This is good, and bad.
He who pays the piper calls the tunes. In this case if the Federal Government provides a school money, the Federal Government can tell the school what to do.
When it somes to military recruiters, that is good, but when it comes to _______ fill in the blank, it could be bad.
I would rather the Federal Government did not tax one set of citizens to give money to another. With the money saved, recruiting office could have been set up across the street from the campus.
I would feel this way regardless. I support the military, and I think they should be allowed to recruit on campus I just wish it could have been done without giving the Federal Government control over what should be a private institution what should or should not be allowed.
I would rather win this culture war with the force of a good argument, rather then through the courts.
excellent post in 42
read my post in 49
That train left the station a long time ago. Until now, it has only worked against us. Turnabout is fair play.
i agree, this may very well turn out to be a 2 edged sword.
i have cousins who home school. i was thinking of the possibiblity of federal interference via non validation or imposition on curricula for their children.
I agree, however, colleges across the country reap the benefit of having a military to defend their rights, and as a result, the government should have access to at least ask them if they wish to join the Armed Forces. I don't think that is too much of a price to pay for the federal funds. Otherwise, they can simply refuse the federal funds.
"This case does not require us to determine when a con dition placed on university funding... becomes an unconstitutional condition. It is clear that a funding condition cannot be unconstitutional if it could be constitutionally imposed directly... the First Amendment would not prevent Congress from directly imposing the Solomon Amendment's access requirement, "
"I would feel this way regardless. I support the military, and I think they should be allowed to recruit on campus I just wish it could have been done without giving the Federal Government control over what should be a private institution what should or should not be allowed.
"
A private institution that lives and breaths the freedom that our military fought and gave lives for, is not a private institution but an institution that doesn't deserve to reside in this Country. Period!!!!!
I would rather win this culture war with the force of a good arguement, rather than through the courts"
The reason we are losing this culture war is because the left, long ago, decided to use the courts as the ultimate battleground.. We are forced to fight fire with fire because they want the Constitution to be rewritten for them.
True, if you put in gay marriage or gay tolerance training, you might see a different response. The military should not be discriminated against, which I agree. But if we are forcing any arbitrary federal rules on schools then it will become a problem.
I would suggest that a proper thing for a court to decide would be that prudent expenditure of federal funds requires that they be allocated only according to prospective uses' ability to meet legitimate federal objectives.
If the federal government is looking to purchase some 3/8" cable for the Defense Department, and a U.S. manufacturer charges $0.05/foot more than a Chinese one, one might justify spending the extra money for the U.S. goods on the basis that the supply would be less likely to be interrupted in case of a international conflict. On the other hand, it would be hard to justify spending an extra $0.02/foot more for a certain company's cable on the basis that the company was minority-owned.
Using that standard, requiring recipients of federal funds to accept recruiters on campus would be legitimate, since putting recruiters in contact with college students is a legitimate federal objective. Requiring colleges receiving federal funds to have gay-indoctrination seminars would not be a legitimate requirement, since such seminars would not contribute toward any legitimate federal objective.
Agreed, think of Title 9 affirmative action sports.
I haven't read the decision, but I'd guess that a lot of the the precedents are *very* liberal-oriented.