Latest Headlines
- A Very Good Boy: ECSO K-9 Streeter Awarded Medal Of Courage For Jumping Off Bridge After Suspect
- Plans Refiled For Circle K At Highway 95A, Quintette Road; Intersection Improvements Proposed
- Escambia School Board Buys 36 Acres For $3.9 Million For New Beulah School
- Head On Crash Injures Two In Beulah
- FWC Removes 14 Boaters For Boating Under The Influence During Blue Angels Air Show
- Century Spending Over $3.3 Million On Five Sewage Lift Stations
- Escambia Man Gets Life Sentence For Murdering Roommate Before Staging Her Drowning
- Catholic’s TJ McCants Drafted By Chicago White Sox
- Man Gets 50 Years In Prison For 2022 Murder At Cantonment Gas Station
- Pedestrian Checking Trailer Tire Struck By Car In Two Vehicle Crash Near Century
Teachers Union Sues To Block Ballot ‘Religious Freedom’ Measure
July 21, 2011
Accusing the Republican-dominated Florida Legislature of trying to dismantle the separation of church and state, a coalition of public school advocates and religious leaders filed a lawsuit Wednesday challenging a ballot measure that would allow the state to funnel money to religious institutions.
Public school advocates are fearful that the proposed constitutional amendment was designed to promote a big expansion of private school vouchers. The lawsuit, filed in circuit court in Tallahassee, is being driven primarily by the Florida Education Association, with help from public school groups such as the Florida School Boards Association.
“Those of us who work to make public schools a priority understand that this is designed to open up the state treasury to voucher schools,” said FEA president Andy Ford, who is also a plaintiff in the lawsuit.
Ford is joined by eight other plaintiffs, who include six rabbis and ministers, and two public school advocates. The American Civil Liberties Union and the Anti-Defamation League are also helping fight the amendment.
The proposed constitutional change, known as Amendment 7, would delete a line in the state constitution that prohibits the state from using taxpayer dollars to “aid in any church, sect or religious denomination.”
Amendment 7 would insert a line that says the government cannot deny an individual or group the “benefits of any program, funding or other support on the basis of religious identity or belief.”
The provision of Florida’s constitution prohibiting state money from going to churches or religious groups is a “Blaine amendment,” for James G. Blaine, a 19th Century congressman from Maine who lobbied unsuccessfully to get that restriction inserted into the U.S. Constitution. After it failed, most of the states put similar provisions in their own state constitutions.
The Legislature is not being honest about why it wants to repeal the Blaine Amendment, argues Ron Meyer, an attorney with Tallahassee firm Meyer, Brooks, Demma and Blohm who works with the FEA.
“The ballot summary enacted by the Legislature to be placed on the ballot for general election does not clearly and unambiguously describe the chief legal effect,” Meyer said.
Florida law requires that a ballot summary and title clearly describe its intent.
Meyer also took issue with the title of the amendment – religious freedom. He said the amendment purports to fall in line with the U.S. Constitution and “nothing could be further from the truth,” he said. Meyer said the amendment would make the Florida constitution more permissive than the federal constitution.
“The real purpose of this amendment is masked from voters,” said Kent Siladi, a minister with the Florida Conference of the United Church of Christ and a plaintiff in the lawsuit. “It is an attack on the separation of church and state. Our lawmakers should put questions before Florida voters that are clear and unambiguous.”
Backers of Amendment 7 say the intent is clear. “What we want to do is simply put our Florida constitution in the same posture as our U.S. constitution,” said Sen. Thad Altman, R-Viera, the sponsor of the amendment.
Altman said the motivation behind the constitutional amendment effort wasn’t related to vouchers.
“I can tell you, I sponsored the bill and it wasn’t about school vouchers,” Altman said. “It was about religious freedom.”
Supporters of the Blaine amendment repeal also say that when an earlier attempt to offer private school vouchers known as Opportunity Scholarships was thrown out by the U.S. Supreme Court in 2006, it was not because of the religious funding restriction in the constitution.
The court voided the school voucher program then because it violated a different part of the state constitution dealing with a promise to give Florida students a “uniform” free public education.
“To try to bring vouchers to the front and center of this is disingenuous,” said Rep. Scott Plakon, R-Longwood, the House sponsor of the Blaine amendment repeal. “It simply says that you can’t single out somebody based on religious identity or belief. The government should not be able to discriminate one group against another.”
But Meyer, the FEA attorney, said there is ample evidence the repeal of the Blaine amendment would be used to expand voucher programs. “This is certainly about vouchers because it offers the opportunity to expand the use of tax money to private religious schools,” Meyer said, but added that it had other consequences.
“Religious organizations would have a legal entitlement to coerce taxpayer money to be expended on programs such as rehab for drug use, which could be conditioned upon participation of a religious exercise,” Meyer said.
Noticeably absent from the lawsuit was anyone affiliated with the Catholic Church.
Michael Sheedy with the Florida Catholic Conference said recent lawsuits have threatened the state’s ability to work with religious groups to provide social services. Sheedy said his group supports private voucher programs, which would direct public funds towards some Catholic schools.
The Blaine amendment repeal does not roll back the separation of church and state, Sheedy said.
“People might invoke it without having a really good understanding of what separation of church and state is,” Sheedy said. He said separation does not mean the state cannot “collaborate” with religious-oriented groups.
“Without this, participation in any public program by religious organization is vulnerable,” Sheedy said.
By Lilly Rockwell
The News Service of Florida
Comments
15 Responses to “Teachers Union Sues To Block Ballot ‘Religious Freedom’ Measure”
No I do not agree with this at all, read my earlier post, and I do not believe in vouchers for any one.
@Bob Hudson
I dont think you are going to be happy when your tax dollars go to support a religious group that you don’t agree with.
Are you going to be ok with your tax money going to schools to teach the kids about Allah and the Koran , preaching during school?
Have you noticed that a country supposedly built on religious freedom and tolerance is quick to deny groups the same rights to worship, especially when those groups are different from the mainstream (yes I am talking about Muslims).
The First Amendment guarantees Religious Freedom to all, regardless of faith. It also prohibits government interference with that right. It seems to me that the proposed Amendment 7 would be opening the door to government endorsement of specific religions and denial to others.
We the People, need to ensure that everyone’s rights are protected — not just the favored majority. If we fail to do this, what other freedoms and rights would be next to be controlled?
Have you ever notice , that those who claim not to believe in God, Are the one’s that are the most afraid of him? At the mere mention of his name, they become very angry , And do not wish to be around, any thing close to religion. Now, if I did not believe in something, what would it matter? It seems that logically, If you do not believe in it, it can not hurt you or it would at least not even bother you enough to care.But that is not the way they react. They seem bent on destroying any thing that they can that is related to it, and yet, they say they do not believe it is real. Just a observation.
A Godless country , is no different , than Russia , or China.This is what I had mention earlier, About people trying to make this a Godless nation. Well we were not founded on this principle, It is a intolerance, brought forth by those who hate God.And it seems to come mostly from the far-left.And they are not willing to compromise about any thing.Just look at the ACLU.
Freedom itself is at stake here. If we don’t fully and completely separate church and state, including all mention of god from the pledge of allegiance and our money and our political processes, we are giving up freedom in increments and in a few generations we will be a totalitarian state or theocracy.
Why? Because freedom of religion/conscience, freedom OF and freedom FROM religion is the bottom line. We are diverse in belief and conviction. The Constitution of the United States and the Bill of Rights supports freedom of the INDIVIDUAL, not ANY group, but most especially not any religious organization, church, school, etc. These people in Florida government wanting to mess with these laws should probably be prosecuted for treason.
Here is Article I, Section 3 of the Florida Constitution: “Religious freedom.—There shall be no law respecting the establishment of religion or prohibiting or penalizing the free exercise thereof. Religious freedom shall not justify practices inconsistent with public morals, peace or safety. No revenue of the state or any political subdivision or agency thereof shall ever be taken from the public treasury directly or indirectly in aid of any church, sect, or religious denomination or in aid of any sectarian institution.”
Hmm. How many of you would like to see vouchers go to Protestant Christian schools? Okay, how about Jewish schools? Roman Catholic? Or, an Islamic school? Buddist? Hindu? Wiccan? Transcendentalist? You get the point. Who would not mind seeing their tax dollars go to the school (through vouchers) that YOU believe in? But, do you have any heartburn about those same dollars going to one of these institutions that you do not support? I bet you do.
You see, we are all free to freely exercise religion. Many countries cannot do this in their own homes without being spied upon by the government. (Chinese Christians and Sudanese Christians are good examples of such.) BUT, no public money can aid in that exercise of freedom of religion.
If you are one of those who loves to point to the Constitution and show how it is not being followed, keep in mind Article I Section 3 of the Florida Constitution has never been found to be in conflict with the U.S. Constitution, and remember that we are citizens of both the U.S. and our state of residence.
Public school vouchers support religious teachings (indirectly). And that is unconstitutional. But, if a family wants to raise a child in a certain religious environment, they are FREE under both constitutions to do so. If you believe Baptist is the way, you are free to teach and practice it. If you believe Catholic is the way, you, too, are free to teach and practice it. Same goes for those religions not popular regionally.
