Two quick question for list members about Trinity Lutheran, if I
might. Say that the government offered grants to schools and day care centers,
on a largely nondiscretionary basis, for the following:
1. Removing potentially cancer-causing asbestos.
2. Retrofitting for earthquake safety.
3. Hiring security guards to prevent gang violence (and
intercede in mass shootings and the like).
4. Eradicating mosquitos on the property that carry some
dangerous virus (e.g., West Nile Virus).
(Assume all the grants came with the usual penalties for misuse of state funds,
including criminal penalties for willful misuse.) But say that the government
expressly stated that religious institutions - and thus the children who go to
those institutions - can't benefit from such grants.
If you think that the exclusion in Trinity Lutheran is
constitutional, do you think all these exclusions would be, too?
If you think that the exclusion in Trinity Lutheran is actually
mandated by the First Amendment, do you think all these exclusions would be,
too?
Eugene
_______________________________________________
To post, send message to Religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu
To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see
http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw
Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as private.
Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are posted; people can
read the Web archives; and list members can (rightly or wrongly) forward the
messages to others.
