Supreme Court to Decide if Churches Are Eligible for State Grants to Renovate Their Property

Consider this: If the church wins this case, the ruling would essentially be saying that secular aspects of religious institutions could be funded with public money. So if Liberty University wanted to build a new gym on campus (that would, at least on paper, be open to the public), taxpayers could theoretically have to pay for it. If a church playground is deemed secular, then what about its other buildings that host more than just church services? What about lakes on the property that are used for baptisms but are said to be for the community. What’s the line between church space that’s used for religion and space that’s for “everyone” and therefore eligible for government-sponsored upgrades?...
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/2016/01/18/supreme-court-to-decide-if-churches-are-eligible-for-state-grants-to-renovate-their-property/