▁with ▁a ▁religious ▁view point ▁was ▁also ▁un const itution al ▁view point ▁disc rim ination . ▁ ▁In ▁spite ▁of ▁these ▁dec isions , ▁the ▁Second ▁Circ uit ▁had ▁ruled ▁in ▁this ▁case ▁that ▁the ▁religious ▁nature ▁of ▁the ▁Good ▁News ▁Club ' s ▁message ▁meant ▁that ▁it ▁" f ell ▁outside ▁the ▁bounds ▁of " ▁speech ▁related ▁to ▁" p ure ▁moral ▁and ▁character ▁development ", ▁and ▁hence ▁was ▁not ▁entitled ▁to ▁First ▁Am end ment ▁protection . ▁ ▁The ▁majority ▁on ▁the ▁Supreme ▁Court ▁" dis ag re ed ▁that ▁something ▁that ▁is ▁' qu int ess entially ▁religious ' ▁or ▁' dec ided ly ▁religious ▁in ▁nature ' ▁cannot ▁also ▁be ▁character ized ▁properly ▁as ▁the ▁teaching ▁of ▁mor als ▁and ▁character ▁development ▁from ▁a ▁particular ▁view point . ▁ ▁What ▁matters ▁for ▁purposes ▁of ▁the ▁Free ▁Spe ech ▁Cla use ▁is ▁that ▁we ▁can ▁see ▁no ▁logical ▁difference ▁in ▁kind ▁between ▁the ▁inv ocation ▁of ▁Christian ity ▁by ▁the ▁Club ▁and ▁the ▁inv ocation ▁of ▁team work , ▁loyal ty , ▁or ▁patri ot ism ▁by ▁other ▁associations ▁to ▁provide ▁a ▁foundation ▁for ▁their ▁less ons ." ▁ ▁Inst ruction ▁related ▁to ▁mor als ▁and ▁values ▁from ▁a ▁religious ▁perspective ▁does ▁not ▁somehow ▁" t aint " ▁that ▁instruction ▁so ▁as ▁to ▁alter ▁the ▁view point ▁such ▁instruction ▁takes . ▁ ▁According ly , ▁Mil ford ' s ▁ex clusion ▁of ▁the ▁Good ▁News ▁Club ▁constit uted ▁un const itution al ▁view point ▁disc rim ination . ▁