Return to Transcripts main page
CNN Live Sunday
University Of Michigan Student Loses Scholarship Because Of Theology Major
Aired August 10, 2003 - 18:16 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
KELLI ARENA, CNN ANCHOR: A legal battle is brewing in Michigan over financial aid for a student of religious study. The state yanked Teresa Becker's scholarship after officials learned of her major. Becker's story was profiled in "The New York Times" today.
And "The Times" reports, Michigan officials sent her a letter stating: "Students enrolled in a course of study leading to a degree in theology, divinity, or religious education are not eligible to receive an award."
Now, 11 states, including Michigan have laws against giving state aid to students of theology. Becker sued, now her scholarship is in escrow until her final court decision in the case.
In a similar case, from Washington state will be decided by the U.S. Supreme Court in it's next term. Well, joining me to discuss the issue is Elliot Mincberg, with People for the American Way and Joe Loconte from the Heritage Foundation.
Gentlemen, thank you for joining us.
ELIOT MINCEBERG, PEOPLE FOR THE AMERICAN WAY: You're very welcome.
JOE LOCONTE, HERITAGE FOUNDATION: Thanks for having us.
ARENA: Elliot, why don't we start with you? Do states have the right to basically decide what studies they'll promote?
MINCBERG: Well, they ought to because the question is if a state decides that it's going to fund people to become doctors, lawyers and teachers, is it mandated? Is it required to fund students to become priests and ministers? That's really the question that the Supreme Court will decide. And the answer ought to be that the state ought to be able to decide one way or the other. Otherwise, you could argue that if you start funding public schools are you mandated to fund religious schools as well.
ARENA: Well, not everybody who studies theology, though, becomes a priest or a minister.
Joe work you argue that this is discrimination?
LOCONTE: Oh, it's absolutely discrimination. This decision by Michigan, it fails the common sense test, it fails the fairness, and it fails the First Amendment test. It fails the common sense test because the scholarship was awarded on same basis all these other students, 100,000 of students, are getting scholarships on the same basis. The government didn't direct her decision. So you can't accuse government of establishing religion.
It also fails the fairness test, on the discrimination issue, because you ask yourself why should it be that students who pursue theology, in some way, why should they be excluded from public benefits that are available to every other student, no matter what degree they pursue. That seems to violate both the spirit and letter of the 1960 Civil Rights legislation. No discrimination on the basis of race, gender, ethnicity an religion.
Then I think it really does fail the First Amendment test, because you have a string of Supreme Court rulings, over the last decade, which have been saying essentially, hey look, government can't discriminate against religious institutions when it makes public benefits generally available to all individuals or institutions to promote a public good.
And just take the voucher decision from last year where parents now can use -- the Ohio decision -- parents can use school vouchers at any school of their choice, secular or religious. The spirit of Supreme Court cases, and the letter of the decisions of those cases really is behind the student in Michigan, it seems to me.
ARENA: Elliot, let me ask you this, some school officials say that studying theology is part of a liberal arts degree, much like philosophy or English literature. Where do you -- where does a line have to be drawn, do you think?
MINCBERG: Well, again, looking not so much at the Michigan case, but the case in the Supreme Court, the question is, can the state decide that we want to go ahead and fund general kinds of education, without then saying we must fund somebody if they want to take the dollars, and use it to become, for example, a priest or minister.
I think the question becomes whose decision is it? Are taxpayers required to put their dollars for one purpose, as opposed to the other. That's, I think, what the concern ought to be.
ARENA: Well, there's also, though, the issue of let's say I'm taking something else something else, some other major. But I take, you know, a number of theology courses and then choose ministry as a profession. Those people can get money, just because they haven't claimed theology as their major. There does seem to be an imbalance there.
LOCONTE: That shows you why I think this is inherently discriminatory in what the state is trying to do. It's trying to draw these fine lines. You can take some theology degrees, but can't declare a theology major. And then you lose your money. That doesn't make a lot of sense. It really violates our sense of fairness.
The other thing to consider, is that these state constitutions that are restrictive when it comes to benefits to religious groups, as Elliot knows, those were constitutions were drafted, and those laws were added in the 19th century, in an era of deep anti-Catholic bigotry. So, what many of us want to say it's time to move beyond that era of anti-religious bigotry and make these benefits available to students of all faith or of no faith.
ARENA: Well, how about this, Elliot, there have been some suggestions that it needs to be clear-cut. That if you are going into the ministry, well then that's one situation, but if you are truly studying theology for academic purposes, that that is something entirely different and can and should be funded. Where do you stand on that?
MINCBERG: I think a state certainly could decide to do it exactly the way you've suggested. There would be nothing wrong with that at all. But the question is, is the state required to fund somebody even if they say right up front, you know, I would like to get taxpayer dollars in order to become a priest or minister.
The only point we're making the state ought not to be required to spend that taxpayer money on that, as opposed to spending precious taxpayer dollars on educational or other purposes.
ARENA: All right. Well, Elliot Mincberg, Joe Loconte, I'm going to have to stop you guys there. Thank you very much for participating.
MINCBERG: You're very welcome.
