Two questions Tom: 1. Are the vouchers you contemplate truly equally available ,or will they be accompanied by restrictions that some groups cannot live with(IE open admissions requirements)?
2. If a larger percentage of students attend various private schools, will there be enough common ground to hold the society together?(I recognize that without vouchers only the well off can take advantage of provide education,a point against the current system) Marc Stern -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Berg, Thomas C. Sent: Thursday, August 25, 2005 3:02 PM To: Law & Religion issues for Law Academics Subject: RE: Hostility It'll take me a while to respond to some of these points, but let me quickly pick up on the last one. I do think that it is unfortunate that many people -- even some judges -- tend to view Religion Clause positions as either "pro-religion" or "anti-religion," so that school prayer, school choice, free exercise exemptions, etc. all go hand in hand. (You either vote "for religion" or vote "against it.") I have some hope -- now I'm the hopeful one! -- that circumstances will push us our society away from the path of government pursuing its favored religion in its schools, but toward the path of government giving equal status in education benefits to all faiths along with nonreligious schools (public and private). I am encouraged by the fact that the Court has moved decidedly in this direction in recent years. I believe, and am writing a book manuscript to this effect, that there are strong social, cultural, and intellectual factors that help explain the Court's direction. I realize that, as Alan points out, several of the pro-school-choice justices also favor allowing some forms of official school prayer; but O'Connor, Kennedy, and to some extent Rehnquist are or were not in favor of this. Moreover, beyond the views of individual justices, I hope and expect that the effects of stare decisis will entrench this distinction: I expect that over the next few years both Zelman and, say, Lee v. Weisman will be followed rather than overruled or significantly cut back. I hope, then, that the solidifying of the distinction in these precedents between government's favored faith and equal treatment for faith will also, indirectly, strengthen the distinction in the attitudes of the general population. Along with Rick Duncan, I also expect that -- as a practical matter -- if more people disaffected from public schools on religious grounds can afford to use private schools because of school choice, then fewer people will have reason to seek religious observances in public schools. It won't eliminate those efforts, obviously, but I expect it will reduce them. Tom Berg _____ From: A.E. Brownstein [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thu 8/25/2005 12:04 PM To: Law & Religion issues for Law Academics Subject: RE: Hostility I think "religious apartheid" and "religious fragmentation" have very different meanings. But putting that issue aside for the moment, the questions Tom asks are certainly fair and important ones. I certainly don't know if there is significant empirical literature that responds to his questions -- and I lack the expertise to evaluate what may be available. But let me offer a few responses that are not based on empirical studies. 1. The intuition that our children benefit from getting to know children of other races, ethnic groups, and religions is a pretty powerful one. Tom's own question reflects it when he notes that Catholic schools are more racially diverse than public schools. Why should we care about that unless we think that interactions with others of a different background or ethnicity matters. Of course, other factors contribute to how well children will socialize with others too. What kids are taught at school and at home is pretty critical. So are other factors. 2. As to how many parents will choose private schools for their kids, I'm not sure how much we can learn from the results of any one program, like the Cleveland program at issue in Zelman. But there is something of a disconnect here. On the one hand, I'm told that the culture war is pervasive. There is no common ground. The public schools will always be a battleground among warring parents over the education of their children. It is intolerable to have children subjected to values or theories that are inconsistent with the values of their parents. But then I'm told, Don't worry about vouchers because hardly anyone is going to use them to attend private schools anyway. One of the reasons I worry that government aid to religious schools and other religious social programs will be fragmenting is that I listen to the arguments of people who support those programs, many of whom are much less moderate than Tom. 3. As for interreligious tension in other Western democracies that provide substantial state aid to religious schools. I can't point to empirical studies. But I think there is considerably more interreligious tension and less religious equality in many Western democracies than exists in the U.S. It's complicated. It gets mixed in with racial, ethnic, and immigration issues. I would not suggest that the government's funding of religious schools is its primary cause. But I think we have done a lot better job in creating a society in which people of different faiths can live together than most other countries. 4. And speaking of empirical studies, where are the studies, here or abroad, that suggest that government aid to religious schools is going to solve the problems we have been discussing about religion and values in the public schools. Most of the countries I am familiar with that fund religious schools also involve religion in the public schools in one way or another. I don't see any clear inverse connection drawn between government funding of private religious institutions and government promotion of religion in the public sector itself -- with government funding of private religious institutions necessarily reducing the promotion of religion in public "secular" institutions. It is also common, I believe, for government funding of private religious institutions and government promotion of religion in the public sector to go hand in hand. Certainly, that is the pattern we see on the U.S. Supreme Court. The same Justices that support allowing the government to fund religious institutions that will use government money for religious purposes also support allowing the government itself to endorse religion. I understand that isn't Tom's position. But if we are talking about what is likely to happen rather than what should happen, it is not at all clear to me that the adoption of voucher programs will markedly reduce attempts to have government endorse religion in schools or elsewhere. Alan Brownstein UC Davis _______________________________________________ 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. _______________________________________________ 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.
