BUILD BACK BETTER, BUT NOT FOR RELIGIOUS BELIEVERS AND AFFILIATED RELIGIOUS CHILD CARE PROVIDERS
" In Another Attack By Progressives President Biden's Build Back Better Plan Discriminates Against Our Rights Of Religious Freedom."
November 24, 2021 By Englebrook Independent News Opinion By Josh Holdenried NAPA Legal Institute,
WASHINGTON, DC.- The Build Back Better Act would not just fundamental alter the scope and size of The American Government. It will also further the progressive campaign against religion. Buried in the fine print of a bill largely framed as support for families is a discriminatory provision that sidelines religiously affiliated child care providers. President Biden and Congressional Democrats are taking aim at care providers that millions of families prefer, all while defying The Supreme Court and undermining religious liberty.
The discrimination can be found in the $390 Billion section dealing with expanded child care and universal pre-kindergarten. A big chunk of the money is reserved for States, which can use it to distribute grants that improve the quality and supply of child care services through remodeling, repairs and renovations. But child care providers that are religious in nature are explicitly prohibited from spending a cent on facilities that are used primarily for sectarian instruction or religious worship.
At first glance, that language may seen unobjectionable. Why should the Federal Government support Churches that also happen to offer child care ? But that misses the whole point of why parents choose to send their kids to these providers. The promise of faith formation in a strong moral environment is not a secondary consideration, it is the primary motivation for millions of parents. The Supreme Court has long protected religious liberty in situations like this, yet Biden and Congress do not seem to care.
Polling shows that most parents think faith based child care is one of the best option for their children, behind only being at home with a parent or relative. And among households with working parents that rely on child care, more than half send their kids to religiously affiliated institutions. The connection to church is a feature, not a flaw.
Churches and religiously facilities are often multi-purpose, and singling out child care providers that use them sends a dangerous message. Denying resources to religious facilities says that religious instruction somehow taints or reduces the value of child care, this is an insult to the overwhelming majority of Americans who have some kind of faith. The bill already requires that providers, faith based or not, meet rigorous licensing requirements and demonstrate that the facility they seek to renovate prioritize child care services. So why does another part of the bill seek to discriminate against those same services ?
The bill does not completely ban funding for religiously affiliated child care providers. Families can still use its direct subsidies to defray tuition costs. But The Build Back Better Act will still tilt the playing field towards non-religious options. Secular providers will have additional funding to improve their facilities and expand their operations. And as Government subsidies allow more families to opt into child care, secular will have a significant advantage in building new facilities to meet demand, while houses of worship won't have help to build at all.
Such discrimination is clearly unconstitutional under Supreme Court president. The 2017 Trinity Lutheran decision declared that "denying a generally available benefit solely on account of religious identity imposes a penalty on free exercise of religion that can be justified by a State interest of the highest order." Similarly, in the 2020 Espinoza case, the majority held that The Constitution "condemns discrimination against religious schools and the families that choose to attend them" because they are "member[s] of the community" whose exclusion from Government Programs is "odious" and "cannot stand."
FILED UNDER NOVEMBER 24, 2021: WASHINGTON, POLITICS, NATIONAL, LOCAL: