Should government be permitted to condition its subsidies on adherence to non-discrimination conditions? It depends. Government in my view should be able to refuse to subsidize those organizations that discriminate on the basis of race or sexual orientation even if the basis for the discrimination is religious.
It similarly should be able to refuse to subsidize those organizations that discriminate on the basis of religion except for religious organizations. If non-religious organizations discriminate on the basis on religion, there is reason to think the discrimination is odious. If a religious organization engages in such discrimination re membership or re its leaders, the government is foreclosed from thinking that this is odious. This would not necessarily mean government could not draw a line somewhere regarding its subsidies for a religious organization's religiously-based decisions regarding employment (though it might).
Note that these issues were not presented in CLS v. Martinez which merely held that a law school need not subsidize an organization, religious or otherwise, that was not open to all students.
This post gets it all bassakwards.
One of the hallmarks of maturity and education is the ability to discriminate. Discrimination by individuals and by private organizations, be they churches or Elk clubs, is to be encouraged.
The problem comes where the Nanny State pervades our lives. When a person is discriminated against by a church or club, he can leave, join another or start one himself. But when our Nanny State discriminates, there is no such recourse that does not cost a fortune in penalties.
Such discrimination without recourse is rampant in our country, in primary and secondary education, in state-supported universities, in national parks and forests, in Social Security and in Medicare, to give just a few examples.
Black and Hispanic Americans pay like everyone else to support the Nanny State, but they do NOT enjoy equal education--primary, secondary or college--and they sure as hell are nowhere to be seen among visitors to national parks and forests. And the Black American Man will die just 4 years after qualifying for full SS and Medicare, while the Honky Woman will die 14 years after qualifying. She will enjoy Medicare benefits based on either her own income record or that of her Honky Husband. This represents a serious transfer of wealth and opportunity from Black to Honky, from worker to non-worker, and from Men to Women.
The solution to these problems, of course, is to PRIVATIZE schools, universities, parks, Medicaid and SS, so that the afflicted minority has an option. Once schooling, parks, forests, retirement and health care are privatized, the poor, Black, Hispanic and Male can use his meager wealth and income to choose alternatives to the disgusting options our Nanny State now presents him and his kids.
Posted by: Jimbino | 07/04/2011 at 11:23 AM