64 Comments
User's avatar
Kate Stone's avatar

Am I the only one who didn’t know there was a patron saint of the internet?

Expand full comment
Timothy Patrick's avatar

like… the WHOLE internet? Or just the family friendly part? 🫣

Expand full comment
Susan Mills's avatar

hahahahahaha...that made me laugh out loud...

Expand full comment
Marti's avatar

🤣🤣

Expand full comment
Marti's avatar

My first thought was “seriously?” No disrespect to Catholics, just was a head scratcher for me.

Expand full comment
Jade's avatar

Why did ACB recuse herself?

Expand full comment
EP's avatar

I have the same question. My first thought is because she is Catholic. But I am curious if she has a personal connection to the school.

Expand full comment
Linda Robledo's avatar

Someone in another comment shared this article: https://www.the74million.org/article/a-lifelong-friendship-could-explain-barretts-recusal-in-catholic-charter-case/

I haven't read it yet, but may provide context

Expand full comment
Linda Robledo's avatar

I had no idea either. I wonder how they ended up being designated to that position... Does the Pope decide? A council of Cardinals?

Expand full comment
Emily's avatar

"In 1997, Pope John Paul II decided that the internet could use a patron saint to guide Catholics in its proper use. He chose Saint Isidore of Seville (560-636), Doctor of the Church, and last of the Latin Fathers. His twenty-book opus (called Etymologia, after the subject title of one of the books), made him an easy choice." https://catholicism.org/patron-saint-for-the-internet-isidore-of-seville.html

Expand full comment
Kate Stone's avatar

Hm, I wonder what John Paul II would’ve thought about how that all turned out.

Expand full comment
Kathryn Toner's avatar

Thanks for sharing the article about Pope John Paul ll decided.

Expand full comment
Linda Robledo's avatar

Thank you for sharing!

Expand full comment
Kathleen's avatar

I read the email and texted my sister right away and asked her that very question LOL

Expand full comment
Lisa Robertson's avatar

Came here to say this!!! Like what was Isidore's martyrdom?

Expand full comment
Janis's avatar

Nope! I never heard that either! Is it true,Sharon?

Expand full comment
Kris C.'s avatar

The issue I have with any Charter School (religious or non) or religious schools getting tax payer funds is that children will no longer have equal access to education. The thing most people don’t consider is that these schools are allowed to turn students away. They don’t have to provide services to those with disabilities. They don’t have to deal with learning disabilities. It’s not much choice if schools can opt out of educating certain people.

Expand full comment
Dawn Wulff's avatar

Charter schools must provide services for disabilities and follow all laws that public schools do. They are only allowed to turn students away for extreme issues the same as public schools. They are allowed to say they do not have room, but that has to be shown with data that their classes are full and this is bc a charter school is built around a unique idea like project based learning or the arts or 1:1 tech. A traditional public school must make room for anyone in the district they service.

Expand full comment
Emily's avatar

That's true, but subtle discrimination against disabled students is a well-known issue even with public charter schools: https://adayinourshoes.com/charter-school-special-education/

Expand full comment
Kris C.'s avatar

The proof most of these schools need to provide is minimal at best. Maybe that varies by state, but in my state, charter schools don’t have the same scrutiny as public schools do. If the legal standard of the Lottery system for EVERY school is that it must be computer generated and not human generated. Then I will believe it is fair and free. Additionally it’s not much of a choice if charter schools pull from 2 or 3 districts which diminishes the parents ability to choose.

Alternatively: we could set up public school models that offer alternative schooling styles at no extra burden to parents, tax base, or students. Growing up, my area developed several programs, all part of the same curriculum and system, for students with different learning needs. This helped the district maintain test scores, funding, and quality of education.

Expand full comment
Jo McEnroe's avatar

My son teaches at a charter school in Dallas, and every single one of his classrooms have over 30 students. Last year he had 180 students.

Expand full comment
Jennifer Smith's avatar

It’s anecdotal but, a family I know has all of its kids except one going to a charter. The one who goes to a public school goes because the charter school did not or would not provide speech and language services. I also know that charter schools in my area tend to kick out any kid who needs special services. It’s gross. I don’t think the charters provide a better education anyways (at least in my area) most kids really struggle academically when they eventually return to public schools.

