It seems to me that if a state says, "we'll give grants to any social service agency that operates a 24/7 pregnancy prevention hotline," and denomination X says "we'd like a grant, but our faith forbids us from operating anything on the sabbath," and the state says "too bad, then," that's not what the Constitution forbids as "denominational discrimination." Some denominations just can't qualify for the terms of the grant. I don't know the Colorado Christian University case but it sounds like the same sort of thing.
Art Spitzer In a message dated 7/23/07 10:54:49 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > Okay, Doug, then how do you decide the Colorado Christian University case > in which the state has engaged in denominational discrimination against > pervasively sectarian schools, but claims to have a state anti-establishment > compelling interest (in not funding sectarian schools) that trumps the > federal EC > violation? > > Is this a case in which the state compelling interest in not funding > certain religious colleges is merely a disagreement with the clearest command > of > the federal EC prohibiting denominational discrimination? > > ************************************** Get a sneak peek of the all-new AOL at http://discover.aol.com/memed/aolcom30tour
_______________________________________________ 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.
