YIPPEE!!!

Court upholds school vouchers

The Supreme Court on Thursday upheld the use of taxpayer-paid school vouchers to send children to private schools, finding that a Cleveland program does not violate the Constitution’s church-state doctrine even though the majority of students use the vouchers to attend parochial schools.

Of course, since this story is on MSNBC.com, it reeks of bias. Gads, it's not even subtle!

"The 5-4 ruling led by the court's conservative majority...." How come nothing else is ever reported as being led by the "liberal majority"? Why does this matter? The implication is that this is purely a conservative vs. liberal matter, and if that's the case the matter isn't being resolved by the law but by political ideology. And if that's the case, which "side" is letting ideology lead the way, because that side isn't doing their job.

"...lowers the figurative wall separating church and state..." How in the hell does it do that? The majority opinion is clear that vouchers are not a violation of the establishment clause because the parents are making the choice, not the school, not the state.

There is also the silly quote from the dissenting opinion, Justice David Souter writing: "There is, in any case, no way to interpret the 96.6 percent of current voucher money going to religious schools as reflecting a free a genuine choice by the families that apply for vouchers."

Nonsense! You want interpretations? 1) That percentage of families are religious and don't mind sending their kids to a religious school, since doing so supports the faith of their choice. 2) People choose these religious schools, knowing that their teachings of faith (or lack thereof) at home are what count, yet also knowing that these schools provide a vastly better education that the existing public school system. 3) Due to the suppression of this concept, the choice are largely limited to existing religious schools. As vouchers become the norm, more alternatives will develop. It's called "free enterprise," bobo.