I also understand that in some areas of the country charter schools are miraculous for a lot of kids. Maybe it is a state by state basis.

I do not think a charter school can or should be religious. This will become very problematic. Are we going to allow all religions to have their own public schools now??

Expand full comment
Jodi B's avatar
2dEdited

In addition, several states have admission to charter schools based on a lottery system, where parents who want children to attend sign them up for the lottery, and so the children who were denied were just as likely to get entrance as the ones who actually did. Usually, these states have a hybrid lottery system, where if one child from a family gains admittance, the other children who have applied in the same family group or household, also gain admittance. After the school’s first year, all open spots again are chosen by a random lottery. The system isn’t the case in every state, but it is the one that makes the most sense to me for sure.

Expand full comment
Kris C.'s avatar

I also want to mention this about charter schools having better teachers. Many charter schools have teachers sign non compete contracts so they leave voluntarily, they may not be able to work in their district for up to a certain amount of time.

This either forces teachers to leave the area, quit all together, or they stay because they can’t afford to leave.

Expand full comment
Maggie's avatar

I’m confused as to why religious organizations are tax exempt, but then want to receive tax payer money…. And why this isn’t a part of the conversation?

Expand full comment
Anna O's avatar

Good point!

Expand full comment
Linda Robledo's avatar

Such a great point! Double dipping? Hmm

Expand full comment
Timothy Patrick's avatar

First, let me just say that this article proves what a valuable resource The Preamble is. Even some of the most respected newspapers don't often provide two paragraphs of parenthetical context where context is key to understanding, instead focusing just on the facts of a case, leaving readers mostly in a vacuum. Thank you so much for connecting all the dots, Sharon.

What I find most interesting is how this case doesn't break along typical partisan lines. You have Republican Attorney General Drummond opposing a Republican governor on this issue, showing that concerns about the separation of church and state can transcend political affiliation. I wonder how Oklahoma residents feel about seeing their governor and attorney general as placeholders in what feels like a culture war, especially when the typically easy R vs D “team sports” dynamic is missing? I don’t know for sure, but my guess is that the governor is taking the politically convenient stance while the attorney general, as crazy as it might seem, is making the call based on law.

One more thing that I'm wondering about: if St. Isidore and similar religious charter schools become taxpayer-funded, would they be required to teach about other religions with equal time and equal respect? You can't claim religious discrimination against Christians while discriminating against other faiths within your curriculum. Would a Catholic charter school need to offer equal education time for Islam, Judaism, Hinduism, or even Satanism to comply with non-discrimination principles? This seems like the logical next battleground if the Court rules in St. Isidore's favor.

Speaking of the Drummonds, for those interested in learning more about their family history, I highly recommend the podcast "In Trust" which explores their role in the Osage story that inspired "Killers of the Flower Moon." Don't let the focus on mineral rights fool you – it's surprisingly captivating.

Expand full comment
Robin D's avatar

Absoluty NOT should one dime of tax payer money go to fund a religious charter school. If that's what these parents want let them pay for it out of their pocket. Separation of Church and state. Get the church out of our gov't. Replace Christian with Jewish or Muslim and you'll see how fast this SCOTUS would vote no, but they are going to vote for it. There are non-Christians who live in this country or atheists or agnostics who pay our taxes who are NOT okay with this. School lunches? 100%. Bible studies? Don't think so.

Expand full comment
TS's avatar
2dEdited

Public money should *not* pay for religious education. It’s exhausting to see so many attacks against public education 💔 From this case, to the passage of school vouchers in state legislatures across the country, we are seeing the White Christian Nationalist agenda unfold: dismantle the separation of church and state and funnel tax dollars to religious schools.

Expand full comment
Morgaine's avatar

Here’s some background to why Amy Coney Barrett might have recused herself: https://www.the74million.org/article/a-lifelong-friendship-could-explain-barretts-recusal-in-catholic-charter-case/

Expand full comment
Linda Robledo's avatar

Well done Justice Barrett for having integrity.

