Supreme Court To Decide If Atheism Can Keep Its Monopoly On K-12 Schools

  
Via:  Vic Eldred  •  4 weeks ago  •  203 comments

By:   By Joy Pullmann

Supreme Court To Decide If Atheism Can Keep Its Monopoly On K-12 Schools
Today the Supreme Court hears a case that could undo a century of decisions that have attacked and undermined religious beliefs by secularizing public education.

Leave a comment to auto-join group We the People

We the People

S E E D E D   C O N T E N T


Today the U.S. Supreme Court hears a case that could determine whether parents and taxpayers have any choices about the kind of religion American children are taught with taxpayer funds.   Espinoza v. Montana Department of Revenue  concerns whether private donations may support schools that make their religious beliefs explicit. It could also undo a century of U.S. court and legislative decisions that used animus between Protestants and Catholics to attack the faith of both kinds of Christians’ children over the last century.

Five years ago, Montana’s legislature enacted a tiny school choice program that allows residents to deduct up to $150 on state taxes for their donations to private school scholarships. Eighteen states   offer   similar charitable opportunities, which fund private schools using private money. Montana’s taxation agency, however, banned religious schools from accessing these   private   donations, on the grounds that would violate the state constitution’s ban on using   public   funds for “sectarian” schools.

Since these school choice programs employ private funds, instead of direct taxpayer support such as through vouchers, they have been less successfully challenged in courts on the grounds Montana’s bureaucracy employed. Thirty-seven states   include   some variation of this prohibition in their constitutions, and several run programs similar to Montana’s, often with courts’ approval. Now the Supreme Court will deal with the discrepancy.

It is expected to use the occasion to consider anti-religious constitutional provisions like Montana’s, known as   Blaine amendments , after the 19th century politician James Blaine. During Blaine’s crusade to enact these policies, the word “sectarian” was understood to mean   specifically   “Roman Catholic.”

That’s because it was then the norm, since the American founding, for tax funds to support openly religious schools. In the first three-quarters of the United States’ existence, many American schools were directly funded by tax dollars and run by local churches, and sometimes even taught by local ministers (often the most educated person in a town).

So until Supreme Court and legislative changes in the mid-1900s, U.S. public schools   were usually overtly Christian : “In the 1800s, the country was predominantly Protestant, and public schools taught a generic Protestantism. Teachers led students in daily prayer, sang religious hymns, extolled Protestant ideals, read from the King James Bible, and taught from anti-Catholic textbooks.”

During the height of Catholic immigration to the United States, however, many Protestants didn’t want to allow Catholics equal access to local public funding for the schools their churches ran. They thus created barriers to public support for religious schooling, such as Blaine Amendments, that at first affected only Catholics, but eventually also turned on Protestants.

These barriers and others lawmakers and courts added ultimately drove Christianity from publicly supported U.S. K-12 education. They helped lay the legal and cultural groundwork for eventually substituting atheism for Christianity as the religion of U.S. schooling. It’s a sneaky move, because atheism and secularism are easier to falsely view as “neutral,”  when they are in fact a competing religious understanding of the ultimate questions every faith seeks to answer.

The truth is that there is no neutrality about religion. To not believe in God is a religous belief,  just as believing in God is a religious belief. To include the Bible in curricula is a religious decision, just like not including the Bible in curricula is a religious decision.

To pray or not to pray: both are religious questions. Both teach something about the importance, existence, and nature of religion, as does every other decision about a school’s instruction, teaching methods, and priorities. Instruction techniques must change based on whether one holds the religious view that humans are by nature sinful or the competing religious view that humans are born perfect and corrupted by institutions.

Yet for a century or more, we’ve accepted the dangerous fiction that it is possible for law and public institutions to be neutral on religious questions. This has had the effect of making secular atheism the dominant religion of American public life, all while pretending it wasn’t happening.

On that basis,   in 1962 the Supreme Court held   that the U.S. Constitution’s requirement that “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion” required U.S. public schools to ban prayer. In 1962, the   court banned public schools   from Bible readings as part of instruction. In 1971, it   banned states from funding nonreligious instruction   in private religious schools. In 1985,   it banned schools   from allowing one minute for silent prayer or meditation, and in 2000   banned students   from voluntarily leading prayers at football games.

While the Supreme Court repeatedly took a sledgehammer to American Christians’ ability to pass on their faith using their own tax dollars and supposedly locally controlled institutions, our politicians have refused to redress the bigotry against religion this entails. For if it is bigotry for Protestants to have banned Roman Catholics from equal access to public education funds solely on account of their religion, it is also bigotry for atheists to have effectively banned Protestants and Catholics from equal access to public education funds solely on account of   their   religion.

Either we all are allowed to educate our children according to our religious beliefs, or some get to impose their religious beliefs on others. There are no two ways about it. There is no such thing as a school that does not teach religion. There is only such a thing as a school that teaches that religion is unimportant, false, foolhardy, a side matter, unrelated to “real life,” a private matter, or not worth considering. These are all religious teachings — or antireligious teachings. Whatever you call them, they are not religiously neutral. They are religiously biased.


U.S. public schools impose religious beliefs on children. According to young Americans who have abandoned their family’s faith, they did so on average   before   leaving high school . One of their top reasons for abandoning the faith is the scientism they are taught in their schools. The other top reason are the sexual relativism they are taught in their schools.

The majority of young Americans   believe the point of an education is to be able to buy stuff to make themselves happy , which directly contradicts religious teachings that the point of life is to   love God   and   serve our neighbors . Thanks to   Obergefell v. Hodges , public schools are now bound to take sides on the deeply religious question of what constitutes a marriage and proper relations between the sexes. Increasingly,   public schools preach   identity politics’ religious beliefs, such as the idea that sins like racism accrue based on skin color (intersectionalism) and can be solved through collective political action rather than individual repentance.

The Supreme Court has spent a century attacking religion under the guise of neutrality. Its decision on this case could reverse more than a century of injustice that the court has until now pushed apace.




headshotnew.jpg


Joy Pullmann is executive editor of The Federalist, a happy wife, and the mother of five children. Newly out: the second edition of her ebook recommending more than 400 classic books for young children. She is also the author of " The Education Invasion: How Common Core Fights Parents for Control of American Kids ," from Encounter Books. She identifies as native American and gender natural.


Article is Locked


 

Tags

jrGroupDiscuss - desc
smarty_function_ntUser_is_admin: user_id parameter required
[]
 
Vic Eldred
1  seeder  Vic Eldred    4 weeks ago

The Court has a chance to rectify a policy that favors atheism.

I dedicate this article to a friend.


Rules of civility will be enforced

Trump is off topic

 
 
 
Greg Jones
1.1  Greg Jones  replied to  Vic Eldred @1    4 weeks ago

Teaching the truths of science cannot be considered the same as advocating atheism. The teaching of any mythology (religion) in the public schools is now no longer allowed. People's personal faiths should only be taught in the home, in private groups, or in the churches. However, in the interest of kids of receiving a quality education, I believe in school choice and that vouchers be used as the parents see fit, as the public schools have failed to do a decent of educating our kids for years and years.

 
 
 
devangelical
1.1.1  devangelical  replied to  Greg Jones @1.1    4 weeks ago
that vouchers be used as the parents see fit

f that, thumpers get too many tax breaks already. if SCOTUS rules in favor, congress needs to retaliate by taxing religion as the business it really is. it costs families extra money to attend church, if they want their spawn to attend the connected madrasa, they can grab their wallets and step up to the cash register.

 
 
 
Texan1211
1.1.2  Texan1211  replied to  devangelical @1.1.1    4 weeks ago
f that, thumpers get too many tax breaks already.

Please define thumpers and what exact tax breaks they get.

You can ask Congress to tax churches, but it ain't going to happen.

 
 
 
devangelical
1.1.3  devangelical  replied to  Texan1211 @1.1.2    4 weeks ago
Please define thumpers

the bible does it best - Matthew 6:5-6

what exact tax breaks they get.

those that are unavailable to non-church attendees

You can ask Congress to tax churches, but it ain't going to happen.

I really don't expect the vast majority of taxpayers to pick up the tab for reinforcing mythological mental handicaps on the innocent children of a fringe religious cult that composes a small fraction of the population. congress has the power to levy taxes, especially when another branch of government gives financial advantages to one small group over all others, because of their votes.

 
 
 
Texan1211
1.1.4  Texan1211  replied to  devangelical @1.1.3    4 weeks ago
the bible does it best - Matthew 6:5-6

After reading many of your posts, it looks to me like you lump all believers in the category of thumpers. Which is ridiculous.

those that are unavailable to non-church attendees

Which are what exactly? You claimed they got tax breaks, so please tell us what breaks they get you can't?

Anyone can claim any old crap they want. I won't believe it without proof. So please, provide some proof for your rather dubious claims.

 
 
 
squiggy
1.1.5  squiggy  replied to  devangelical @1.1.1    4 weeks ago
they can grab their wallets and step up to the cash register.

They do. It's called tuition - and by paying thousands of dollars for their own they give free money to the school district to conduct underwater violin classes.

 
 
 
Gordy327
1.2  Gordy327  replied to  Vic Eldred @1    4 weeks ago

How is atheism favored exactly?  Public schools are supposed to be secular, per the separation of church and state. If one wants religion with their school, there are religious based schools.

 
 
 
devangelical
1.2.1  devangelical  replied to  Gordy327 @1.2    4 weeks ago

the establishment clause is my personal red line. freedom from a particular religion was a primary reason for immigration to the new world. the Constitution is clear on this and backs it up with the very next amendment.

 
 
 
Gordy327
1.2.2  Gordy327  replied to  devangelical @1.2.1    4 weeks ago

It is a good Clause.

 
 
 
squiggy
1.2.3  squiggy  replied to  devangelical @1.2.1    4 weeks ago

So why can't a Catholic kid ride the district bus to his school?

 
 
 
katrix
1.2.4  katrix  replied to  squiggy @1.2.3    4 weeks ago

A Catholic kid can absolutely ride the district bus to his public school.

As for funding public transportation to private schools - I doubt most school systems have any money for that. They are focused on providing services for the kids who are enrolled in their school system. And around here, we can't even find enough school bus drivers for the regular bus routes.

But actually, I think you raise an interesting point. It would cut down on congestion and such if all the private school kids weren't driven by their parents ... and they have paid taxes for the school buses, when you think about it. It could be a logistical nightmare. But if the private school were located along a regular school bus route ....

 
 
 
squiggy
1.2.5  squiggy  replied to  katrix @1.2.4    4 weeks ago

"A Catholic kid can absolutely ride the district bus to his public school."

No. The Catholic kid can't ride a district bus so as to cause it to stop at the Catholic school so he could get off.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
1.2.6  seeder  Vic Eldred  replied to  devangelical @1.2.1    4 weeks ago
freedom from a particular religion was a primary reason for immigration to the new world.

Not from any and all religion!

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
1.2.7  seeder  Vic Eldred  replied to  Gordy327 @1.2    4 weeks ago
How is atheism favored exactly?

I can't really improve on Ms Pullman's complaint:

"Either we all are allowed to educate our children according to our religious beliefs, or some get to impose their religious beliefs on others. There are no two ways about it. There is no such thing as a school that does not teach religion. There is only such a thing as a school that teaches that religion is unimportant, false, foolhardy, a side matter, unrelated to “real life,” a private matter, or not worth considering. These are all religious teachings — or antireligious teachings. Whatever you call them, they are not religiously neutral. They are religiously biased."


