Schools aren’t required to use Bluebonnet Learning, but the state will offer financial incentives to districts that do.
Nah get outta here with that. This violates the principle of separation of church and state.
A place to discuss pro-conservative stuff
Be excellent to each other. Civility, No Racism, No Bigotry, No Slurs, No calls to violences, No namecalling, All that good stuff, follow lemm.ee's rules, follow the rules of your instance, etc.
We are a Pro-Conservative forum. Posts must have a clear pro-conservative, or anti left-wing bias. We are interested in promoting conservatism and discussing things that might get ignored elsewhere. All sources are acceptable, however reputable sources with a reputation for factual reporting are preferred.
Dissent is allowed in the comments, but try to be constructive; if you do not agree, then provide a reason which is backed up by references or a reasonable alternative interpretation of the provided facts. That means the left wing is welcome to state their opinions, but please keep it in good faith.
A polite request, not a rule, if you feel the need to report a comment, please don't reply to it.
Schools aren’t required to use Bluebonnet Learning, but the state will offer financial incentives to districts that do.
Nah get outta here with that. This violates the principle of separation of church and state.
But the constitution only says:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof...
Nobody is making any law to establish any religion nor prohibit any. So I don't think your arguement applies here.
I never said it violated the Constitution.
Hmm so you didn't. Perhaps it does tho, cuz check this out: https://caselaw.findlaw.com/court/us-supreme-court/374/203.html
no state law or school board may require that passages from the Bible be read
Although I don't know if judges care about precedent anymore.
SCOTUS sure doesn't.
Now children, please turn to Ezekial 23 20.