The gentleman is aware, as we debated a number of times, that there are multiple rulings if it is used to teach primarily sectarian doctrine. In other words, if you teach religious doctrine, the courts clearly ruled. However, if one is pervasively sectarian, but not teaching religious views, the court has ruled in other cases. That is why we said consistent with the establishment clause, because it could be challenged. The fact is, HUD currently gives and has given hundreds of these grants around the country to pervasively sectarian organizations.
Mark Souder: “The gentleman is aware, as we debated a number of times, that there are multiple rulings if it is used to teach…”
Editor's note · Context
Discussing the implications of court rulings on sectarian doctrine and HUD grants.
Share
More from Mark Souder
How does the Administration plan to stem the need for drug treatment in the future by eliminating prevention efforts such as the State Grants portion of the Safe and Drug Free Schools and Communities (SDFSC) program?
It's based off the capital gains. Right now--I had one person with a $40,000 house, and the capital gains on that made the difference of his retirement on an annual basis. The question is they have planned nothing----
The proposal to sharply expand the Pell Grant Program and make it an entitlement is likewise fiscally irresponsible and potentially might add to already inflated college costs.
The proposal to end the FFEL program and replace it with direct federal student lending will have negative consequences on students, it is fiscal madness and the alleged financial benefits to the federal government are likely illusionary.