LOCONTE: Thanks for having us, appreciate it.
TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com
Of Theology Major>
Aired August 10, 2003 - 18:16 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
KELLI ARENA, CNN ANCHOR: A legal battle is brewing in Michigan over financial aid for a student of religious study. The state yanked Teresa Becker's scholarship after officials learned of her major. Becker's story was profiled in "The New York Times" today.
And "The Times" reports, Michigan officials sent her a letter stating: "Students enrolled in a course of study leading to a degree in theology, divinity, or religious education are not eligible to receive an award."
Now, 11 states, including Michigan have laws against giving state aid to students of theology. Becker sued, now her scholarship is in escrow until her final court decision in the case.
In a similar case, from Washington state will be decided by the U.S. Supreme Court in it's next term. Well, joining me to discuss the issue is Elliot Mincberg, with People for the American Way and Joe Loconte from the Heritage Foundation.
Gentlemen, thank you for joining us.
ELIOT MINCEBERG, PEOPLE FOR THE AMERICAN WAY: You're very welcome.
JOE LOCONTE, HERITAGE FOUNDATION: Thanks for having us.
ARENA: Elliot, why don't we start with you? Do states have the right to basically decide what studies they'll promote?
MINCBERG: Well, they ought to because the question is if a state decides that it's going to fund people to become doctors, lawyers and teachers, is it mandated? Is it required to fund students to become priests and ministers? That's really the question that the Supreme Court will decide. And the answer ought to be that the state ought to be able to decide one way or the other. Otherwise, you could argue that if you start funding public schools are you mandated to fund religious schools as well.
ARENA: Well, not everybody who studies theology, though, becomes a priest or a minister.
Joe work you argue that this is discrimination?
LOCONTE: Oh, it's absolutely discrimination. This decision by Michigan, it fails the common sense test, it fails the fairness, and it fails the First Amendment test. It fails the common sense test because the scholarship was awarded on same basis all these other students, 100,000 of students, are getting scholarships on the same basis. The government didn't direct her decision. So you can't accuse government of establishing religion.
It also fails the fairness test, on the discrimination issue, because you ask yourself why should it be that students who pursue theology, in some way, why should they be excluded from public benefits that are available to every other student, no matter what degree they pursue. That seems to violate both the spirit and letter of the 1960 Civil Rights legislation. No discrimination on the basis of race, gender, ethnicity an religion.
Then I think it really does fail the First Amendment test, because you have a string of Supreme Court rulings, over the last decade, which have been saying essentially, hey look, government can't discriminate against religious institutions when it makes public benefits generally available to all individuals or institutions to promote a public good.
And just take the voucher decision from last year where parents now can use -- the Ohio decision -- parents can use school vouchers at any school of their choice, secular or religious. The spirit of Supreme Court cases, and the letter of the decisions of those cases really is behind the student in Michigan, it seems to me.
ARENA: Elliot, let me ask you this, some school officials say that studying theology is part of a liberal arts degree, much like philosophy or English literature. Where do you -- where does a line have to be drawn, do you think?
MINCBERG: Well, again, looking not so much at the Michigan case, but the case in the Supreme Court, the question is, can the state decide that we want to go ahead and fund general kinds of education, without then saying we must fund somebody if they want to take the dollars, and use it to become, for example, a priest or minister.
I think the question becomes whose decision is it? Are taxpayers required to put their dollars for one purpose, as opposed to the other. That's, I think, what the concern ought to be.
ARENA: Well, there's also, though, the issue of let's say I'm taking something else something else, some other major. But I take, you know, a number of theology courses and then choose ministry as a profession. Those people can get money, just because they haven't claimed theology as their major. There does seem to be an imbalance there.
LOCONTE: That shows you why I think this is inherently discriminatory in what the state is trying to do. It's trying to draw these fine lines. You can take some theology degrees, but can't declare a theology major. And then you lose your money. That doesn't make a lot of sense. It really violates our sense of fairness.
The other thing to consider, is that these state constitutions that are restrictive when it comes to benefits to religious groups, as Elliot knows, those were constitutions were drafted, and those laws were added in the 19th century, in an era of deep anti-Catholic bigotry. So, what many of us want to say it's time to move beyond that era of anti-religious bigotry and make these benefits available to students of all faith or of no faith.
ARENA: Well, how about this, Elliot, there have been some suggestions that it needs to be clear-cut. That if you are going into the ministry, well then that's one situation, but if you are truly studying theology for academic purposes, that that is something entirely different and can and should be funded. Where do you stand on that?
MINCBERG: I think a state certainly could decide to do it exactly the way you've suggested. There would be nothing wrong with that at all. But the question is, is the state required to fund somebody even if they say right up front, you know, I would like to get taxpayer dollars in order to become a priest or minister.
The only point we're making the state ought not to be required to spend that taxpayer money on that, as opposed to spending precious taxpayer dollars on educational or other purposes.
ARENA: All right. Well, Elliot Mincberg, Joe Loconte, I'm going to have to stop you guys there. Thank you very much for participating.
MINCBERG: You're very welcome.
LOCONTE: Thanks for having us, appreciate it.
TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com
Of Theology Major>
