It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Little Sisters of the Poor Aiding in the Religious Right Wing's Agenda for a Theocratic Government

page: 16
34
<< 13  14  15   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 31 2015 @ 09:21 AM
link   
a reply to: Gryphon66

Are you suggesting your question didn't imply that Satantist's would not have gotten a day in court in the 1950's and simply trying to hide behind the fact that you asked it in a question form? If so, you should research a rhetorical device. As far as your claim of me using anecdotal evidence; Citing the same scenario as you suggested for other religions isn't anecdotal evidence when applicable to the SCOTUS. They are evidential of a lawful precedent protecting freedom of religion in the USA. It only takes one court case to set a standard in the USA. Roe Vs Wade is a perfect example of that.




posted on Jul, 31 2015 @ 09:30 AM
link   
a reply to: Gryphon66

So can any kid go and get into a charter school? Learn how it works. A charter school is a private school from an admittance standpoint.


Charter schools are limited public access in the sense that:
They can define the number of enrollment slots they wish to make available
They can admit students only on an annual basis and do not have to take students mid-year
They can set academic, behavior and cultural standards that promote exclusion of students via attrition.


Because it is publicly funded by state and local government does not mean it is a public school. And State and Local governments already tried to remove funding to charter schools that teach "religious teachings including creationism" but the SCOTUS shot them down.


An important legal distinction is that the U.S. Supreme Court has recently decided that when tuition tax credit funds are used to support religious education, taxpayers have no standing to challenge that distribution as a distribution of their tax dollars, due to the indirect nature of the subsidy.


So you are just trying to say that public schools teach creationism, when you are just harping on the funds behind a school, not if the school is actually public or not. For all intents and purposes, if anyone in the USA sends their child to a public school, they can be quite solid knowing that their child will not be taught creationism. You are arguing from a non existent foundation.

Your argument should just be you don't want ANY funds going to the teaching of creationism, however the SCOTUS disagrees with you. Apparently they feel as long as the students are getting their basic/general education (Reading, Writing, Arithmetic) as mandated by the state, they don't care about the mumbo jumbo that gets mixed along with it.



new topics
 
34
<< 13  14  15   >>

log in

join