Let me add my own thoughts. Through grades 1 through 8 I was sent to a private Catholic school. To this day I recall a nun telling us that our parents paid to send us there. She told us that our parents had to also pay via taxes for the public schools. She topped it all off by saying that she hoped the newly elected President, John F Kennedy, (a Catholic) would do something to change that. (I'll bet I'm the only one alive who remembers that.)  Maybe that would be a kind of compromise. Those who go to private schools get a tax exemption from funding the public schools. If your answer is that it would destroy the public school system, then clearly there is something wrong with the public school system.

 
 
 
sandy-2021492
1.2.8  sandy-2021492  replied to  Vic Eldred @1.2.7    4 weeks ago
Either we all are allowed to educate our children according to our religious beliefs

All are.

It's really easy to improve on her complaint, when her complaint is false.

Nobody is stopping her from teaching her children according to her religious beliefs.  She is free to do so.  Always has been.  She is not entitled to funding for her choices.

Not being paid to do something is not the same as being forbidden to do it.

 
 
 
Tessylo
1.2.9  Tessylo  replied to  Vic Eldred @1.2.7    4 weeks ago

Her complaint is totally bogus 

 
 
 
katrix
1.2.10  katrix  replied to  squiggy @1.2.5    4 weeks ago
No. The Catholic kid can't ride a district bus so as to cause it to stop at the Catholic school so he could get off

I said to a PUBLIC school. Plenty of Catholic kids go to public schools. And as I also mentioned, I'd have no problem with having the bus stop at the Catholic school if it was along the bus route - although many of the religious school parents probably wouldn't want their kids mingling with the public school kids.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
1.2.11  seeder  Vic Eldred  replied to  sandy-2021492 @1.2.8    4 weeks ago
Not being paid to do something is not the same as being forbidden to do it.

That is a point well taken. What of my suggestion?

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
1.2.12  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  Vic Eldred @1.2.7    4 weeks ago

Vic,

First of all, Ms. Pullman is wrong. Public schools do not teach religion. I would know. I was a teacher for over 20 years. My children went to a public school and they were not taught a specific faith or nonfaith either. And I get really upset that this bogus excuse gets used over and over as a way of taking funds from public school. 

Our founding fathers wanted a public school system for this very reason. To teach the masses without the infringement of a faith upon them. It is what makes us unique from other nations. 

"I know no safe depository of the ultimate powers of the society but the people themselves, (A)nd if we think them not enlightened enough to exercise their control with a wholesome discretion, the remedy is not to take it from them, but to inform their discretion by education. This is the true corrective of abuses of constitutional power."

Thomas Jefferson

"It is an object of vast magnitude that systems of education should be adopted and pursued which may not only diffuse a knowledge of the sciences but may implant in the minds of the American youth the principles of virtue and of liberty and inspire them with just and liberal ideas of government and with an inviolable attachment to their own country."

          Samuel Adams, letter to James Warren, February 12, 1779

Among his many influential thoughts on laws and governance, John Adams included a short, but substantial passage about the vital need for quality education, accessible to all citizens:

“Laws for liberal education of youth, especially of the lower class of people, are so  extremely wise and useful, that, to a humane and generous mind, no expense for this  purpose would be thought extravagant.”

But, Adams perhaps made his strongest argument for the value of a strong system of public education  in a letter to British reformer John Jebb :

“The Whole People must take upon themselvs the Education of the Whole People and must be willing to bear the expences of it. There should not be a district of one Mile Square without a school in it, not founded by a Charitable individual but maintained at the expence of the People themselvs they must be taught to reverence themselvs instead of adoreing their servants their Generals Admirals Bishops and Statesmen.” https://www.k12insight.com/trusted/words-john-adams-education-democracy/

Private school of any sort is a choice. Public schools are there for everyone. And since they are funded by tax dollars, they can not be infringed upon. It is a slippery slope. Think about this: an extremist faith can then demand tax dollars to support their schools. Does that seem right to you?

 
 
 
katrix
1.2.13  katrix  replied to  Vic Eldred @1.2.7    4 weeks ago
Those who go to private schools get a tax exemption from funding the public schools.

That gets back to then I should get a tax exemption from funding the public schools, because I don't send kids to them either.

The government has no obligation to fund people's religious training. It provides public schools and you can use them or not. Just as it funds public transportation and I can choose whether or not to use it. I don't get money back if I drive rather than using the public transportation which I subsidize. 

 
 
 
sandy-2021492
1.2.14  sandy-2021492  replied to  Vic Eldred @1.2.11    4 weeks ago

I have to disagree.  A tax exemption for religious school is playing religious favorites with tax money - treating religion (any religion) better than lack of religion.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
1.2.15  seeder  Vic Eldred  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @1.2.12    4 weeks ago
First of all, Ms. Pullman is wrong.

It seems we have both done her an injustice.


Public schools are there for everyone. 

They are the bottom line. How would you say they are performing?


 Think about this: an extremist faith can then demand tax dollars to support their schools. Does that seem right to you?

Absolutely not!  Is it possible we could declare an extremist faith extremist?

 
 
 
sandy-2021492
1.2.16  sandy-2021492  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @1.2.12    4 weeks ago
an extremist faith can then demand tax dollars to support their schools. Does that seem right to you?

I share that concern.  We funded religious extremists once.  It hasn't turned out well.

 
 
 
Dismayed Patriot
1.2.17  Dismayed Patriot  replied to  Vic Eldred @1.2.7    4 weeks ago
Maybe that would be a kind of compromise. Those who go to private schools get a tax exemption from funding the public schools.

Sure, and why stop there! People who don't have kids shouldn't have to pay, right? And I haven't driven on many of the roads in my State, so why should I have to pay taxes for that either? Every man for themselves! Let's go back to just predatory survival of the fittest and forget about this shitty thing called society that the people around me want to force me to participate in! Unless it's a power line going to my house or the sewer taking away my crap, I shouldn't be taxed for any of this infrastructure used to make other peoples lives better. It has to make MY life better or I'm not giving a penny! /s

The majority decided that having a basic educational standard makes all of our lives better, even if you're not directly benefiting from some of the programs. We have a country because our founders brought us together under one constitution. It's sad to see so many who claim to be patriotic reject the very foundation of our society and are bitter they can't take what they want from it but refuse to give back. I believe that most often this selfish nature is nurtured by groups that exclude and ridicule others in society, that get angry and bitter at the thought of their tax dollars being spent on lgtbq Americans, minorities or, Dog forbid, an atheist.

I can't really improve on Ms Pullman's complaint:

I can't either, but only because it's total worthless garbage.

There is no such thing as a school that does not teach religion

Yes there is. Public schools do not teach any religion in their curriculum.

There is only such a thing as a school that teaches that religion is unimportant, false, foolhardy, a side matter, unrelated to “real life,” a private matter, or not worth considering.

Bullshit. Simply not teaching you to be a stuffed shirt Christian does not mean the school is teaching you religion is "unimportant". But the fact is, it's not a public schools responsibility to teach children that religion is important. What this religious extremist nut wants is to take my tax dollars, infect them with her beliefs and then inject them into children that have no say over it. What horseshit.

Whatever you call them, they are not religiously neutral

Public schools in America are not religiously neutral. I truly wish they were, but unfortunately the virus of organized religion has long infected our Public schools. It's been getting better, there are fewer and fewer Christian themed events and more support for other faiths and cultures, but that's likely what is prompting religious extremists like Ms Pullman to get so bitter about her tax dollars going to public schools. She likely got her panties in a bunch when they decided not to do the annual Christmas manger play and she wasn't able to pass on the hand-me down beard for a wise man to her 10 year old.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
1.2.18  seeder  Vic Eldred  replied to  katrix @1.2.13    4 weeks ago
I don't get money back if I drive rather than using the public transportation which I subsidize. 

That is an excellent analogy. Ok, and what about those who don't care about religion and just don't like the quality of education in the public schools? I'm thinking of those moms in the inner city would desperately want a choice.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
1.2.19  seeder  Vic Eldred  replied to  Dismayed Patriot @1.2.17    4 weeks ago
Sure, and why stop there! People who don't have kids shouldn't have to pay, right? And I haven't driven on many of the roads in my State, so why should I have to pay taxes for that either?

I can't argue with that.


What this religious extremist nut wants is to take my tax dollars, infect them with her beliefs and then inject them into children that have no say over it. 

I know the feeling, especially when "A People's History of the US" is being used as a textbook in many schools.


She likely got her panties in a bunch when they decided not to do the annual Christmas manger play and she wasn't able to pass on the hand-me down beard for a wise man to her 10 year old.

The public school system would be represented by the innkeeper who tells Mary & Joseph "there's no room at the inn."

 
 
 
katrix
1.2.20  katrix  replied to  Vic Eldred @1.2.15    4 weeks ago
Is it possible we could declare an extremist faith extremist?

Extremists don't generally consider themselves extremists. They consider themselves right. And it can be a very fine line between an extremist and non-extremist religion, or a cult.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
1.2.21  seeder  Vic Eldred  replied to  katrix @1.2.20    4 weeks ago
Extremists don't generally consider themselves extremists.

Yes, of course, but that is what the rest of us have to decide. For instance a religion which calls for death to all those who are outsiders is clearly extremist and should be designated as such.

 
 
 
sandy-2021492
1.2.22  sandy-2021492  replied to  Vic Eldred @1.2.19    4 weeks ago
The public school system would be represented by the innkeeper who tells Mary & Joseph "there's no room at the inn."

No.

He's telling Mary, Joseph, Muhammed, Shiva, Odin, Zeus, and Mars that there's no room at the inn, and they'll have to recruit followers who are free to walk away, unlike public school pupils.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
1.2.23  seeder  Vic Eldred  replied to  sandy-2021492 @1.2.22    4 weeks ago

I get that, the hand is evenly turned against all religions

 
 
 
katrix
1.2.24  katrix  replied to  Vic Eldred @1.2.18    4 weeks ago
Ok, and what about those who don't care about religion and just don't like the quality of education in the public schools? I'm thinking of those moms in the inner city would desperately want a choice.

Many of those inner cities have tried charter schools for just this reason, and generally they have failed miserably. Which Betsy DeVos conveniently ignores. We've tried forced busing to get kids from poor neighborhood to better schools. We've tried so many things and so far don't seem to have a clue.

Just like other things we pay taxes on for the general good, we need to figure out how to improve the quality of education in the public schools rather than siphoning the money away. But there is no easy answer, especially when the parents are so often a major part of the problem. As is poverty. Rural schools have just as many problems as inner cities.

Getting kids to read - I loved Laura Bush's pet project - is key. Involving parents is also key, but far too many parents don't do a thing to help educate their own kids at home, to supplement what they learn in school.

I just read a great book called The Book Woman of Troublesome Creek, which was mostly about a program the government started in Appalachia in the 30s. Women were hired to deliver books to the isolated people of the hollows via pack mule. Many of the people were suspicious of the "government books" and threatened by the idea of literacy. Many of them simply couldn't imagine how literacy could improve their lives, and those of their children. Some even threatened the book women because they didn't want their women and kids getting ideas in their heads (and thus maybe wanting to improve their lives).

