This article in the Neocon Review is insane even by NR standards. Missouri has a program to use recycled tires to “rubberize” school playgrounds. This does not apply to religious schools, because why would it? But according to author David French this violates the schoolchildren’s first amendment rights.
The first amendment begins with the words “congress shall make no law” so why does this even apply to the states? It’s due to the idea of “incorporation,” which, along with the judge’s interpretation of the commerce clause, have been the exceptions which have invalidated the rule of “constitutional” government. With them, there is essentially nothing the federal government may not claim a justification for being allowed to do, nor anything that they can not prohibit states from doing. Conservatives sometimes criticize incorporation, though even if they accept it, French’s interpretation of “free exercise” is still absurd. It’s as absurd as claiming my first amendment right to free speech entitles me to a government provided microphone. Taken to it’s logical conclusion, it would demand that government provide equal funding to any religious school, which may be French’s (needless to say unachievable) goal.
This just goes to show that most “conservatives,” like the politically correct libertarians, don’t really care about the constitution. They attack the alt-Right for not caring about it, but they, like the Left, will use any absurd reasoning they can when there’s something they support and can’t make law “democratically.” Very few people, and I am not among them, really want to go back to the type of government envisioned by the founders, so I tend to gloss over “the constitution says this or that” as an argument for why I should support something. Almost nobody forms their opinion on something on the basis of their interpretation of the constitution. Their interpretation of the constitution flows from their opinions.
French whines in the article that:
Indeed, given the tenor of the times, if a lawmaker tried to propose the Free Exercise Clause today, he’d likely face the full wrath of the entire social-justice coalition — from Apple to PayPal to even the NFL.
But hey, it’s a great idea to lower their taxes so that they have even more economic power to use for political blackmail!
French’s article also sounds a lot like the whining, and demands for handouts, you typically find on the Left. He tries to justify it by saying that the Christian parents are “paying taxes,” yet what percent of them pay enough state taxes to pay for the annual cost k-12 education of two children? It’s a small number. What even happened to good old self-reliance?