to rescind its contract with St. Isidore, the Oklahoma Supreme Court sent a pointed message: Our public schools are for education, not evangelizing.
“Our public schools are for education, not evangelizing.”
The court held that charter schools, which are funded by the state, created as government entities, and expressly characterized in state law as “public schools,” are, of course, just that – public schools. As a result, the court explained, a religious public charter school violates not only the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment, but also Oklahoma’s charter school law and constitution, which forbid public schools from imposing religious teachings on students. “Enforcing the St. Isidore contract would create a slippery slope and what the [state constitution’s] framers warned against—the destruction of Oklahomans’ freedom to practice religion without fear of governmental intervention,” the court stated.
The ruling comes in response to a petition filed with the Oklahoma Supreme Court by the Oklahoma attorney general, who sought to rescind the Charter School Board’s contract with St. Isidore. Although some people may be surprised that a Republican attorney general would object to the nation’s first religious public charter school, safeguarding the separation of church and state is not, and never should be, a partisan issue.
That’s why the ACLU, along with Americans United for Separation of Church and State, Education Law Center, and the Freedom From Religion Foundation, filed a friend-of-the-court brief in the case supporting the attorney general. Even before the attorney general filed his petition, we brought suit in Oklahoma state court on behalf of parents, faith leaders, and public-school advocates who don’t want their tax dollars used to fund a religious public school that discriminates against students and staff and promotes religious doctrine.
Church-state separation is a cornerstone of our democracy. It’s critical to preserving the right of every person to decide for themselves—without pressure from the government—which religious beliefs, if any, to hold and practice. It also ensures that the government doesn’t undermine religion either by co-opting it for political purposes or rendering religious institutions dependent on the state to spread their faith. Indeed, the U.S. Supreme Court has repeatedly emphasized that the separation between religion and government is particularly crucial in our public schools, which, by design, freely serve all students equally regardless of religious background or preference.
St. Isidore is, and has always been, free to open as a private religious school that taxpayers would not be forced to support. It is not free, however, to assume the mantle of a public school—including all the associated legal and financial benefits—while flouting the Oklahoma and U.S. Constitutions. The Oklahoma Supreme Court recognized as much, explaining, “What St. Isidore requests from this court is beyond the fair treatment of a private religious institution receiving a generally available benefit…It is about the state’s creation and funding of a new religious institution violating the Establishment Clause.”
https://www.aclu.org/news/religious...nations-first-religious-public-charter-school
PAF
Member
- Joined
- Feb 26, 2012
- Messages
- 13,615
Two wrongs don't make a right.
I see the push to eliminate "separation of church and state" as a way to appeal to people to support and stay in public school. If folks are so inclined to raise their children morally, home school, send them to Sunday School, pull them out of public school and send them to a private school. I don't want or need another reason to pay for public indoctrination camps with my tax dollars.
PAF
Member
- Joined
- Feb 26, 2012
- Messages
- 13,615
Government Promotion of Religion
Religious freedom is not only one of our most treasured liberties, but it is also a fundamental human right and a defining feature of our national character. Given this nation’s robust, longstanding commitment to freedom of religion and belief, it is no surprise that the United States is among the most religious and religiously diverse nations in the world. Indeed, religious liberty is alive and well in this country precisely because our government cannot tell us whether, when, where, or how to worship, and because our government cannot take sides on matters of faith.
Recognizing the importance of religious freedom, our founders set forth the Establishment Clause as the very first freedom enshrined in the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. It is a guarantee that the government will neither prefer religion over non-religion nor favor particular faiths over others.
Unfortunately, the government sometimes strays from this ideal by, for example, using taxpayer dollars to support religious activities, erecting religious symbols on government land, or discriminating on the basis of religion in government programs. These actions violate the Establishment Clause, which recognizes that religious freedom thrives best when the government stays out of it. Matters of religious belief should be left to individuals and faith communities, not to governments or political majorities.
https://www.aclu.org/issues/religious-liberty/government-promotion-religion
Religious freedom is not only one of our most treasured liberties, but it is also a fundamental human right and a defining feature of our national character. Given this nation’s robust, longstanding commitment to freedom of religion and belief, it is no surprise that the United States is among the most religious and religiously diverse nations in the world. Indeed, religious liberty is alive and well in this country precisely because our government cannot tell us whether, when, where, or how to worship, and because our government cannot take sides on matters of faith.