 
 
 
sandy-2021492
1.2.25  sandy-2021492  replied to  Vic Eldred @1.2.23    4 weeks ago
the hand is evenly turned against all religions

Which protects all religions, as well as the non-religious.

 
 
 
katrix
1.2.26  katrix  replied to  Vic Eldred @1.2.21    4 weeks ago
For instance a religion which calls for death to all those who are outsiders is clearly extremist and should be designated as such.

Many religions' holy books do that, including the ones involving the Abrahamic god. It's all about the interpretation.

There are 33,000 sects of Christianity alone, and countless other sects of other religions - how to determine which ones are extremist, especially the more secretive ones? And then we get into even the non-extremist ones, such as Catholicism, which teaches girls that they are inferior to boys. Why should public money be spent enforcing that type of discrimination?

Bottom line is, we'll never get people to agree on which are extreme, or maybe aren't extreme but are teaching values that go against our country. I think a religion which teaches that gays are evil is horrible; others think a religion which teaches that gays are normal and must be accepted is horrible.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
1.2.27  seeder  Vic Eldred  replied to  katrix @1.2.24    4 weeks ago
Many of those inner cities have tried charter schools for just this reason, and generally they have failed miserably.

That's not what I've heard. Could you give some evidence?

 
 
 
katrix
1.2.28  katrix  replied to  Vic Eldred @1.2.23    4 weeks ago
the hand is evenly turned against all religions

Not against religion per se - against the government promoting any religion. There are plenty of opportunities for people to teach their children religion at home, in church, at Sunday school (I remember going to CCD every Monday evening), at camp ... just not in school.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
1.2.29  seeder  Vic Eldred  replied to  katrix @1.2.26    4 weeks ago
Many religions' holy books do that, including the ones involving the Abrahamic god.

Um-hum.


There are 33,000 sects of Christianity alone, and countless other sects of other religions - how to determine which ones are extremist, especially the more secretive ones?

How many of those would fit the definition of "extreme?"


And then we get into even the non-extremist ones, such as Catholicism, which teaches girls that they are inferior to boys. 

How on earth does it do that?


Bottom line is, we'll never get people to agree on which are extreme

I don't think it's that difficult. You pointed to one right away. (you meant Allah)

 
 
 
katrix
1.2.30  katrix  replied to  Vic Eldred @1.2.27    4 weeks ago

DC is a perfect example. Charter schools don't seem to have figured out how to fix the very same problems that other public schools face. And they have added additional problems in many cases, including financial fraud (just google Pennsylvania charter schools and fraud), lack of accountability, etc. They also don't admit as many special needs children, from what I've read. That's not to say that some of them don't do well, but then so do some "regular" public schools. They are no panacea, that's for sure.

https://nepc.colorado.edu/thinktank/review-separating-fact-and-fiction

 
 
 
sandy-2021492
1.2.31  sandy-2021492  replied to  Vic Eldred @1.2.29    4 weeks ago
Um-hum.

She's right.  Both the Old Testament and the Quran (based largely on the OT) give death as the penalty for apostasy.  So that particular criterion could apply to all the Abrahamic religions.  Sure, most don't follow it, but it's there in their scriptures.  So those claiming to be Biblical literalists could reasonably be considered extremists.

How on earth does it do that?

By forbidding women positions within the church which are open to men.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
1.2.32  seeder  Vic Eldred  replied to  katrix @1.2.30    4 weeks ago

That is quite a report but I'm not sure where it compares performace.


 They also don't admit as many special needs children, from what I've read.

No they don't, just like UPS hands unprofitable deliveries over to the US Post Office. Special needs kids really have no choice.

 
 
 
Dismayed Patriot
1.2.33  Dismayed Patriot  replied to  Vic Eldred @1.2.19    4 weeks ago
The public school system would be represented by the innkeeper who tells Mary & Joseph "there's no room at the inn."

Nonsense. They are the ones saying "There's room for everyone here, but we only have the basics. If you need a shrine to your God to pray, you'll have to go elsewhere to find one."

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
1.2.34  seeder  Vic Eldred  replied to  sandy-2021492 @1.2.31    4 weeks ago
By forbidding women positions within the church which are open to men.

That doesn't really equate to teaching that women are inferior. The Catholic Church has it's female wing. They are called nuns and they used to be tasked with educating and civilizing children. That along with a lot of other functions of he Catholic Church seems to be falling by the wayside. 

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
1.2.35  seeder  Vic Eldred  replied to  Dismayed Patriot @1.2.33    4 weeks ago
If you need a shrine to your God to pray, you'll have to go elsewhere to find one."

You are talking to the wrong person. You missed what I said in Post 1. I don't get angered by that statement. It would take someone who believes in something greater than one's self.

 
 
 
sandy-2021492
1.2.36  sandy-2021492  replied to  Vic Eldred @1.2.34    4 weeks ago

It's based on Biblical verses forbidding women to hold positions of authority over men.  No such injunction against men being in positions of authority over women.  There's really no getting around this one, Vic.  The church holds women to be inferior.

 
 
 
squiggy
1.2.37  squiggy  replied to  katrix @1.2.10    4 weeks ago

I wasn't crystal clear in my first statement - let's not run it into the cattails. The public system gets a free ride from private education.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
1.2.38  seeder  Vic Eldred  replied to  sandy-2021492 @1.2.36    4 weeks ago
There's really no getting around this one, Vic.  The church holds women to be inferior.

Well, I sure don't!

 
 
 
devangelical
1.3  devangelical  replied to  Vic Eldred @1    4 weeks ago
I dedicate this article to a friend.

the one with a foot out of the door?

 
 
 
Snuffy
2  Snuffy    4 weeks ago

There's another thread also talking about that.  My take is if a state is going to allow vouchers for school choice then they must allow all schools. Excluding religious schools is just another case of discrimination. It must be an all or nothing approach.

I personally approve of school choice. Having put three children thru the public school system, I got rather tired of the one-size fits all solutions and the teaching to the lowest common denominator. And the past 10 years or so teaching to pass a test rather than teaching children how to think for themselves. Our public school system has failed to many of our children.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
2.1  seeder  Vic Eldred  replied to  Snuffy @2    4 weeks ago
There's another thread also talking about that. 

Yes, from a much different perspective.


I personally approve of school choice. Having put three children thru the public school system, I got rather tired of the one-size fits all solutions and the teaching to the lowest common denominator. And the past 10 years or so teaching to pass a test rather than teaching children how to think for themselves. Our public school system has failed to many of our children.

Thank you for that.

 
 
 
evilgenius
2.2  evilgenius  replied to  Snuffy @2    4 weeks ago
My take is if a state is going to allow vouchers for school choice then they must allow all schools. Excluding religious schools is just another case of discrimination. It must be an all or nothing approach.

I agree. My position is they get nothing. Any money taken away from public schools makes the problems with public schools worse. If the state has extra money for other schools then every public school in that state better be at the top of academic excellence - every classroom should be at optimal student to teacher ratio and fully stocked with current text books and supplies.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
3  JohnRussell    4 weeks ago

Public schools take all kids, with a few exceptions. There is a very small number of kids who cannot be permitted in a classroom for psychological, behavorial reasons. 

But public schools take almost all kids, irregardless of their parents income, the kids learning curve, their color, creed or politics.

If the emphasis in teaching children moves from public schools to taxpayer subsidized private schools innumerable kids will be "left behind" by the resulting system. Private schools dont have to take every kid, and dont. 

The overwhelming emphasis in K-12 education should be kept on the public schools, with private schools an option for those who want it and can manage the cost. 

And we cannot have it a government policy to pray in school. We have a separation between church and state. 

 
 
 
Greg Jones
3.1  Greg Jones  replied to  JohnRussell @3    4 weeks ago

And they should not be teaching about "gender identity and equality" in grade school, as my city is planning to do shortly.

According to science, there are only two genders.

 
 
 
Just Jim NC TttH
3.1.1  Just Jim NC TttH  replied to  Greg Jones @3.1    4 weeks ago

384

 
 
 
sandy-2021492
3.1.2  sandy-2021492  replied to  Greg Jones @3.1    4 weeks ago

You don't want them teaching gender equality?  Back to girls being required to take Home Ec and secretarial courses, and boys taking shop, then?

 
 
 
sandy-2021492
3.1.3  sandy-2021492  replied to  Just Jim NC TttH @3.1.1    4 weeks ago

Scientists actually don't say there are only two genders.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
3.1.4  seeder  Vic Eldred  replied to  sandy-2021492 @3.1.3    4 weeks ago

What do they say?

 
 
 
Greg Jones
3.1.5  Greg Jones  replied to  sandy-2021492 @3.1.3    4 weeks ago

Scientists don't have to say it....there are only two genders according to science...male and female.

All the rest, like gender identity, is a mental construct.

I should have not used the word equality in this case

 
 
 
Just Jim NC TttH
3.1.6  Just Jim NC TttH  replied to  Greg Jones @3.1.5    4 weeks ago

No you were fine to use it. You see, with the advent of boys in girl's sports, they are equating the genders already.

And sandy-lotsanumbers, no one is saying that. Hell when I was in junior high boys were required to take home ec for at least one grading period. Girls, shop class (wood working) and as far as I know, with my son graduating from HS last year and now attending college, students can take whatever courses they want beyond the pre-requisites.

 
 
 
sandy-2021492
3.1.7  sandy-2021492  replied to  Vic Eldred @3.1.4    4 weeks ago

First, let's decide if we're talking about "gender" or "sex".  The existence of intersex people has long been recognized by medical science, as it is not terribly rare for babies to be born with ambiguous genitalia.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intersex

There are not only 2 biological sexes.

46, XX intersex [ edit ]

This condition used to be called "female pseudohermaphroditism ". Persons with this condition have female internal genitalia and karyotype (XX) and various degree of external genitalia virilization . [174] External genitalia is masculinized congenitally when female fetus is exposed to excess androgenic environment. [168] Hence, the chromosome of the person is of a woman, the ovaries of a woman, but external genitals that appear like a male. The labia fuse, and the clitoris enlarges to appear like a penis. The causes of this can be male hormones taken during pregnancy, congenital adrenal hyperplasia, male-hormone-producing tumors in the mother and aromatase deficiency . [168]

46, XY intersex [ edit ]

This condition used to be called "male pseudohermaphroditism". This is defined as incomplete masculinization of the external genitalia. [175] Thus, the person has the chromosomes of a man, but the external genitals are incompletely formed, ambiguous, or clearly female. [168] This condition is also called 46, XY with undervirilization. [168] 46, XY intersex has many possible causes, which can be problems with the testes and testosterone formation. [168] Also, there can be problems with using testosterone. Some people lack the enzyme needed to convert testosterone to dihydrotestosterone , which is a cause of 5-alpha-reductase deficiency . [168] Androgen Insensitivity Syndrome is the most common cause of 46, XY intersex. [168]

True gonadal intersex [ edit ]

This condition used to be called " true hermaphroditism ". This is defined as having asymmetrical gonads with ovarian and testicular differentiation on either sides separately or combined as ovotestis. [176] In most cases, the cause of this condition is unknown; however, some research has linked it to exposure to common agricultural pesticides . [176]

Complex or undetermined intersex [ edit ]

This is the condition of having any chromosome configurations rather than 46, XX or 46, XY intersex. [168] This condition does not result in any imbalance between internal and external genitalia. [168] However, there may be problems with sex hormone levels, overall sexual development, and altered numbers of sex chromosomes. [168]

There are genetic disorders, such as Turner's and Kleinfelter syndromes, in which a person has an extra copy of a sex chromosome, or is missing a copy.  They may appear as either male (Kleinfelter) or female (Turner's), but lack some secondary sex characteristics, and may have characteristics in common with the opposite sex (lack of breast development in women with Turner's or broad hips in men with Kleinfelter).

