So I sympathize with the idea that a government school paid for by tax dollars, is violating 1st amendment rights.
But it would also violate 1st amendment rights if they took tax dollars and gave it to families who used it on a private religious education.
Or they could arbitrarily let parents pick whatever school they wanted, regardless of what it taught, but that is way too ripe for fraud.
Can anyone think of how a government could respect various religious beliefs while not advocating for one specific one (and let’s presume secular humanism is a type of religious belief), while maintaining tax funded education?
> (and let’s presume secular humanism is a type of religious belief)
Let's not presume that, because it's in no way a religious belief. Pretending that it is means that there's little the government could actually do. Which may, in fact, be the point of this particular lie.
4 comments
[ 2.0 ms ] story [ 14.1 ms ] threadBut it would also violate 1st amendment rights if they took tax dollars and gave it to families who used it on a private religious education.
Or they could arbitrarily let parents pick whatever school they wanted, regardless of what it taught, but that is way too ripe for fraud.
Can anyone think of how a government could respect various religious beliefs while not advocating for one specific one (and let’s presume secular humanism is a type of religious belief), while maintaining tax funded education?
Let's not presume that, because it's in no way a religious belief. Pretending that it is means that there's little the government could actually do. Which may, in fact, be the point of this particular lie.
So presuming it forces a set of beliefs on people based on an idea that there is no god that would be counter to their religious beliefs.
A lot of secular humanists are are believers in various religions. There is no actual contention between the two ideas.