|
By James Vicini
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The U.S. Supreme Court upheld on Wednesday a government scholarship program that bars any money for college students who pursue a degree in theology, an important ruling reaffirming church-state separation.
By a 7-2 vote, the high court declared Washington state's program does not violate the constitutional right to the free exercise of religion. The program, which gives scholarships to needy and academically gifted students, excludes vocational religious instruction.
The ruling has national significance as Washington is one of about 37 states to forbid public financing of religious instruction. It was a departure from a series of recent rulings that allowed more state involvement with religious activities.
Groups advocating church-state separation hailed the ruling for reaffirming that states cannot be forced to fund religious instruction. Those who challenged the program denounced the decision that "clearly sanctions religious discrimination."
A degree in theology means the degree would be "devotional in nature and designed to induce religious faith," training the student for the clergy, according to the ruling. The student at issue in the case wanted to become a church pastor.
"Training someone to lead a congregation is an essentially religious endeavor," Chief Justice William Rehnquist said in the opinion. "Indeed, majoring in devotional theology is akin to a religious calling as well as an academic pursuit."
The ruling was a defeat for Joshua Davey, who was awarded a scholarship in 1999 under the state's Promise Scholarship Program for high school graduates.
Davey enrolled in Northwest College, a Christian school affiliated with the Assembly of God in Kirkland, Washington. He declared a double major in business and pastoral ministries.
When Davey learned students who pursue a degree in theology cannot receive any state-funded financial aid, he gave up the scholarship so he could pursue the major. Davey then sued.
STATE CHOOSES NOT TO FUND RELIGIOUS INSTRUCTION
Rehnquist wrote in the 12-page opinion that the state has merely chosen not to fund a distinct category of religious instruction.
He said most states around the time of the founding of the country placed formal prohibitions against using tax funds to support the ministry.
Nothing in the history of the law or the operation of the program suggested animosity toward religion, Rehnquist said.
Justices Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas dissented. Scalia said the program discriminated against religion.
Scalia wondered what would happen next.
"Will we deny priests and nuns their prescription drug benefits on the ground that taxpayers' freedom of conscience forbids medicating the clergy at public expense?"
The Rev. Barry Lynn of the group Americans United for Separation of Church and State said, "This ruling is a huge defeat for those who want to force taxpayers to pay for religious schooling and other ministries."
Jay Sekulow, chief counsel of the American Center for Law and Justice who argued the case for Davey, said the decision "clearly sanctions religious discrimination."
He said the court "missed an important opportunity to protect the constitutional rights of all students."
Davey, who graduated from the college, changed his mind about a career as a minister. He decided he wanted to be an attorney, and is enrolled at Harvard University's law school.
© Reuters 2004. All Rights Reserved.
|