If we're talking gender, science has recognized that many people's psychological gender does not match their physical appearance, and identified possible causes (among them, gender assignment surgery of infants with ambiguous genitalia).

Some studies have investigated whether or not there is a link between biological variables and transgender or transsexual identity.[44][45][46] Several studies have shown that sexually dimorphic brain structures in transsexuals are shifted away from what is associated with their birth sex and towards what is associated with their preferred sex.[47][48] In particular, the bed nucleus of a stria terminalis or BSTc (a constituent of the basal ganglia of the brain which is affected by prenatal androgens) of trans women is similar to cisgender women's and unlike men's.[49][50] Similar brain structure differences have been noted between gay and heterosexual men, and between lesbian and heterosexual women.[51][52] Another study suggests that transsexuality may have a genetic component.[53]

So, yeah, scientists are not saying that there are only 2 genders.

 
 
 
sandy-2021492
3.1.8  sandy-2021492  replied to  Greg Jones @3.1.5    4 weeks ago
Scientists don't have to say it....there are only two genders according to science...male and female.

Nope.

 
 
 
Old Hermit
3.1.9  Old Hermit  replied to  Vic Eldred @3.1.4    4 weeks ago
Sandy - Scientists actually don't say there are only two genders.
. Vic - What do they say?

Scientists say, "It's complicated".

original

Stop Using Phony Science to Justify Transphobia

Actual research shows that sex is anything but binary

                   ---------------------

By Simón(e) D Sun on June 13, 2019

.....

Contrary to popular belief, scientific research helps us better understand the unique and real transgender experience. Specifically, through three subjects: (1) genetics, (2) neurobiology and (3) endocrinology. So, hold onto your parts, whatever they may be. It’s time for “the talk.”

....

BIOLOGICAL SEX: HOW YOU GET IT

The truth is, your biological sex isn’t carved in stone, but a living system with the potential for change.

....

THE BRAIN: WHERE STUFF GETS “MADE UP”

When the biology gets too complicated, some point to differences between brains of males and females as proof of the sexual binary. But a half century of empirical research has repeatedly challenged the idea that brain biology is simply XY = male brain or XX = female brain.

In other words, there is no such thing as “the male brain” or “the female brain.”

This is not to say that there are no observable differences. Certain brain characteristics can be sexually dimorphic: observable average differences across males and females.

But like biological sex, pointing to “brain sex” as the explanation for these differences is wrong and hinders scientific research .

....

THE BODY AND THE BRAIN AND THE HORMONES BETWIXT

As if the brain and body weren’t complicated enough, another biological factor influences the expression of biological sex in an individual: hormones. Anyone who has gone through puberty has felt the power of hormones firsthand. But like all things biology, hormones cannot be limited to the pubescent idea of “estrogen = female and testosterone = male.”

.....

SCIENCE AND SOCIETY: BETTER TOGETHER

While this is a small overview, the science is clear and conclusive: sex is not binary, transgender people are real .

It is time that we acknowledge this. Defining a person’s sex identity using decontextualized “facts” is unscientific and dehumanizing.

The trans experience provides essential insights into the science of sex and scientifically demonstrates that uncommon and atypical phenomena are vital for a successful living system.

Even the scientific endeavor itself is quantifiably better when it is more inclusive and diverse .

So, no matter what a pundit, politician or internet troll may say, trans people are an indispensable part of our living reality.

Transgender humans represent the complexity and diversity that are fundamental features of life, evolution and nature itself. That is a fact. 
 
 
 
sandy-2021492
3.1.10  sandy-2021492  replied to  Old Hermit @3.1.9    4 weeks ago

Exactly so.

Every human produces both male and female sex hormones; the balance of those hormones results in the development of secondary sex traits.  Individually, those balances vary, and they are not constant throughout life - consider the changes that come with puberty, both positive and negative.  Boys and girls alike can thank testosterone for that embarrassing and sometimes painful acne.  Premenopausal women can thank estrogen for protecting them from heart disease, but lose that protection at menopause, about the time that testosterone reasserts itself in the form of female facial hair.

Prenatal exposure to excess male or female sex hormones has effects on the fetus that we have only recently begun to sort out.

And then there are the effects of genetics, ranging from missing or extra sex chromosomes to inherited hypersensitivity or resistance to the effects of sex hormones.

It's complicated enough that I'm a bit surprised more people aren't intersex or transgender.

 
 
 
pat wilson
3.2  pat wilson  replied to  JohnRussell @3    4 weeks ago

And the idea that atheism has a monopoly of any kind is absurd.

 
 
 
Kathleen
4  Kathleen    4 weeks ago

I could not afford to send my child to a private school. Instead we saved the money in a 529 for her college education. We could not do both things.  I feel that it would be very unfair to taxpayers that can’t send their child to a private school to help pay for the other kids that can.  Let the parents that want and can send their child pay for it themselves. 

 
 
 
loki12
4.1  loki12  replied to  Kathleen @4    4 weeks ago

Good morning Miss Kathleen, Wouldn't it be fair to allow the parents to choose? Here is what states pay for each child to be educated, If you had this money instead, Could you have done both? private and save for college? I'm sure your daughter did fine, but almost 20% graduate, Yes graduate, functionally illiterate, There needs to be better choices.

https://www.cnbc.com/2018/04/16/the-5-states-that-spend-the-most-on-students.html

 
 
 
r.t..b...
4.1.1  r.t..b...  replied to  loki12 @4.1    4 weeks ago
but almost 20% graduate, Yes graduate, functionally illiterate,

A tragedy, but siphoning public monies away from public schools will only make that number grow...to no ones' benefit. Let us tackle the systemic problems that everyone acknowledges, but let us not hamstring those efforts by cutting the legs out from those that need it most. The choice still exists for those that wish to go a different route.

 
 
 
loki12
4.1.2  loki12  replied to  r.t..b... @4.1.1    4 weeks ago
A tragedy, but siphoning public monies away from public schools will only make that number grow...to no ones' benefit. Let us tackle the systemic problems that everyone acknowledges, but let us not hamstring those efforts by cutting the legs out from those that need it most. The choice still exists for those that wish to go a different route.

Why? You lose 1 kid you lose 1 funding, the incompetence remains the same as does the money.  The only difference is you increased the number of literate children by 1.  

 
 
 
Texan1211
4.1.3  Texan1211  replied to  loki12 @4.1.2    4 weeks ago

Money for actual education isn't really the issue with public schools.

We spend far more than many other countries without their results.

We spend far too much on bureaucrats and have succumbed to too many teachers unions demands.

Throwing more money at the problem obviously won't solve it.

Does anyone else see that our test scores have gone down while funding has increased--ever since the inception of the Dept. of Education?

 
 
 
Kathleen
4.1.4  Kathleen  replied to  loki12 @4.1    4 weeks ago

Good morning Loki, Some public schools are better then others. I was hoping they would improve the public schools all around.  One other thing as a student, you should make a great effort to get as much out of the learning experience as you can. Parents need to fully support their kids as well. That would make a great improvement and allow the teachers to teach instead of dealing with unruly students that don’t care. I don’t mean all students, but some just don’t.  My daughter did great on her SAT’s so she definitely learned a great deal. I still feel, if you want to send your child to a private school, you should pay for the tuition yourself. That is the only choice I agree on.

 
 
 
Just Jim NC TttH
4.1.5  Just Jim NC TttH  replied to  Texan1211 @4.1.3    4 weeks ago
We spend far too much on bureaucrats and have succumbed to too many teachers unions demands.

And THAT, as evidenced in loki's link above, is a matter of top heavy administration positions..........and per campus staff. FFS my wife works at a title one school (650 students) and they have three, count 'em three, ESL "counselors" to be able to communicate with the parents of Hispanic students and teachers are a separate entity to do the same, who by the way speak better English than their parents. THAT is bullshit. I was under the impression that to become a US citizen that you needed to be able to read and write English. So one could surmise that the students are anchor babies???? Or just why is it???? Same reason all signage in stores has two language versions. 

Sorry but it is total bullshit. WE don't do that for French, German, Japanese, Hindu and the plethora of other nationalities we have here.

 
 
 
loki12
4.1.6  loki12  replied to  Kathleen @4.1.4    4 weeks ago

Thank you for the reply, and I will agree to disagree.  

 
 
 
r.t..b...
4.1.7  r.t..b...  replied to  Texan1211 @4.1.3    4 weeks ago
ever since the inception of the Dept. of Education?

Agreed. Providing the best education for our children is the rare 'bottom up' example of best practices. Local school districts should be driving the 'bus' so to speak, as the conditions in Texas are different than those in Michigan or Arizona. While federal funding remains a necessity, the bureaucracy in Washington has little significant impact on the actual teaching of our children and the less they interfere, (other than cutting the check) the better.

 
 
 
Texan1211
4.1.8  Texan1211  replied to  r.t..b... @4.1.7    4 weeks ago

We should do better by all our children, but throwing yet more money into a money pit won't solve what is wrong.

In Texas, like many other states, school districts abound. There may be as many as 20 in a single county--all with their own administrators and offices. What a waste!

 
 
 
Kathleen
4.1.9  Kathleen  replied to  loki12 @4.1.6    4 weeks ago

Okay, fair enough.

 
 
 
r.t..b...
4.1.10  r.t..b...  replied to  Texan1211 @4.1.8    4 weeks ago
There may be as many as 20 in a single county--all with their own administrators and offices. What a waste!

So federal dollars going to the additional private charter schools within the already bloated 'administrators and offices' will somehow ameliorate the situation? If anything, it is a construct already proven to be rife with financial abuse.

 
 
 
sandy-2021492
4.1.11  sandy-2021492  replied to  Texan1211 @4.1.8    4 weeks ago

I will agree that there's too much bureaucracy.  The school system where I grew up was excellent, but we made do with one secretary per school, one principal for each elementary and middle school, and one principal and vice principal for each high school.  Where I am now, every school has at least one vice principal, and sometimes several.  There are also quite a few more guidance counsellors than we had, and a fairly large staff at the county school board office.

I'd rather see some of that money spent on teacher salaries and benefits, and school supplies.  We lose experienced teachers to other counties due to low compensation.  We're known as a "training ground" for young grads who move on when their experience lets them compete for better-paid teaching jobs.

 
 
 
sandy-2021492
4.1.12  sandy-2021492  replied to  r.t..b... @4.1.7    4 weeks ago
Providing the best education for our children is the rare 'bottom up' example of best practices.

To some degree, I agree.  There do need to be some nation-wide standards that schools must meet, though.  All students in a school system won't be living in that area after graduation, and they need an education that allows them to function, no matter where they choose to live.

 
 
 
XDm9mm
4.1.13  XDm9mm  replied to  Texan1211 @4.1.8    4 weeks ago
In Texas, like many other states, school districts abound. There may be as many as 20 in a single county--all with their own administrators and offices. What a waste!

Damn man.....  don't get me started!!

Superintendents and their staff, Boards and their staffs, many have their own Police Force and all that goes with that.

