Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Religious School Funding Defended by Obama Administration.

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
olegramps Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-04-10 09:09 AM
Original message
Religious School Funding Defended by Obama Administration.
An Obama administration lawyer, Neal Katyal, joined Arizona lawyers in defending an Arizona program that funds religious schools with state tax credits and urged the Supreme Court to block advocates of church-state separation from suing over such arrangements. Two of Obama's appointees, Justices Sotomayor and Elena were joined with Stephen Breyer and Ruth Bader Ginsburg in objecting to Katyal's urging the court to overturn the Federal Appeals Court that ruled the plan unconstitutional because it uses tax money to support the teaching of religion. Katyl argued that no citizen and taxpayers have a right to sue in court to challenge this law. If the Republican Justices agree with the administration it will open up flood gates for massive public funding of religious schools.

This is unbelievable.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
lunasun Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-04-10 09:19 AM
Response to Original message
1. omg ...and will that include madrasas in AZ?? or only 1or2 religions only nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
T Wolf Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-04-10 09:22 AM
Response to Original message
2. How many "last straws" will so-called Democrats accept before they wake up to the fact that
Edited on Thu Nov-04-10 09:22 AM by T Wolf
this administration does not have our best interests at heart?

Lesser of two evils? Maybe, but only by an insignificant degree, especially if real progress is the aim instead of feel-good, we won bullshit that accomplishes nothing.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
olegramps Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-04-10 09:26 AM
Response to Reply #2
3. It appears that he is intent of alienating every Democrat
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RainDog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-04-10 09:33 AM
Response to Original message
4. Obama's social conservative stupidity on parade
I think he does this just to pander - I don't think he's actually this stupid on a variety of issues - like funding churches to propagandize youth and opposing GBLT civil rights.

It doesn't make it any better that this reeks of political opportunism.

Sadly, I no longer respect the man. What a disappointment. If I wanted a social conservative to deny civil rights and to inject religion into matters of govt and education, I would have voted for a Republican.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
67 Mercury Donating Member (6 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-04-10 09:46 AM
Response to Original message
5. This is another wake-up call


Before getting to the meat of this, let me pause for a moment, to offer a word in defense of righteous anger. There is a certain legitimacy to raw anger. Anger is a correct & reasonable first response to injustice. By itself, it is an inadequate response to injustice. But it is an excellent foundation on which more constructive responses can be built.

And, on the other hand, the most paralyzing & crippling response towards great injustice, is docile acceptance. THAT is what the American political system & their apologists are all about — getting you to somehow resign yourself to corporatists & warmongering imperialists, who however (like Obama) are skilled in the use of ‘uplifting’ language.]

OK, now the meat. We are at a time in our nation’s history where the political system is breaking down. It is no ordinary time. Mechanisms that have sufficed since the 1930’s are now failing.

There is zero chance that our system can be fixed through the officially-approved mechanisms. Whether overtly recognized or not, there’s a war going on — the US ruling class against all the rest of us. It’s essentially a class war. The rulers want you to remain a Democrat, because the D’s are a ruling-class institution, whose job is guiding the Dem half of the populace in paths that are safe for the rulers. To remain a Dem voter, and to swallow whatever slop the party dishes up, is to passively assent to this arrangement.

Therefore, your primary focus should be on resisting & criticizing the system, not on adapting yourself to it. You should be talking with your friends & family about the very real things that are wrong. You should be trying to make whatever contribution you can to elevating political consciousness. Accepting the slop of the Dem Party is the opposite of all that: it deadens political consciousness, & only makes your enemies stronger.

Voting for candidates only works when there are decent candidates — but that’s not our situation. We betray ourselves if we fail to recognize that.

Well, looking at it historically, the “solution” has to be a break from the officially-approved mechanisms. It must have the form of a broad movement based on the interests of the bottom 80-90% of the population, rather than on the interests of the top 1%. It has to be what they call “radical” politics — something that big business and the media are definitely not going to like, any more than they like Kucinich or antiwar protestors.

The 2 parties are really just a mechanism of social control. They’re not a way for “the people” to express their will; they’re a way for rulers to control the people — partly by making them believe that they (the peeps) have some say (which they don’t). Building a movement to oppose this takes time. But its sine qua non is political consciousness — the type that socialists understand & try to cultivate; and that the big-business parties & media try to suppress & eradicate.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LiberalEsto Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-04-10 10:08 AM
Response to Original message
6. That's it! Let's start a pagan school
and DEMAND government funding.
:evilgrin:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
onpatrol98 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-04-10 10:14 AM
Response to Reply #6
8. Pagan Funding?
Doesn't pagan imply a belief in no religion?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kick-ass-bob Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-04-10 10:18 AM
Response to Reply #8
9. No. The pagan religions predate the monotheistic ones. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LiberalEsto Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-04-10 10:18 AM
Response to Reply #8
10. Paganism is a polytheistic earth-centered religion
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
onpatrol98 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-04-10 10:27 AM
Response to Reply #10
11. Well, hey!!!
Well, hey! You'd probably get funded. Looks like you've got every base covered. I'm not sure how many kids you'd get. But, you never know.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LiberalEsto Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-04-10 10:29 AM
Response to Reply #11
12. Paganism is a fertility religion
There are lots of little pagans around these days. ;)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
onpatrol98 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-04-10 10:36 AM
Response to Reply #12
13. Well, wait a minute...
Maybe we shouldn't be funding additional fertility...LOL. That may have "unintended" consequences.
-------------------------
Just kidding...seriously, just kidding.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Wednesdays Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-04-10 10:10 AM
Response to Original message
7. Link, please?
:shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
happyslug Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-04-10 11:05 AM
Response to Original message
14. Cite is on another Thread on this same subject
Edited on Thu Nov-04-10 11:59 AM by happyslug
http://demopedia.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=433x507252

Cite is from Catholic News Agency:
http://www.catholicnewsagency.com/news/white-house-aligns-with-supreme-court-conservatives-in-religious-schools-case

US Supreme Court "Docket Page", NOT the decision but a list of what had been filed. this is just a list, it is NOT a list of downloadable files:
http://www.supremecourt.gov/Search.aspx?FileName=/docketfiles/09-987.htm

List of Briefs (The page below is NOT PDF, but a list of Cite where you can download PDF files that contain the Briefs):
http://www.abanet.org/publiced/preview/briefs/nov2010.shtml#christian

The Ninth Circuit Decision (the Case Appealed from) Please note this is a PDF file:
http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2009/04/21/0515754.pdf

Ninth Circuit denial of en banc review of the above decision, Please note this is a PDF file:
http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2009/10/20/05-15754o.pdf

Ninth Circuit list of Opinions:
http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/opinions/

Ninth Circuit Web cite:
http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
snot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-04-10 11:25 AM
Response to Original message
15. K&R'd
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Mon Jan 13th 2025, 10:49 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC