[Vision2020] Supreme court ruling

[thansen@moscow.com]

Thank you, Don.

That is exactly ohw CNN reported it.

Take care,

Tom

> 
> DonovArn@aol.com wrote:
> > I am such a liberal, I actually oppose this ruling, as a liberal. Here 
> > is why.
> >  
> > It is not because I think that local tax payers should fund private 
> > religious beliefs. It is because it is the state controlling what we as 
> > individuals want to learn and study.
> >  
> > I fear the government saying, "You cannot learn about this", or "You can 
> > only learn that which we approve of you to learn."
> >  
> > What if I want to go to school and learn about Christianity, Islam, 
> > Hinduism, and Judaism and compare the four, write a book and earn a 
> > living that way?
> 
> That would be called studying religion and would certainly qualify for 
> public scholarship money. What is ruled out by the Supreme Court is 
> enrolling with a religious institution to learn about that particular 
> religion and be certified to minister to the followers of that religion.
> 
> I think that for once the Supreme Court got something right.
> 
> Don Coombs
> 
> 
> 
> _____________________________________________________
>  List services made available by First Step Internet, 
>  serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.   
>                http://www.fsr.net                       
>           mailto:Vision2020@moscow.com
> ŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻ
> 


---------------------------------------------
This message was sent by First Step Internet.
           http://www.fsr.net/