Go with a State operation with county office representation and oversight.  Major cost savings.

 
 
 
Texan1211
4.1.14  Texan1211  replied to  r.t..b... @4.1.10    4 weeks ago
So federal dollars going to the additional private charter schools within the already bloated 'administrators and offices' will somehow ameliorate the situation? If anything, it is a construct already proven to be rife with financial abuse.

Clearly not anything even near to what I have stated here.

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
4.1.15  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  Texan1211 @4.1.8    4 weeks ago
In Texas, like many other states, school districts abound. There may be as many as 20 in a single county--all with their own administrators and offices. What a waste!

You do realize that Texas is right up there with the best overall public schools. They must be doing something right. 

 
 
 
Texan1211
4.1.16  Texan1211  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @4.1.15    4 weeks ago

Yes, but doing something right can be improved upon, right?

I see a lot of waste when you have administration buildings and staff for a school district with several hundred students and there are multiple districts in each county.

Money isn't the issue--it is how the money is being spent.

We spend more than many countries without getting their results.

Things can be improved, and isn't that what everyone wants for the kids?

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
4.1.17  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  Texan1211 @4.1.16    4 weeks ago

The reason that each district has its own admin, is that it operates to fit the needs of that district. That is the very argument used for using tax money for various private and religious schools. Each of those has their own admin, too. Overall in the country, the states that allow for the local school districts outperform the states that have statewide administration. 

And Texas is getting results. Texas and NY are among the highest-rated education system in the nation since they allow for local school districts. 

 
 
 
Texan1211
4.1.18  Texan1211  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @4.1.17    4 weeks ago

Okay, I just see waste when you have multiple administrators and buildings and school bus contracts, etc. for tiny districts when you could easily combine them and save money--money that could be spent on teachers and supplies. 

the simple fact is that our test scores have gone down while spending has increased.

Shouldn't they be going up as more money is being spent?

 
 
 
JohnRussell
5  JohnRussell    4 weeks ago

I wonder if the author of this article would like to see taxpayer funded Muslim schools.   Probably not. 

 
 
 
Ronin2
5.1  Ronin2  replied to  JohnRussell @5    4 weeks ago

Of course you feel the need to try and insert religious bias where none was present.

 
 
 
Texan1211
5.2  Texan1211  replied to  JohnRussell @5    4 weeks ago

Why not ask instead of assuming facts you don't know?

 
 
 
Sunshine
6  Sunshine    4 weeks ago

Why can't the funds follow the child and the parents can pay any of the extra tuition at private schools?

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
6.1  seeder  Vic Eldred  replied to  Sunshine @6    4 weeks ago

That's a great question

 
 
 
sandy-2021492
7  sandy-2021492    4 weeks ago

"Scientism".  Good grief.  What paranoia.

 
 
 
Dismayed Patriot
7.1  Dismayed Patriot  replied to  sandy-2021492 @7    4 weeks ago
"Scientism".  Good grief.  What paranoia

It's not so much paranoia as a desperation to be found relevant in the age of science. By throwing an "ism" on the end, they're trying to equate their own faith based theories to scientific theories which anyone who actually knows anything about the two know they are polar opposites of each other.

 
 
 
sandy-2021492
8  sandy-2021492    4 weeks ago
U.S. public schools impose religious beliefs on children. According to young Americans who have abandoned their family’s faith, they did so on average before leaving high school .

This is true, but certainly not in the way the author intended.  Schools still, in violation of the First Amendment, impose religion on students, but it's generally the Christian religion.  Coach-led prayers, religious songs in choir, prayers (but only by Christian pastors) before football games.

Schools do not teach atheism, which is not a religion, anyway.  If students leave their churches because they're taught science (not "scientism", which is also not a religion), then perhaps their churches' message is weak and lacking the support of science.

The author needs to teach her kids her religion at home, and leave my kid out of it.  I won't interfere in her rights, if she doesn't interfere in mine.  She has a boundary issue.

 
 
 
r.t..b...
8.1  r.t..b...  replied to  sandy-2021492 @8    4 weeks ago
The author needs to teach her kids her religion at home, and leave my kid out of it.  I won't interfere in her rights, if she doesn't interfere in mine.

Hear, hear!

A simple concept that everyone should embrace...but we are talking about money here, always the bottom line, thus corrupting their religious tenets in deferring to the most secular of beliefs...'fairness'. Hypocritical, that. 

 
 
 
Tessylo
8.2  Tessylo  replied to  sandy-2021492 @8    4 weeks ago
'U.S. public schools impose religious beliefs on children. According to young Americans who have abandoned their family’s faith, they did so on average before leaving high school .'

'This is true, but certainly not in the way the author intended.  Schools still, in violation of the First Amendment, impose religion on students, but it's generally the Christian religion.  Coach-led prayers, religious songs in choir, prayers (but only by Christian pastors) before football games.

Schools do not teach atheism, which is not a religion, anyway.  If students leave their churches because they're taught science (not "scientism", which is also not a religion), then perhaps their churches' message is weak and lacking the support of science.

The author needs to teach her kids her religion at home, and leave my kid out of it.  I won't interfere in her rights, if she doesn't interfere in mine.  She has a boundary issue.'

jrSmiley_81_smiley_image.gifjrSmiley_81_smiley_image.gifjrSmiley_81_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
Split Personality
8.3  Split Personality  replied to  sandy-2021492 @8    4 weeks ago

And this is why my very large, very extended, predominantly RC family spread over 7 or 8 states, almost all risk everything

on raising those kids in a high tuition Catholic elementary school and high school,

never mind that a layoff or death could plunge the individual families into instant poverty.

 
 
 
Tessylo
8.3.1  Tessylo  replied to  Split Personality @8.3    4 weeks ago

How soon do you think those Catholic schools would kick you out if you couldn't pay?

Happened to one of my best friends as a child.  Father left him and his brother behind.  When mom of course couldn't pay they kicked them to the curb.  His mom was Italian and cursed the nuns out.

 
 
 
Sunshine
9  Sunshine    4 weeks ago
The author needs to teach her kids her religion at home, and leave my kid out of it.  I won't interfere in her rights, if she doesn't interfere in mine.  She has a boundary issue.

I don't think she is saying it should be mandatory for children to be taught any religion in public schools. 

 
 
 
sandy-2021492
9.1  sandy-2021492  replied to  Sunshine @9    4 weeks ago

She seems pretty upset that her own isn't being taught, which leads to her lie that atheism is being taught.

Not teaching religion is not the same as teaching atheism, which is what she'd have us believe.  Some of us see through the lie.

 
 
 
Tessylo
9.1.1  Tessylo  replied to  sandy-2021492 @9.1    4 weeks ago

'She seems pretty upset that her own isn't being taught, which leads to her lie that atheism is being taught.

Not teaching religion is not the same as teaching atheism, which is what she'd have us believe.  Some of us see through the lie.'

jrSmiley_81_smiley_image.gifjrSmiley_81_smiley_image.gifjrSmiley_81_smiley_image.gif

You are spot on with every post here!  Kudos!!

 
 
 
Sunshine
9.1.2  Sunshine  replied to  sandy-2021492 @9.1    4 weeks ago
She seems pretty upset that her own isn't being taught, 

I didn't read this anywhere in the article.  Seems to me she is upset that religious based schools are discriminated against by withholding funding.  One can agree or disagree with this, but nowhere is she telling you or anyone else to teach their child a religion.  Seems dishonest to attack her for it.

 
 
 
Just Jim NC TttH
9.1.3  Just Jim NC TttH  replied to  sandy-2021492 @9.1    4 weeks ago
Not teaching religion is not the same as teaching atheism, which is what she'd have us believe.  Some of us see through the lie.

Guilt by omission.

 
 
 
sandy-2021492
9.1.4  sandy-2021492  replied to  Sunshine @9.1.2    4 weeks ago

She is equating neutrality towards religion in public schools with "teaching atheism".  That's dishonest, and not very Christian.

These barriers and others lawmakers and courts added ultimately drove Christianity from publicly supported U.S. K-12 education. They helped lay the legal and cultural groundwork for eventually substituting atheism for Christianity as the religion of U.S. schooling. It’s a sneaky move, because atheism and secularism are easier to falsely view as “neutral,”  when they are in fact a competing religious understanding of the ultimate questions every faith seeks to answer.

And yeah, to me, that reads like she's not very happy that Christianity isn't being taught in public schools.

While the Supreme Court repeatedly took a sledgehammer to American Christians’ ability to pass on their faith using their own tax dollars and supposedly locally controlled institutions,

So does that.

 
 
 
sandy-2021492
9.1.5  sandy-2021492  replied to  Just Jim NC TttH @9.1.3    4 weeks ago

Guilt of what?  Fortunately, nobody is required to teach religion in public schools.  To do so would violate the First Amendment.  There is no guilt in not violating the Constitution.

 
 
 
Tessylo
9.1.6  Tessylo  replied to  sandy-2021492 @9.1.5    4 weeks ago

Kudos again Sandy!

 
 
 
katrix
9.1.7  katrix  replied to  Just Jim NC TttH @9.1.3    4 weeks ago
Guilt by omission.

So, by not teaching kids the Muslim religion in schools, we're teaching atheism?

Good grief.

 
 
 
Sunshine
9.1.8  Sunshine  replied to  sandy-2021492 @9.1.4    4 weeks ago
it’s a sneaky move, because atheism and secularism are easier to falsely view as “neutral,”  when they are in fact a competing religious understanding of the ultimate questions every faith seeks to answer.

Sounds to me like she is saying their is only one option and that is secular.

While the Supreme Court repeatedly took a sledgehammer to American Christians’ ability to pass on their faith using their own tax dollars and supposedly locally controlled institutions,

Again, not advocating for religion to be taught in public education, just referring to the public funding.

 
 
 
sandy-2021492
9.1.9  sandy-2021492  replied to  Sunshine @9.1.8    4 weeks ago

If you want to use taxpayer money, there should only be one option.  She can reach religion at home and take her children to church, if it's that important to her.  She shouldn't expect the teaching of her religion to be important to anyone else, or to be supported by them financially.

Again, not advocating for religion to be taught in public education, just referring to the public funding.

No, that's a pretty obvious complaint about public schools, which have generally been locally controlled, no longer spreading Christianity, which is the local majority religion in most areas of the US.  That's why she used "supposedly" - she thinks that local schools being in control gives them the right to violate the US Constitution, or should.

 
 
 
sandy-2021492
9.1.10  sandy-2021492  replied to  katrix @9.1.7    4 weeks ago
Again, not advocating for religion to be taught in public education, just referring to the public funding.

Yeah, it seems that some folks here want to fund madrassas.

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
9.1.11  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  sandy-2021492 @9.1.10    4 weeks ago

Which is an excellent point.

 
 
 
Sunshine
9.1.12  Sunshine  replied to  sandy-2021492 @9.1.9    4 weeks ago
If you want to use taxpayer money, there should only be one option.

Well we will see..

She shouldn't expect the teaching of her religion to be important to anyone else, or to be supported by them financially.

She isn't asking it to be important to you or anyone else, she just wants the same funding that public schools receive not your opinion.  Of course you are entitled to your opinion, but she is not advocating religious beliefs be taught in public schools to your child.

 
 
 
sandy-2021492
9.1.13  sandy-2021492  replied to  Sunshine @9.1.12    4 weeks ago
She isn't asking it to be important to you or anyone else

If she wants me to pay for it, she is.

