 |
| The Supreme Court of the United States (Towleroad) |
First the bad news.
The defeat came in a 6-3 decision to apply the 1964 Civil
Rights Act to the LGBTQ community. Surprisingly - conservative Justice Neil
Gorsuch speaking for the majority said that the word ‘sex’ in the language of
that law - which bans discrimination in employment based on race, religion,
national origin or sex - applies to sexual orientation or sexual identity too.
In my view that is a debatable interpretation of the kind often
used by the liberal factions on the court. I understand why discrimination against
anyone for those reasons is unjust. But I question why a ‘strict constructionist’
like Gorsuch would allow himself to veer off that path because of such feelings.
From a moral perspective, I actually agree with that
decision. But I disagree with the universal application of it in cases of
religious institutions. If a religious school hires an openly gay teacher who
is ‘loud and proud’, only to come out of the closet after being hired - they
will not be able to fire him or her.
Religious schools are about more than teaching what is on
the written page. It is about teachers being role models. An openly gay
individual who proudly lives a lifestyle that is clearly forbidden by the Torah
in the severest of terms cannot be a role model for religious students.
Discriminating against them in general is one thing. It is
wrong and ought to be taught that way to religious students. Every human being
is created ‘B’Tzelem Elokim – in God’s image and to be treated accordingly. But
to be prevented from firing someone that takes pride in that kind of lifestyle
is not the message a religious school wants to be sending. This Supreme Court
ruling means that once such an individual is hired, a school will not be able to do anything about it.
Not sure how Orthodox Jewish day schools and Yeshiva high
schools will handle this.
Now the good news.
The other Supreme Court decision is a win for freedom of religion
and the Orthodox Jewish community that places a high value on religious
education. Although those who opposed the law being reviewed - saw it as a violation of
the ‘separation clause’ of the first amendment, the Supreme Court ruled
otherwise.
At stake was a policy whereby state scholarship programs
that allow donors to religious school scholarships to use some of it as a tax
credit - deducting it from their tax obligation. That was actually implemented in Illinois a few years ago - and if I remember correctly it had been challenged on constitutional
grounds. A similar law in Montana was challenged
in the Supreme court and ruled constitutional - striking down a lower court ruling that it was unconstitutional.
Most Orthodox Jews that have children in the religious
schools know how prohibitive school tuitions are. The ability of the vast majority of parents to pay full
tuition is a virtual impossibility if they have the typical size family of 3-5
children. And there are a great many parents that have a lot more. Some as many
as 10 children or more. The cost per child times the number of children is more
that even well paid educated professionals can afford.
Just to cite an example, if tuition is $20,000 per child
and you have 5 children, your tuition bill will be $100,000. Except for the
very wealthy, how many parents can afford that? Obviously almost every parent
in a school will receive tuition assistance of some kind. But they are nevertheless
squeezed for every penny they are deemed to be able to afford by the school. The
school has no choice - needing to meet a budget that will provide top quality
teachers that every parent wants. This is a crisis that has yet to be
solved.
But the Supreme Court decision will help. Because those among
us that pay state income tax can use some of it to help pay for that budget –
in states that have such programs.
This is good news. Like I said. You win some and you lose some.