Recognizing the importance of religious freedom, our founders set forth the Establishment Clause as the very first freedom enshrined in the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. It is a guarantee that the government will neither prefer religion over non-religion nor favor particular faiths over others.
Unfortunately, the government sometimes strays from this ideal by, for example, using taxpayer dollars to support religious activities, erecting religious symbols on government land, or discriminating on the basis of religion in government programs. These actions violate the Establishment Clause, which recognizes that religious freedom thrives best when the government stays out of it. Matters of religious belief should be left to individuals and faith communities, not to governments or political majorities.
https://www.aclu.org/issues/religious-liberty/government-promotion-religion
CaptUSA
Member
- Joined
- May 17, 2011
- Messages
- 18,941
So then... When does the ACLU go after wokism, DEI, and ESG??? These are the state's religions and the symbols are plastered all over the place in government buildings. They will actively discriminate on the basis of that religion in hiring, promoting, and implementation of their government programs.
I guess the ACLU doesn't care about the "establishment" clause if you pretend it's not a religion??
I guess the ACLU doesn't care about the "establishment" clause if you pretend it's not a religion??
Invisible Man
Member
- Joined
- Dec 9, 2019
- Messages
- 4,376
Dream on.
Everything the government does takes sides on matters of faith. Any conceivable justification for the government's existence at all must necessarily take sides on matters of faith.
In fact, the view that government should not take sides on matters of faith is self defeating because it is itself the taking of a side on a matter of faith.
Invisible Man
Member
- Joined
- Dec 9, 2019
- Messages
- 4,376
"You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to Occam's Banana again."
aclu doesnt care about establishing religions of pecker chopping , marxism etc , those are on approved list
PAF
Member
- Joined
- Feb 26, 2012
- Messages
- 13,615
How many classrooms are in the state of Louisiana?
2 bucks here, 8 trillion there...
How about don't spend it in the first place.
You just want to keep those public indoctrination camps running, don't you. To the point of merging church and state.
Nationalist, Communist... to me, what's the difference?
Last edited:
Snowball
Member
- Joined
- Nov 25, 2011
- Messages
- 5,253
Here's the problem.
Although the Constitution certainly did allow STATES to establish religious preferences, and they did, over time, the liberalization (masonification) and the influence of Jewish activists and lawyers was able to politically affect those states, and to alter their Christian favoritisms.
For example, Massachusetts amended their Article III in 1917. South Carolina didn't get around to it until 1970 and 1971.
The point of conflict is high since the enactment of the 1964 Civil Rights Act. That being a conflict for courts to rule upon. Because the states AND municipalities which run publc schools and public lands still have these rights, it's UP TO the individuals, most often sponsored by the ACLU and such, to bring complaints that they FEEL their rights have been infringed upon by the state, municipality, etc.
So, it's still an unresolved matter. Which is why it's going to court.
Although the Constitution certainly did allow STATES to establish religious preferences, and they did, over time, the liberalization (masonification) and the influence of Jewish activists and lawyers was able to politically affect those states, and to alter their Christian favoritisms.
For example, Massachusetts amended their Article III in 1917. South Carolina didn't get around to it until 1970 and 1971.
The point of conflict is high since the enactment of the 1964 Civil Rights Act. That being a conflict for courts to rule upon. Because the states AND municipalities which run publc schools and public lands still have these rights, it's UP TO the individuals, most often sponsored by the ACLU and such, to bring complaints that they FEEL their rights have been infringed upon by the state, municipality, etc.
So, it's still an unresolved matter. Which is why it's going to court.
Similar threads