 
 
 
Just Jim NC TttH
9.1.14  Just Jim NC TttH  replied to  katrix @9.1.7    4 weeks ago
Good grief.

 Right over your head it flies. By not offering opposing views, which could be made available through course selection, It stands to reason they want to shy away from it and teach one viewpoint only. Thus guilt by omission. This is about choice and hasn't that been a hot topic this last week?

 
 
 
Sunshine
9.1.15  Sunshine  replied to  sandy-2021492 @9.1.13    4 weeks ago
If she wants me to pay for it, she is.

No, she just wants the same funding for education.  You may disagree but your importance is irrelevant.  Our tax dollars are used for many different things that as individuals may not be important.  

The court will decide.

 
 
 
Split Personality
9.1.16  Split Personality  replied to  sandy-2021492 @9.1.13    4 weeks ago

That is up to each state, but after almost 400 years of evolving, it would seem to be rather onerous to change what we have all grown up with and have radically different rules in different states.  

Technically,  since the word education is nowhere to be found in the Constitution, SCOTUS should not even be entertaining this case.

It should have ended with the Supreme Court of Montana.

 
 
 
sandy-2021492
9.1.17  sandy-2021492  replied to  Just Jim NC TttH @9.1.14    4 weeks ago
teach one viewpoint only

Which viewpoint do you think they are teaching?

 
 
 
sandy-2021492
9.1.18  sandy-2021492  replied to  Sunshine @9.1.15    4 weeks ago
she just wants the same funding for education

She has it.  In public schools.

 
 
 
Just Jim NC TttH
9.1.19  Just Jim NC TttH  replied to  sandy-2021492 @9.1.17    4 weeks ago
Which viewpoint do you think they are teaching?

That religion(s) aren't relevant to life..........at all. O M I S S I O N

 
 
 
katrix
9.1.20  katrix  replied to  Just Jim NC TttH @9.1.14    4 weeks ago

It's not the job of schools to teach religion. If people want their kids to be religious, they can take them to church/temple/mosque or whatever.

Schools are supposed to teach science, not mythology. It is not "guilt by omission" - the one viewpoint they teach is that of facts. Suppose there are 100 different religions practiced by students at a school, do you really expect the school to offer 100 different religious courses? Hell, there are 33,000 Christian sects alone. A fundie isn't going to want to be subjected to Catholic doctrine, an Episcopal isn't going to want to be subjected to holy roller doctrine ... your comment is patently absurd.

Certain idiots may claim that "intelligent design" and the Christian creation myths are equivalent to science and should thus be given equal consideration, but they're full of shit. What if I want the creation myth of Atum masturbating people into existence, or the Native American creation myth of a turtle barfing everything into existence? How can those idiots prove that my creation myth isnt' the correct one?

Trump fans really seem to hate the Constitution.

 
 
 
katrix
9.1.21  katrix  replied to  Just Jim NC TttH @9.1.19    4 weeks ago
That religion(s) aren't relevant to life..........at all. O M I S S I O N

There is no reason for public schools to consider religion at all. That's the parents' job.

A comparative religion class in high school could certainly be offered, but I doubt that's what you want.

 
 
 
Sunshine
9.1.22  Sunshine  replied to  sandy-2021492 @9.1.18    4 weeks ago
She has it.  In public schools.

Why does it have to be a public school?  Parents who home school or private school their children should receive the same funding as public schools. If the state doesn't have the expense and burden of educating the child, they don't need the funding.  

 
 
 
sandy-2021492
9.1.23  sandy-2021492  replied to  Just Jim NC TttH @9.1.19    4 weeks ago
That religion(s) aren't relevant to life..........at all.

They don't teach any such thing.

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
9.1.24  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  Just Jim NC TttH @9.1.19    4 weeks ago

They are public schools, which means that they are not supposed to advocate for a religion. What they do teach is comparative religion in high school. They also don't teach atheism. Is that omission too?

 
 
 
sandy-2021492
9.1.25  sandy-2021492  replied to  Sunshine @9.1.22    4 weeks ago

Why?  Public schools are funded with public money to educate children, not indoctrinate them.  This woman is either indoctrinated or a liar.  She thinks, or pretends to think, that her religion not being taught is the same as atheism being taught.  Nobody should be forced to pay to raise similarly doctrinated or dishonest students.

 
 
 
katrix
9.1.26  katrix  replied to  Sunshine @9.1.22    4 weeks ago
Parents who home school or private school their children should receive the same funding as public schools. 

Nope, they can send their kids to public schools. Home schooling can be a total joke and so are some charter schools. If taxpayer money went to those who home school, then we'd be able to put a lot of constraints on those parents and hold them accountable - and they would screech like hell. Many home schoolers are simply trying to keep their children from learning facts, which is their choice, but not on our dime. You don't get taxpayer money to teach your children that the earth is only 6000 years old or that gays are evil. Save that shit for church.

 
 
 
sandy-2021492
9.1.27  sandy-2021492  replied to  katrix @9.1.21    4 weeks ago

They could teach the Atum masturbation myth.  The reactions of the sanctimonious would be hilarious.  Are you all stocked up on popcorn?

 
 
 
katrix
9.1.28  katrix  replied to  sandy-2021492 @9.1.27    4 weeks ago
They could teach the Atum masturbation myth.  The reactions of the sanctimonious would be

I would love that! Funny how they get so insulted when we point out that their creation myth is just that, a myth - but I assume they have no such problem with our referring to other religions' creation myths as myths.

 
 
 
Larry Hampton
9.1.29  Larry Hampton  replied to  sandy-2021492 @9.1.27    4 weeks ago

Lol, that's great! 

 
 
 
Sunshine
9.1.30  Sunshine  replied to  katrix @9.1.26    4 weeks ago
Home schooling can be a total joke and so are some charter schools. If taxpayer money went to those who home school, then we'd be able to put a lot of constraints on those parents and hold them accountable - and they would screech like hell. Many home schoolers are simply trying to keep their children from learning facts, which is their choice, but not on our dime. You don't get taxpayer money to teach your children that the earth is only 6000 years old or that gays are evil. Save that shit for church.

What a close minded ignorant statement.  But not surprised.  I home schooled my oldest daughter for two years because she had some special needs that the public school would not provide.  I also had a tutor come into my home which we had to pay for.  In the meantime we still had to pay our taxes and pay for the dumbass lazy ass public school kids who had to attend summer school or night school to get their lazy asses graduated from HS.  

 
 
 
Split Personality
9.1.31  Split Personality  replied to  Sunshine @9.1.22    4 weeks ago

Like all other public funding, taxpayers pool the funds for the general good.

If I never use a particular airport or road, can I ask for my portion of the taxes back?

The next step would be to only have schools funded by people who have school aged children.

What a windfall that would be for us older adults /s

 
 
 
Sunshine
9.1.32  Sunshine  replied to  sandy-2021492 @9.1.25    4 weeks ago
ublic schools are funded with public money to educate children, not indoctrinate them. 

Well it isn't up to you to decide what is an education and what is indoctrination.  We will see what the court decides.

 
 
 
katrix
9.1.33  katrix  replied to  Sunshine @9.1.30    4 weeks ago

I said it CAN be a total joke.

 My sister home schooled her son so he wouldn't be subjected to nasty facts about dinosaurs living millions of years before humans, or anything that would conflict with the brainwashing she wanted to inflict on him. That doesn't mean there aren't good reasons to home school.

But the fact is, if taxpayers dollars go to education, there has to be a standard so that we know the kids aren't being taught bullshit.

I'm glad you have so much concern for the dumbass lazy ass public school kids who might also have had special needs that you aren't aware of.

 
 
 
Just Jim NC TttH
9.1.34  Just Jim NC TttH  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @9.1.24    4 weeks ago
They are public schools, which means that they are not supposed to advocate for a religion.

Funny I thought the Constitution conveyed that government was not to establish a national religion. With all the variations thereof that may be of interest, and the simple fact that GovCo provides funding for schools, I don't see how this crosses into the realm of it's against the separation of church and state. I guess that is what the court must sort out.

**I am NOT for funding of specific religion's schools with GovCo (my) funding and private schools are a different story.** Isn't that what this story is all about? But when one tucks "Catholic School, Muslim School, etc into that drawer it is no longer just a private school. I should have made that clear in the beginning so as not to raise so much angst ...........................

 
 
 
Sunshine
9.1.35  Sunshine  replied to  katrix @9.1.33    4 weeks ago
I'm glad you have so much concern for the dumbass lazy ass public school kids who might also have had special needs that you aren't aware of.

I'm glad your are so concerned about kids who have to be home schooled. jrSmiley_18_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
devangelical
9.1.36  devangelical  replied to  Sunshine @9.1.35    4 weeks ago

somebody has to flip burgers after trump deports all the immigrants that aren't already employed by major campaign donors

 
 
 
XDm9mm
9.1.37  XDm9mm  replied to  devangelical @9.1.36    4 weeks ago
somebody has to flip burgers after trump deports all the immigrants that aren't already employed by major campaign donors

Don't worry.  We have all the snowflakes screaming at the sky and trying to find their safe spaces for that.  Oh, and the people with PhDs in basket weaving and protesting.

 
 
 
katrix
9.1.38  katrix  replied to  Sunshine @9.1.35    4 weeks ago
I'm glad your are so concerned about kids who have to be home schooled

I actually am - I think it's good that the home school community is banding together to provide better resources for the kids, so they have a chance to succeed. But again - if you want taxpayer dollars to do that, then you get subject to the accompanying controls. Lots of parents aren't actually qualified to home school, and it's impossible for most parents to have the breadth of knowledge they need to actually produce an educated child.

And lots of parents pay for tutors, not just those with special needs children. They don't get taxpayer dollars for that either.

 
 
 
Sunshine
9.1.39  Sunshine  replied to  XDm9mm @9.1.37    4 weeks ago

jrSmiley_4_smiley_image.png  

 
 
 
Dismayed Patriot
9.1.40  Dismayed Patriot  replied to  sandy-2021492 @9.1    4 weeks ago
Not teaching religion is not the same as teaching atheism, which is what she'd have us believe.

Sadly, you're likely debating folk who think "not" teaching people that homosexuality is a sin and is to be ridiculed is by default teaching them to be gay. They don't want to reason, they don't want to debate, they just want to beat everyone into submission. We had thousands of years of forced conversion practiced by almost every religion on the planet, I suppose only having to deal with their more subtle attacks on reason and logic should be viewed as progress.

 
 
 
sandy-2021492
9.1.41  sandy-2021492  replied to  katrix @9.1.38    4 weeks ago

I remember the first time I debated home schooling on Facebook.  One mom who home schooled her kids because she thought that public schools were terrible really needed to review basic English grammar, in particular, the run-on sentence.  There was not a bit of punctuation anywhere in her comments.  I try not to be a grammar stickler on Facebook, but when somebody is claiming educational superiority, they really should know the basics taught to elementary school students.

 
 
 
Sunshine
9.1.42  Sunshine  replied to  katrix @9.1.38    4 weeks ago
I actually am -

Yeah sure sounds like it...

Nope, they can send their kids to public schools.
 
 
 
devangelical
9.1.43  devangelical  replied to  XDm9mm @9.1.37    4 weeks ago

gee, that comment kind of flies in the face of the right wing memes that democrats don't have jobs and the gov't gives us everything, don't it? we don't own guns either.

 
 
 
Sunshine
9.1.44  Sunshine  replied to  sandy-2021492 @9.1.41    4 weeks ago
I remember the first time I debated home schooling on Facebook

I remember one teacher going to prison for fking her student.  Perhaps that isn't the public education some parents are seeking.

 
 
 
sandy-2021492
9.1.45  sandy-2021492  replied to  Sunshine @9.1.44    4 weeks ago

And?  Do you think that doesn't happen in private schools?  Or even home schoolers?  One reason for more oversight over home schooling families is that it provides ample opportunity to hide child abuse and neglect, including sexual abuse.  Consider the Turpins or the Duggars.

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
9.1.46  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  Sunshine @9.1.44    4 weeks ago
I remember one teacher going to prison for fking her student.  Perhaps that isn't the public education some parents are seeking.

That goes on in private school, too. You can't make your case on the occasional deviant. 

 
 
 
katrix
9.1.47  katrix  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @9.1.46    4 weeks ago

Remember the private school headmistress who went to jail for killing her lover? Perhaps that wasn't the private school education some parents were seeking ;)

 
 
 
Sunshine
9.1.48  Sunshine  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @9.1.46    4 weeks ago
You can't make your case on the occasional deviant. 

Nor on a Facebook debate.  Seriously Facebook?

 
 
 
Gordy327
9.1.49  Gordy327  replied to  Just Jim NC TttH @9.1.19    4 weeks ago

Religion certainly isn't relevant to my life. Not at all. So saying its relevant is not entirely accurate and is also a matter of personal preference. But it's not a school's purpose to say religion is relevant. Especially with which particular religion is referenced. That alone means a school might focus on one religion over others or non religion, which is blatantly unconstitutional. 

 
 
 
katrix
9.1.50  katrix  replied to  sandy-2021492 @9.1.41    4 weeks ago
I remember the first time I debated home schooling on Facebook. 

I'm pretty intelligent and educated, and I think many of us in here are - but still, I can't imagine most of us are knowledgeable in all the areas we'd need to home school. And when you add willful ignorance to the mix, it can be a horrible thing. For those who want to, though, they can band together to get their kids educated in things like science or math or whatever areas they're not proficient in, get them involved in sports in the community, and such (because the social isolation can also be bad for the kids' future lives), and not screw up their children. It does allow the kids to avoid the bullying and other horrible aspects of middle school (one common reason to home school), but you have to find some way to make up for the limitations. Some parents are great at figuring it all out, but it takes a lot of effort. It still needs more oversight, though.

 

 
 
 
sandy-2021492
9.1.51  sandy-2021492  replied to  Sunshine @9.1.48    4 weeks ago
Seriously Facebook?

Do you think one's grammatical abilities (or lack thereof) are not readily on display on Facebook?

Also, she's not the only home schooling parent I've known.  Some, like my cousin and his wife, and I will assume you, were educated people who had both knowledge and the ability to pass on that knowledge, and were good educators.  Some were religious people who didn't want their children exposed to "the world", and used a curriculum that they knew was dumbed down, but didn't care.  One to my certain knowledge had mental health issues.

 
 
 
sandy-2021492
9.1.52  sandy-2021492  replied to  katrix @9.1.50    4 weeks ago

Same.  I have a good education myself, but I wouldn't want to try to teach math or history.  I only enjoyed history after I was no longer being tested on it, and I hate memorizing dates.  And math - well, I remember trying to tutor my ex (we were high school sweethearts) in math, and failing.  I'm not sure if it was him or me, but while I might understand math myself, I'm terrible at explaining it to someone else (or he was terrible at understanding it).  I wouldn't want to risk my son's education on my questionable teaching abilities.

 
 
 
katrix
9.1.53  katrix  replied to  Sunshine @9.1.48    4 weeks ago
Nor on a Facebook debate.  Seriously Facebook?

You can debate in here, but can't grasp how some people use Facebook to debate with their friends? Seriously?

 
 
 
Sunshine
9.1.54  Sunshine  replied to  katrix @9.1.53    4 weeks ago
You can debate in here, but can't grasp how some people use Facebook to debate with their friends? Seriously?

Went over your head didn't it?  One example was used for a home schooling parent and I used one example for a public teacher but for some reason the one example I used wasn't sufficient. 

Seriously?

 
 
 
JBB
9.1.55  JBB  replied to  katrix @9.1.53    4 weeks ago

My FB Friends do not push their political agendas on me on FB and neither do I butt some of my Friend's Friends, inevitably far rightwing Trump supporters, are intent upon doing so. When they post fake news I sometimes post a link to a fact checking service that debunks their tawattle. That usually results in them blocking me which at least stops me and my Friends from being subjected to them spreading fake news, rank misinformation and divisive foreign propaganda. 

 
 
 
Sunshine
9.1.56  Sunshine  replied to  Split Personality @9.1.31    4 weeks ago
The next step would be to only have schools funded by people who have school aged children.

I have no problem paying for education.  We have several programs that are tax funded such as Head Start etc. which I feel are great programs but why does the state need the money to provide an education to a child who doesn't attend? Are we refunded our taxes collected when a child chooses a private school? Where does the money go? 

 
 
 
katrix
9.1.57  katrix  replied to  Sunshine @9.1.56    4 weeks ago

The money goes to the same place the money collected from someone who doesn't have children goes, into the overall school budget. Whether or not you have children in public schools has nothing to do with it. But then, I'm pretty sure you already knew that.

 
 
 
Sunshine
9.1.58  Sunshine  replied to  katrix @9.1.57    4 weeks ago
Whether or not you have children in public schools has nothing to do with it. But then, I'm pretty sure you already knew that.

Not even close to what I said.  I was addressing the child's enrollment regarding the taxes allocated to public schools.  jrSmiley_80_smiley_image.gif

But I will post for you again...

 why does the state need the money to provide an education to a child who doesn't attend? Are we refunded our taxes collected when a child chooses a private school? Where does the money go? 

 
 
 
Tessylo
9.1.59  Tessylo  replied to  Sunshine @9.1.58    4 weeks ago

Split Personality already covered that.

All those funds are pooled for the public good

 
 
 
katrix
9.1.60  katrix  replied to  Sunshine @9.1.58    4 weeks ago

Sigh. School taxes aren't budgeted on a one-to-one basis per child.

But hey, I have an idea - if you decide not to send your kid to public school, do I get a refund for the percent of my taxes that would have covered that one child, since you seem to think there is a one-on-one correlation?

/smh

 
 
 
KDMichigan
9.1.61  KDMichigan  replied to  JBB @9.1.55    4 weeks ago
That usually results in them blocking me which at least stops me and my Friends from being subjected to them spreading fake news,

Sorry but that isn't how FB works, If you are blocked you don't see their posts, it has nothing to do with your friends. Maybe you should have fact checked your own comment....

 
 
 
Sunshine
9.1.62  Sunshine  replied to  katrix @9.1.60    4 weeks ago
But hey, I have an idea - if you decide not to send your kid to public school, do I get a refund for the percent of my taxes that would have covered that one child, since you seem to think there is a one-on-one correlation?

Sure, why are you paying for a service that is not being completed?  Seems rather dumb.  

Is it or is it not the responsibility of the school district to educate a child?  If the child is not there, then why is the money needed? 

Since you can't answer the question, I will assume you don't have an answer.

 
 
 
JBB
9.1.63  JBB  replied to  KDMichigan @9.1.61    4 weeks ago

It someone blocks you on FB then you do not see their comments or what they post and visa versa. You completely misrepresented what I said. FYI, since my friends can see anytime I comment if someone blocks me then my friends who aren't their friends are also spared their bullshit! Are you that very desperate to always be contentious? To always be confrontational? To mount an argument even when there is none? Sheesh!

 
 
 
Sunshine
9.1.64  Sunshine  replied to  katrix @9.1.60    4 weeks ago
Sigh. School taxes aren't budgeted on a one-to-one basis per child.

When enrollment is down are your taxes lowered?  Where is this money being siphoned off to?  We spend increasingly more money on our public schools but we receive less and less education for our kids.  This is why homeschooling and charter/private schools are becoming more appealing to parents.  Good grief third world countries are out ranking the US in education.  Why shouldn't private schools receive the same funding?  Public schools are not holding up to any standards.  They meet the lowest standards possible to push kids through.

 
 
 
Tessylo
9.1.65  Tessylo  replied to  Sunshine @9.1.62    4 weeks ago

It's been answered multiple times.

 
 
 
KDMichigan
9.1.66  KDMichigan  replied to  JBB @9.1.63    4 weeks ago
butt some of my Friend's Friends,

Again not how FB works.

 You completely misrepresented what I said.

No I didn't, It's there for everyone to see. You posted a false scenario to take a dig at the right with your "far right-wing trump supporters". Again no matter how you spin it if you are blocked it has nothimg to do with what your friends see which is exactly what you stated.

 Are you that very desperate to always be contentious? 

If you feel being contentious is calling out fake posts then I guess yes I am.

To always be confrontational

LMAO coming from you this is Hillaryious.

To mount an argument even when there is none?

No argument just calling out your false information, So you are sticking with the whole if my friends, friends block me your friends no longer see their posts thing...

256

 
 
 
Sunshine
9.1.67  Sunshine  replied to  Tessylo @9.1.65    4 weeks ago
It's been answered multiple times.

In your mind I am sure it has.

 
 
 
katrix
9.1.68  katrix  replied to  Sunshine @9.1.67    4 weeks ago

Attempting to cover lack of reading comprehension with snark doesn't work too well for you. But thanks for playing.

 
 
 
katrix
9.1.69  katrix  replied to  Sunshine @9.1.62    4 weeks ago
Is it or is it not the responsibility of the school district to educate a child?  If the child is not there, then why is the money needed? 

You seriously don't understand how school taxes work. As has been explained to you, there is not a one-on-one correlation to school taxes and individual children. If you decide to take in 3 foster kids in the middle of the school year, the school doesn't suddenly increase its budget for those 3 kids, any more than it reduces its budget if you decide to use private schools. It's pretty basic.

 
 
 
Dismayed Patriot
9.1.70  Dismayed Patriot  replied to  katrix @9.1.69    4 weeks ago

I'm glad I can stay out of this debate regarding FB since I've thankfully never used it. That being said, the debate about it above seems rather petty, but I guess that's just par for the course for some who'll spend days arguing over their own obtuse misunderstandings.

 
 
 
Tessylo
9.1.71  Tessylo  replied to  Sunshine @9.1.67    4 weeks ago

It's been explained to you over and over and over and over again

 
 
 
Tessylo
9.1.72  Tessylo  replied to  Tessylo @9.1.59    4 weeks ago

Plus katrix has explained it to you

 
 
 
Sunshine
9.1.73  Sunshine  replied to  katrix @9.1.69    4 weeks ago
As has been explained to you, there is not a one-on-one correlation to school taxes and individual children

No kidding?  That is what I have been saying. jrSmiley_80_smiley_image.gif

If there was, taxes would be lowered due to the fact that public school enrollments have been dropping for many reasons but mostly due to a declining population, but public schools still need the same or higher budget to educate less pupils.  

It isn't that difficult to understand.  Even those who have a minimal understanding of SBB budgets can understand.

