From: scruggs@zeus.franklin.edu (Kevin Scruggs)
Subject: Re: Madeleine Murray O'Hare
Organization: Franklin University (Columbus, OH)
Date: Fri, 8 Jan 1993 00:21:30 GMT

In article <root.726418525@spssig> adams@spss.com (Steve Adams) writes:
>cortese@skid.ps.uci.edu (Janis Maria Cortese) writes:
>
>>In article <root.726363915@spssig> adams@spss.com (Steve Adams) writes:
>>>jimb@rcx1.csd.harris.com (Jim Burmeister) writes:
>>>
>>>>In article <5JAN199322080860@jane.uh.edu>, lib1p@jane.uh.edu (Tammy Stark Blandino) writes:
>>>>(bunch of stuff deleted)
>>>
>>>PBS is also funded by my $$ when I give to their pledge drive.  And by
>>>corporations, etc.  Of course, since PBS is funded by the governemt, and
>>>terefore blatantly [conservative|liberal|progay|antiabortion] shows don't
>>>belong on it.  Ever heard of freedom of speech?
>>
>>There is nothing in the constitution that requires separation of 
>>[conservativism|liberalism|homosexuality|abortion] and state.  There is,
>>however, a stated requirement for separation of *church* and state.  
	The Congress (?) shall make no law supporting the establishment of
religion or the free exercise thereof...

	Ever heard of an apropriations bill? In other words, any government
funding can be considered logically equivalent to a law. Therefore, it is 
illegal for the congress/etc to pass a bill/law that supports religion by 
subsidizing it.

>
>Want to provide references to such a statement?  The Bill of Rights 
>specifically prohibits ONLY the establishment of a religion as the State 
>religion.  It does not in any way prohibit government resources from being 
>used by religious groups.  Refusing to allow a religious group on PBS is 
>analogous to refusing church buses the right to use the roads, since they 
>are government funded.  Or refusing churches police and fire protection.
>
>>The
>>state also funds public schools, and it is precisely for that reason
>>that prayer in schools is such a controversial topic.  This is something
>>treated as quite distinct by the constitution, and hence you can't lump
>>it in with anything else so facilely.  
>
>Note well that religious groups may meet in school buildings if the school
>allows other student groups to meet...In other words, you can't discriminate 
>against a bible study if you allow a chess club.
>
	 This point is still under contention. Personally, I find it rather
silly that religious groups feel the need to congregate in public buildings/
schools when plenty of churchs/temples/mosques infest the landscape...

	Oh, and a chess club is hardly comparable to a religious group. I 
wonder if you would be so supportive if it was wiccans that wanted to broadcast
on PBS...

>>>>However, if O'Hare was trying to ban religious programming from broadcast TV
>>>>in general, then I agree she was way off base--that's censorship.
>>>
>>>So is allowing every group access to PBS except religious ones...
>>
>>Nope, no more than disallowing prayer in state-funded schools is
>>censorship.  Again, religion is distinct from other things in this
>>instance, precisely because the constitution treats it as such --
>>REQUIRING that it be distinct from the state and state-funded stuff.
>
>Once again, I point you to the fact that reliious institutions make use of
>public roads, police & fire protection, etc.  What is being done is an
>attempt to censor Christians by twisting the Constitution.
>
> -Steve
>--
>  The opinions expressed above are those of the author and not SPSS, Inc.
>                         -------------------
>   adams@spss.com                                  Phone: (312) 329-3522
>   Steve Adams        "Space-age cybernomad"       Fax:   (312) 329-3558


-- 
	|||				...Your future hasn't been written yet.
       / | \				   No one's has. Your future is what 
    =Mysh+Krysa=			   you make it...    
							   -Emmet L. Brown-