Expand full comment
Ashley Archuleta's avatar

It is shockingly refreshing to see someone have an ethical backbone in this day and age.

Expand full comment
Linda Robledo's avatar

Would this mean the Satanic Temple could start a charter school? Because I'm pretty sure most people don't want that. (Perhaps most especially the people who hope St. Isidore wins this case.)

Expand full comment
Ashley Archuleta's avatar

The Satanic Temple is such a bogeyman. Their ethos is basically logic and reality over the supernatural, and they promote the common good over suffering. They don’t even believe in Satan. In short, I think the Satanic Temple is a necessary countermeasure if (heaven forbid) SCOTUS rules in St Isidore’s favor.

Expand full comment
Linda Robledo's avatar

Oh I agree with you! I definitely could have made that more clear in my original post. I think its mission is awesome. I also think that the same people who want this ruling to be in favor of St Isidore would be terrified of their public funds being used to support religions that aren't their own...

Thank you so much for adding context to my original post.

Expand full comment
Mike's avatar

I think that’s exactly the precedent that could be set should the court (god forbid) rule in favor of this school. Heck, I’d happily send my kids to a school run by the Satanic Temple over one by a Catholic or Baptist church.

Expand full comment
Linda Robledo's avatar

agreed

Expand full comment
Nancy Cozzi's avatar

My kids attend a Catholic high school and no, I don’t think religious schools should be able to be considered the same as public schools.

Expand full comment
Krause Kim's avatar

This is a Pandora’s box. The same people wanting the government to pay for their children to attend a religious school will be having a meltdown when a satanic religious school, or some other very unusual religion, opens in their neighborhood. You can’t just say Christian schools, it’s all or nothing. I hope this conservative court thinks VERY carefully about allowing this to go forward with all of the unintended consequences that will come with it

Expand full comment
Dennis McElroy's avatar

In Iowa, religious schools now get public tax dollars AND don’t have to adhere to the same state education regs as the publics. The next step the legislature is trying to push through is public dollars going to home schoolers who also would not have to follow state regs. In Iowa it’s a money grab by the GOP.

Expand full comment
Amy O's avatar

This kind of thing makes me nervous. I understand the argument of "it's my tax money, it should go to things I support" but it's a very slippery slope for me. What if I don't personally want to support police or firefighters with my tax dollars... Can I pull that and redirect it to my public library? What happens when my house is on fire, do they get to choose not to serve me? It seems like we're applying a "get what you pay for" mentality with taxes that people should be able to choose... But I don't feel comfortable with the actual application of that. Feels like we could end up privatizing everything.

Expand full comment
Dennis McElroy's avatar

I see it as a constitutional argument. The establishment clause specifically separates church and state. The use of taxes to pay for things that are for the common good is different than using them for what individuals want them applied to. Federal and state law requires public education…not private or religious.

Expand full comment
Anita's avatar

Separation of church and state PERIOD.

Expand full comment
Kathryn Toner's avatar

History shows the Danger of mixing Religion and Power. Taxpayer money should not fund religion since churches and religious organizations don’t pay taxes. It’s unfair for non- religious people to fund religious agendas period.

Expand full comment
Timothy Haggerty's avatar

Why bother to have a nation? If everyone wants it their way. Perhaps we need 50 new countries to provide those special services. The Preamble of the Constitution is this country's mission statement perhaps we should reflect on that. No where does it say "You can have it your way"

Expand full comment
Amy F's avatar

To go back to Carson vs. Makin for a minute, there ARE religious schools in Maine that receive public funding. Cheverus High School in Portland is one of them. They have agreed to follow rules about non-discrimination and so on (then again, they're a Jesuit school, not quite the same as other Catholic schools, Jesuits are much more accepting). And then on the other hand, you have St. Dominic in Maine, that is currently suing the state over the same principle stated here. They want public school dollars, but they don't want to follow non-discrimination laws. Not sure what the status is - think it's still going through the appeals process. Lower courts have ruled against the school.

Expand full comment
Todd Bruton's avatar

Funny how school *choice* means that non-Christian parents have NO choice when it comes to which schools receive their tax-support. And, in some cases...which schools their students attend.

Expand full comment