I wonder whether it is appropriate to try to ground a position one way
or the other on same-sex marriage on ONE policy consideration. (And I
don't read Eugene as advancing such a position, and thus I agree with
him, at least on this point.) I am not sure that heterosexual marriage
can be said to
I will be putting together an article on the Stasi Report and the
subsequent French law. I will welcome citation of any relevant
articles.
Bob O'Brien
NTMail K12 - the Mail Server for Education
___
To post, send message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To sub
However broad Locke may be, it strongly suggests that
Rosenberger is very narrow indeed. While Locke was pending in
the Supreme Court, a number of articles appeared arguing that
many government expenditure programs (e.g., school vouchers,
social service programs relying on private contractors)
--- Douglas Laycock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> The principal thrust of the Locke opinion
> is that funding the
> clergy has a special tradition, and that there is no
> right to such
> funding. On that rationale, Chip is right and a
> future Court could just
> say that there is no si
To follow up on the discussion about the distinction
between subject and viewpoint discrimination, does
anyone have an opinion about the best law review
articles (if any) trying to work through this issue?
Rick
=
Rick Duncan
Welpton Professor of Law
University of Nebraska College of Law
Li
Rick makes several good points, but I still think the issue is not as
clear as he suggests.
Rick argues that discrimination against "devotional" theology majors
constitutes viewpoint discrimination while discrimination
against "objective" theology majors might be more properly characterized
The principal thrust of the Locke opinion is that funding the
clergy has a special tradition, and that there is no right to such
funding. On that rationale, Chip is right and a future Court could just
say that there is no similar tradition with respect to women's studies.
But t
--- "A.E. Brownstein" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>While the Court has recognized discrimination
> against religious speech to
> constitute viewpoint discrimination in several
> cases, many of those cases,
> including Rosenberger, involved regulations with a
> fairly clear viewpoint
> discrimina
