Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof...
The point of such an amendment is twofold. First, it ensures that religious beliefs - private or organized - are removed from attempted government control. This is the reason why the government cannot tell either you or your church what to believe or to teach. Second, it ensures that the government does not get involved with enforcing, mandating, or promoting particular religious doctrines. This is what happens when the government "establishes" a church - and because doing so created so many problems in Europe, the authors of the Constitution wanted to try and prevent the same from happening here. Can anyone deny that the First Amendment guarantees the principle of religious liberty, even though those words do not appear there? Similarly, the First Amendment guarantees the principle of the separation of church and state - by implication, because separating church and state is what allows religious liberty to exist.
Voucher proponents have a lot on their plate simply with regard to explaining the undistinguished record of performance noted where such systems have been tried so far. Virtually none of the promised benefits has actually materialized in any of them at anywhere near the levels we were told to anticipate.
Public schools have not suddenly blossomed as the result of new voucher-school competition. Quality private schools have not suddenly popped up out of nowhere to provide any meaningful improvement over local public schools. These programs have so far simply failed to deliver the promised goods. Where is there any reason to expect that this will change?
Meanwhile, we all pay to make free public education available because we all benefit from it. Like roads, mass transit, parks, and other social infrastructure, these are things that we as a society provide for the benefit of all. None of the funding of such projects is attached to any particular user. Young, old, rich, poor, you may jog in the park twice a day every day or never go there at all. Your tax bill is still the same. The same is true with public schools. Your taxes go to provide the service in general. It does not matter one whit whether you ever use it or not.
The option of a free public education is however available to any children you might have. If you choose to turn that option down for whatever reason, that is your personal choice, and as any bona fide right-winger would instantly recognize, the doctrine of Personal Responsibility® demands that you pay for it yourself. That choice in no way reduces your responsibility to continue paying your share for provision of free public education in general. That obligation is yours by virtue of your standing as a member of society.
Separation of Church and State is the catch phrase of the 21st century so secularists can get their way in politics.
Oddly, it was also a catchphrase in the 18th, 19th, and 20th centuries. And if religion is to be drawn into the matter, some might as well own up to the fact that voucher programs were originally developed merely as a selfish means to get hold of taxpayer money for decisions over religious education that had already been made. When the Milwaukee voucher program began, more than 90% of the participating students had never spent a single day in the Milwaukee public school system. Nothing but a crude money grab. Public money. More feeding at the government teat, if you will...
The option of a free public education is however available to any children you might have. If you choose to turn that option down for whatever reason, that is your personal choice, and as any bona fide right-winger would instantly recognize, the doctrine of Personal Responsibility® demands that you pay for it yourself. That choice in no way reduces your responsibility to continue paying your share for provision of free public education in general. That obligation is yours by virtue of your standing as a member of society.
Is the financial burden upon the public education system lessened by those who homeschool or those who send their children to private school?
Over 20 schools in Arizona were found "deficient" and likely to be taken over -
Say you have a school in one of these schools - your child is not getting a good education in one of these schools - you want your child to get the best education - the only way to do that is to move your child to a "private" school. You can, with some "stretching" pay some of the tuition but, not all.
Remember - the public school is failing your child - and it may take years to correct the problem - do you make your child wait and suffer or, do you ask for a voucher to help offset the tuition to be paid so your child can get a good education?
Location: The Chatterdome in La La Land, CaliFUNia
39,031 posts, read 23,025,682 times
Reputation: 36027
Quote:
Originally Posted by mackinac81
The problem is two fold. The root problem comes from families. The best school districts are in towns where the parents are involved and care about their kids' education. My area (West Michigan) has tons of great school districts for this very reason. We care about our towns and understand that a good school makes for a good community. We're involved.
BUT...I know that's not the case everywhere, especially in the big cities (Detroit, Chicago, etc) Suppose you have a single mom in the inner city who wants a better education for her kid. She can't afford a private school, but has to send her kid to a district that is simply too big for her to make any impact. I can't tell her "sorry, in order to prop up our failing district your kid will have to get the shaft" No, I'd give her a voucher so that her child would get a better education elsewhere.
I think parents should use vouchers as a last resort. They should definitely get involved first and see how that goes. But if all else fails, Take your kid elsewhere. At the end of the day, education is about the education of the child. It's not about propping up the institution or school funding or whatever.
This is precisely why people are opposing vouchers. The schools will lose money! This is why public school employees and unions oppose vouchers. It's about preserving the status quo and not about what's in the best interests of the child, especially the innercity child!
Location: The Chatterdome in La La Land, CaliFUNia
39,031 posts, read 23,025,682 times
Reputation: 36027
Quote:
Originally Posted by LiveTodayLez08
Whatever.
I don't want tax dollars going to support parochial schools. If parents want their kids to attend a parochial school, they need to pay for it out of their own pockets.
I don't want MY tax dollars to support failing public schools. Why should parents have to be forced to pay taxes on failing school AND foot the bill for a quality private education? It's about choice!
Is the financial burden upon the public education system lessened by those who homeschool or those who send their children to private school?
Not at the margins, no. It typically takes major demographic shifts to affect public school financing. If a signficant fraction of a student population were to withdraw and be expected to stay withdrawn, costs would ultimately fall, and so would either local taxes or the portion of them going to public education. I'd guess that you are trying to tie specific dollars to your specific kid. But at the bottom line, the cost of your specific kid doesn't matter at all. It's the cost of all kids that matters.
Over 20 schools in Arizona were found "deficient" and likely to be taken over - Say you have a school in one of these schools - your child is not getting a good education in one of these schools - you want your child to get the best education - the only way to do that is to move your child to a "private" school. You can, with some "stretching" pay some of the tuition but, not all.
Pardon my asking, but if one were so concerned about the child's education, why was he or she in this school to start out with? It used to be a great school like two years ago and now it's suddenly turned rotten to the core? I don't think that happens very often.
Does the same principle apply to private schools? If I get my $5K voucher and send my kid over to the Podunk Private School, but he still isn't getting a good education, do I get to demand a $50K voucher so I can bump him up to the Wingate School for Boys Who Are Destined for Harvard?
This is precisely why people are opposing vouchers. The schools will lose money! This is why public school employees and unions oppose vouchers.
No, people oppose vouchers because you owe your share for supporting public education regardless of whether you so much as have children, and vouchers are just a scheme to weasel one's way out of that obligation.
Quote:
Originally Posted by msconnie73
It's about preserving the status quo and not about what's in the best interests of the child, especially the innercity child!
Ah, the inner city child! Do you suppose that there are lots of these good quality private schools currently going unattended down there in the inner city? No? Where is the choice for them then? It seems that they don't really have any.
In many cases, that's not the point though. Most people don't really care about what happens to the inner city child. They care about whether they can con the taxpayer out of a nice fat check while Junior continues to go to the very same private school that he's been going to all along. Not saying that you fall into this category. Just saying that the category exists and is quite substantial...
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
