Religious Spending Does Not Conflict With Church Vs. State

To the editors:

“The Case for Separation” (Staff Ed, March 2) objects to “state funds paying for a dogmatic and colored religious education,” and fears that the free use of government-funded vouchers would produce “de facto state sponsorship of one religious mindset.” Does the staff also wish to prevent welfare recipients from donating to religious charities? Surely the flow of taxpayer dollars into the collection plate constitutes “de facto state sponsorship”—yet such sponsorship is hardly terrifying when it comes, not from the hand of a government bureaucrat, but from the choices of individuals.

Stephen E. Sachs ’02

Oxford, U.K.

March 2, 2004

The writer was editorial chair of The Crimson in 2001.