In Paying a Price for Bias , Inside Higher Ed reports that a Baptist university in Kentucky lost state money for a pharmacy school after the state’s supreme court ruled against them, in a case brought by a homosexualist lobby group. It would be nice if a conscientiously held moral view, almost universally held in this country and enshrined in law until recently, were not dismissed as “bias,” meaning not just a tilt of mind but prejudice or bigotry.
In an e-mail to me responding to the story, Hadley Arkes wrote:
And so the hard point here is: If it is indeed legitimate for a university to retain its religious character—if it is a legitimate entity, if it is committed to nothing that is illegitimate in the eyes of the law—there surely could be nothing wrong with a school of pharmacy generated by the same school. The question for the court is just why it should be unconstitutional for the government to support a school of pharmacy under a religious school while the government funds the same kinds of schools under the auspices of schools without a religious character. It has seemed to me in the past that this kind of a situation creates a disability distinctly based on religion, and I wish the school would contest it.
Dr. Arkes has an article appearing in the next issue on a very similar subject, the Supreme Court and the Christian Legal Services’ desire that their university treat them the same as other groups . And his new and much anticipated book C onstitutional Illusions and Anchoring Truths: The Touchstone of the Natural Law (Cambridge University Press) will be published in June .
Moral Certitude and the Iran War
The current military engagement with Iran calls renewed attention to just war theory in the Catholic tradition.…
The Slow Death of England: New and Notable Books
The fate of England is much in the news as popular resistance to mass immigration grows, limits…
Ethics of Rhetoric in Times of War
What we say matters. And the way we say it matters. This is especially true in times…