What if He Would Have Been an Atheist?

SOTUS has ruled in Locke vs. Davey, 7-2, that states may disallow scholarship funds, which of course the states have misappropriated from individuals under the guise of altruistic redistribution, from students who wish to study courses in theology.

In one aspect this ruling is sound.  Individual states have retained the authority to decide this issue rather than the federal government.  But, I think the ruling as a whole is off the mark.  The student in this case had declared two majors, business and pastoral ministries, and is currently attending law school.

Two points to consider.  First.  What if I labeled myself as an atheist, or, as an individual with no religious belief or affiliation, and I wanted to major in a theological field?  Would denying a scholarship for studying a religious course of instruction then be sound?  Wouldn’t such a course of instruction possibly be beneficial to the individual, and the state, if it enabled such an individual to achieve a greater knowledge which could then be used in secular society to refute religious interference in daily life?

Second.  The more important point is this.  Though the monies so freely scattered about in the form of scholarships by the state have been misappropriated, the state would have us believe, not think, that they are distributed, solely, based on need and merit.  The old blind eye trick.  In fact, they are not.  Any monies redistributed by the state always have strings attached and in fact turn individuals into mere puppets.  If the states would not have misappropriated the monies in the first place, it is quite possible Davey might not have been in need of a scholarship.

One last thing.  According to the first linked article in this post, Davey’s lawyers argued for his right to utilize the scholarship on the following basis.

"Davey’s lawyers argued that the state violated his constitutional right to worship freely."

If the argument above is what Davey’s lawyers were hanging their hat on, it’s no wonder it fell to the floor and was trampled underfoot.  They seemed to have confused attending an institution of higher learning with attending church.

Here is a link to the oral arguments and other resources in regard to this case.

Posted by on 02/25 at 09:35 AM

  1. What if He Would Have Been an Atheist?

    But he wasn’t an Atheist – was he now Mr. Venlet?

    ... and that is the whole point.

    Don’t look too hard Mr. Venlet, because if you start to perceive the double standard that exists all around you I’m not sure your sanity will be able to tolerate it.

    Posted by  on  02/27  at  10:38 AM

  2. One needn’t look very hard at all to find it Serpent.  I think one should point it out though.  Oh, and I appreciate your concern for my sanity.

    Posted by  on  02/27  at  12:55 PM

Name:

Email:

Location:

URL:

Smileys

Remember my personal information

Notify me of follow-up comments?

Submit the word you see below:


Next entry: Who is Screwing Who?

Previous entry: Superman?

<< Back to main