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
10  Perrie Halpern R.A.    4 weeks ago

Public schools do not teach religious beliefs. They do teach in high school comparative religion as part of the social studies curriculum. It is utter nonsense that they teach atheism. 

 
 
 
Kathleen
11  Kathleen    4 weeks ago

I have to tell you a little story.  I had a garage sale one day and a neighbor down the street came up with her 7 year old son. He went to a private school. They wanted to buy a toy, so she gave her son her change purse and said okay honey you take care of it. I smiled at him and she looked at me and said, don’t worry, he knows what he is doing, in not a nice way.  She went away to look at the other stuff that I had.  It was $2.00, and he could not figure out how much he needed. So I walked over to her and said. I think your son needs some help.  My next door neighbor just smiled at me.

So, I would not put down all public schools, my daughter would have been able to do it with no problem. 

 
 
 
sandy-2021492
11.1  sandy-2021492  replied to  Kathleen @11    4 weeks ago

The only private schools here are a few church-operated ones, and one military school.  The church ones come and go - one folds, and another opens.  But the one I was most familiar with before it closed taught only through middle school, and kids were behind when they got to high school, academically and emotionally.  The parents sometimes didn't know how behind they were, because they were making good grades, but the requirements were not rigorous.

The military academy seems to do a better job, but when I first moved here, it was more of an alternative to juvenile detention, and the kids I met who went there readily admitted it.  It is prohibitively expensive for most local families - about $32,000 per year, last I heard, and that was several years ago.  There are quite a few international students whose families want them to have an American education.

 
 
 
Kathleen
11.1.1  Kathleen  replied to  sandy-2021492 @11.1    4 weeks ago

That is so true about grades. My daughter took AP and honor classes to prepare her for college.  She got B’s in them instead of A’s but it helped in the long run. Public or private, they try to push a few through. 

 
 
 
Just Jim NC TttH
11.1.2  Just Jim NC TttH  replied to  Kathleen @11.1.1    4 weeks ago
My daughter took AP and honor classes to prepare her for college.

As did my son. He entered college for his first year this year with 18 college credits and only was required to finish one semester to become a Sophomore and now has 4 credits toward that achievement. Essentially he is only going to have to go for three and a half instead of four years. 

Kudos to you and your daughter.

 
 
 
sandy-2021492
11.1.3  sandy-2021492  replied to  Kathleen @11.1.1    4 weeks ago

Kudos to your daughter.  Sometimes, the letter grade isn't the whole picture.  The difficulty of the courses counts, too.  Taking the more difficult path likely prepared her very well for college.

I did the same.  When I got to college, biology and chemistry were a review for me.  I passed the AP exam, and could have skipped them and received credit, but I was a biology major, so my advisor recommended that I go ahead and take them again.

I also passed the AP exam for English, which allowed me to skip freshman composition class.

Even physics, which wasn't offered at the AP level at my high school, was taught rigorously enough that most of my college physics class was a review.

My high school math teacher taught calculus much better than my college calculus professor, and the college algebra and trigonometry I took were reviews of what I'd covered in high school.

My high school was very focused on academic excellence.  When Facebook became a thing, and we all started joining, somebody remarked on how all of our comments displayed fairly good grammar and spelling, and attributed it to excellent teachers, whose strictness we probably didn't appreciate enough at the time.

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
11.1.4  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  Just Jim NC TttH @11.1.2    4 weeks ago

My daughters did the same thing. They took AP everything. They had agreat GPAs and SATs scores. They got into Johns Hopkins with a 100% scholarship. All that with a public education, that was second to none and I paid less for it with local taxes than if I had sent them to a private school. But here our schools are local, and that makes all the difference. 

Btw, Kudos to all the proud parents on this thread. It's wonderful to read about other kids' successes. 

 
 
 
Kathleen
11.1.5  Kathleen  replied to  Just Jim NC TttH @11.1.2    4 weeks ago

Thank you and congratulations to your son. College is a lot harder and it makes it easier for them.

 
 
 
Kathleen
11.1.6  Kathleen  replied to  sandy-2021492 @11.1.3    4 weeks ago

Congrats to you too for your success in education...

Its so Important in life.

 
 
 
Kathleen
11.1.7  Kathleen  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @11.1.4    4 weeks ago

You too Perrie, what a wonderful accomplishment.

 
 
 
sandy-2021492
11.1.8  sandy-2021492  replied to  Kathleen @11.1.6    4 weeks ago

Thanks.  I give credit to some excellent teachers in well-supported public schools.

 
 
 
Split Personality
11.2  Split Personality  replied to  Kathleen @11    4 weeks ago

Parental responsibility is a tricky thing. I bought second hand cars when I had to and new minivans when I could afford it.  My kids went to military base day care and elementary schools, 8 or 9 different schools before they graduated public HS and now they have 5 degrees and counting between the three of them. They could all read and count before they entered kindergarten.

 
 
 
katrix
11.2.1  katrix  replied to  Split Personality @11.2    4 weeks ago
They could all read and count before they entered kindergarten

Same here. I wonder how many people who slam our public schools bother to supplement that education at home, so their kids understand just how important it is?

 
 
 
Sunshine
11.2.2  Sunshine  replied to  Split Personality @11.2    4 weeks ago
They could all read and count before they entered kindergarten.

Most kids do now.  If they can't, they are usually entered into a pre-k classroom.  

 
 
 
sandy-2021492
11.2.3  sandy-2021492  replied to  katrix @11.2.1    4 weeks ago

Same, and that was before pre-K was much of a thing.

My son first did multiplication in his head when he was four.  I actually didn't teach him that, so I was a bit surprised myself.  But I did make sure we practiced reading and math outside of school.  Baking is a great way to teach fractions - halving or doubling a recipe is a good  practical lesson.

 
 
 
Kathleen
11.2.4  Kathleen  replied to  Split Personality @11.2    4 weeks ago

Kindergarten is all day now. Yes, they are reading and counting before they go to first grade.

 
 
 
Split Personality
11.2.5  Split Personality  replied to  Kathleen @11.2.4    4 weeks ago

How many naps a day is that, lol?

 
 
 
Kathleen
11.2.6  Kathleen  replied to  Split Personality @11.2.5    4 weeks ago

I am trying to think if they still do... lol

I helped out and can’t remember..  it’s been 15 years...

 
 
 
sandy-2021492
11.2.7  sandy-2021492  replied to  Split Personality @11.2.5    4 weeks ago

Just one.

Kindergarten was all day when I was 5, and I had already given up taking naps.  We were made to lie down every day after lunch, and actually graded on whether or not the teacher thought we were asleep.  My mom just rolled her eyes when the teacher complained that I didn't sleep at nap time.  I hadn't taken a nap since I was 2, unless I was sick.

 
 
 
TᵢG
12  TᵢG    4 weeks ago
To not believe in God is a religous belief,  just as believing in God is a religious belief. 

False.   

Belief in a god is religion.  Not being convinced a god exists is not religion, it is the absence of religion.

The old example of absurdity:

'not stamp collecting' is a hobby

... is clear enough but people often ignore logic so as to promote their agendas.

 
 
 
TᵢG
13  TᵢG    4 weeks ago
Yet for a century or more, we’ve accepted the dangerous fiction that it is possible for law and public institutions to be neutral on religious questions. This has had the effect of making secular atheism the dominant religion of American public life, all while pretending it wasn’t happening.

This point would have legs is there was an active curriculum in schools teaching that no god exists.    The article seeks to claim that not discussing a god is somehow teaching atheism as a religion.   An emotional argument that contradicts facts and reason.

 
 
 
katrix
13.1  katrix  replied to  TᵢG @13    4 weeks ago
This has had the effect of making secular atheism the dominant religion of American public life

It cracks me up when religious people claim that atheism is a religion. It's as though subconsciously, they realize the absurdity of their religious claims, so they try to pretend that atheism is just as ridiculous as their claims.

And it is totally possible for the law and public institutions to be neutral on religious questions, or at least it would be if certain religious folks would stop trying to push their faith into our laws and public institutions.

 
 
 
Kathleen
13.1.1  Kathleen  replied to  katrix @13.1    4 weeks ago

Atheism is not a religion, it questions the existence of God and religions, 

 
 
 
TᵢG
13.1.2  TᵢG  replied to  katrix @13.1    4 weeks ago
It cracks me up when religious people claim that atheism is a religion.

It show the lack of a counter-argument thus the attempt to redefine common English words.   It is intellectual dishonesty.

And it is totally possible for the law and public institutions to be neutral on religious questions, or at least it would be if certain religious folks would stop trying to push their faith into our laws and public institutions.

Indeed it is possible.   In fact it is necessary if everyone is to be treated fairly.   Objectively the question of religion or irreligion must be ignored when dealing with an individual or providing government services.   

 
 
 
sandy-2021492
13.1.3  sandy-2021492  replied to  Kathleen @13.1.1    4 weeks ago

Of course not, which is one reason this article is ridiculous.  Public schools don't teach students to question the existence of God (any of the gods).  They are, and should be, legally prohibited from doing so.  But to the author, not teaching religion is the same as teaching atheism.

I guess the author only considers her religion important enough to teach if somebody's paying her to do so.

 
 
 
Kathleen
13.1.4  Kathleen  replied to  sandy-2021492 @13.1.3    4 weeks ago

That’s why I have always felt that religion and state should be separated. There is nothing wrong with being religious and non religious, just keep those two things separate. Those are my feelings about this. I will have to add that I did not mind that they put up Christmas trees and other religious decorations around the holidays. 

 
 
 
katrix
13.1.5  katrix  replied to  Kathleen @13.1.4    4 weeks ago

I'm an agnostic atheist and I love Christmas! And I don't care if schools celebrate Christmas as long as they include other cultural and religious holidays as well - learning how other people live and celebrate is always a good thing and fosters tolerance and inclusion, as well as being what our Constitution requires rather than just covering one religion's holidays. Just as I'm a fan of comparative religion classes. It always amazes me how many people claim their religion is the one true one, when they've never taken the time to really learn about any of the others.

 
 
 
Kathleen
13.1.6  Kathleen  replied to  katrix @13.1.5    4 weeks ago

I think it really makes the kids enjoy the holidays more. 

 
 
 
charger 383
13.1.7  charger 383  replied to  katrix @13.1.5    4 weeks ago

agree, well said

 
 
 
TᵢG
14  TᵢG    4 weeks ago
U.S. public schools impose religious beliefs on children. According to young Americans who have abandoned their family’s faith, they did so on average      before     leaving high school  . One of their top reasons for abandoning the faith is the scientism they are taught in their schools. 

When young people are exposed to science and learn that our planet is 4.54B years old, evolution is extremely well corroborated and taken as a given nowadays, etc. and compare that with what their religious teachers have told them, they will likely find the need to resolve contradictions.    I can only hope that the resolution nowadays favors well-established scientific explanations over religious explanations which are based not on evidence and formal reason but on what ancient men merely claim.

 
 
 
charger 383
15  charger 383    4 weeks ago

This opens a door with unknown consequences,   Anybody can make up a religion and it is just as real as the mainstream churches.  Might not be a good thing to start.   

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
16  seeder  Vic Eldred    4 weeks ago

Final thoughts:

We managed to get through this one with civility. Thanks to all.

And to my good friend: I did the best I could with it.

 
 
Loading...
Loading...

Who is online

Raven Wing
Texan1211
JohnRussell
Gordy327
igknorantzrulz


49 visitors