If you are wanting to improve education of young people, vouchers is not the “cure all” solution. I would instead focus on less TV (which is essentially anti-religion culture entering YOUR family home), less on internet games and silly activities, and more on reading, exploring, and simply talking with one another and communicating better. Expand your faith within the family. Please don’t make the government, public schools, etc. pick a religion and teach it. As parents, that is YOUR responsibility to pass the torch of a faith to your children. That’s perfectly legal, and that’s what America’s religious freedom is about.
I have a bad feeling about this, I do believe the liberals have gone to far as demanding what is allowed in public school and in court rooms. 10 commandments , prayer, and religious activities. . But do you really want to take money from the government?I do not agree with vouchers at all, But remember, seems that when you jump in to bed with the government, there always seems to be (conditions) sooner or later. This bill I think had good intentions, but they say the road to hell is paved with those. No offence, But I do not want government in a church, if you take their money , you are now obligated to do their bidding.As a firm believer, in the Lord Jesus Christ, this seems to be like taking money from the devil.A Trojan horse you might say. This is one of those Thanks, but no thanks deals,
REGARDING:
” it violated a different part of the state constitution dealing with a promise to give Florida students a “uniform” free public education.”
- – - which will never happen anyway. Public education is not uniform. There are special programs for those perceived to have special needs. (How uniform would it be to teach verbally to the deaf, teach in English to those who only speak French?)
Teachers will prefer certain schools over others so some schools will have teachers who didn’t want to be there.
In some schools, students have to dodge bullets on the way, in others they have to dodge joggers.
Students come to school with different outlooks and life experiences, so the same lesson by the same teacher will have different educational results.
Anyhoo, our state constitution thus promises an impossibility.
David for reality and honesty
REGARDING:
“I’m still looking for the term “separation of church and state” in the constitution.”
And, of course, you won’t find it, not the phrase itself.
The wording was first spelled out by President Thomas Jefferson in 1802 when writing to Danbury Baptists Association “- – - that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should ‘make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,’ thus building a wall of separation between Church & State.”
If you would kindly read the first amendment it states: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; – - – “)
They were worried the federal government would support state churches, which many of them did at one time. They were afraid they would have to pay into the coffers of other churches even though they didn’t agree with the teachings of those churches. It was important to them because they believed the doctrines of many other denominations or religions would send souls to Hell and did not want to pay to cause such destruction or for the rich lifestyles of their clergy. (The other folks were just as certain the doctrines of us Baptists would have the same effect.)
Anyway, if you take money from taxpayers and give it to churches in any form, you have supported that religion in some degree. Not everybody has the same religious beliefs. Anything other than separation will be construed by somebody as favoring somebody else.
David explaining
@coach bell: you’re right about some liberals wanting bad policy, just as some conservatives. Unfortunately on this topic the neo-cons (not true conservatives) want to dismantle the principle that government would be secular and not have laws or policy that supports any one religion for to do so would do this at the expense of all other religions. Not even basic Christianity can agree on many positions due to the various sects. The notion that government could establish religion within its framework has been shown to be bad; look at Europe’s history with the Inquisition and Hitler’s following Martin Luther’s unfortunate bigotry toward Jews in one of his writings and implementing those ideas almost to the letter while proclaiming himself Christian.
Unfortunately, as to liberal versus conservative, we should be asking ourselves what is good for the country and getting away from policy from both sides considered ‘anti-intellectual’ or that do not work.
Kathy, you don’t think liberals want to control our lives and our money? I think it was the liberal democrats in Washington who are mandating that everyone purchase health care insurance or face punitive measures. Now, to be a bit more clear, when something is being mandated that means we are being FORCED to do it. That sounds like liberals are trying to control our lives to me.
I’m still looking for the term “separation of church and state” in the constitution.
If you would kindly read the first amendment it states: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
As far as school goes, if it were up to me I would not pay tax money for
some of the Garbage that is called education in these PC days.
That is what you get when you got radicals running government, craz y, sick conservatives wanting to control your lives and your money. Give me a liberal any time.
“The proposed constitutional change, known as Amendment 7, would delete a line in the state constitution that prohibits the state from using taxpayer dollars to “aid in any church, sect or religious denomination.””
Whoever thinks that they are going to remove separation of church and state has to be completely out of it. Even more crazy is trying to remove it. People fail to realize what is going to happen if your local government starts supporting a religious sect that you are completely against . Tax dollars should not go to any religious groups, sects, or organizations,