If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#431
|
|||
|
|||
School Choice (was How Children REALLY React To Control)
Nathan A. Barclay wrote:
"toto" wrote in message ... On Wed, 30 Jun 2004 08:07:58 -0500, "Nathan A. Barclay" How hard, and in how many places, have you looked? Are you really saying that the peer pressure issue has nothing to do with why some Jews and Moslems send their children to Jewish or Moslem schools? And if so, how do you know? I notice you leave out Hindus (maybe because there are not many Hindu day schools?) My dil is Hindu. My husband is Jewish. I live in a very diverse area which includes those of all these religions and more - Bahai, for example are numerous here. The only proselytizers are fundamentalist Christians. Some Catholics may proselytize in some circumstances though not among children as far as I know. Why does it matter? If anything, your apparent prejudice against religions that proselytize looks like evidence that you are trying to take advantage of the current situation to put non-prosylitizing religions in a stronger position compared with prosylitizing ones. That would violate the Establishment Clause. ----------------- Non-proselytizing by the government UPHOLDS the Establishment Clause, it doesn't violate it! Steve |
#432
|
|||
|
|||
School Choice (was How Children REALLY React To Control)
"Donna Metler" wrote in message . ..
"Banty" wrote in message ... In article , Nathan A. Barclay says... "Donna Metler" wrote in message .. . One of my major problems is that here religious separation and racial separation would be equivalent. There are still a lot of private religious schools here which were created due to public school desegregation. To allow children of predominantly white, rich religious groups to take vouchers and leave the public schools while minority children who belong to poorer religions which cannot afford the infastructure needed to run a school system remain in the public schools seems like a step backwards to me. On the other hand, operating schools in poor areas could be a great opportunity for members of wealthier religious groups to help others and possibly win some converts at the same time. How good or bad that is from a religious perspective would be debatable, but it is a possibility that offers very definite advantages from an educational perspective. I can easily see myself donating to such an effort. Ah, but what if they don't want to be converted? Most of my students have strong religious beliefs, but not necessarily those preached by, say Roman Catholics. I don't think my COGIC or AME parents would want their child in a private school (and since many COGIC and AME churches are small, storefront or living room operations, I don't think they're going to be opening their own schools anytime soon). I really don't think my Moslem parents are going to want to send their child to a school run by a Christian group. That's reasonable and in a voucher system, they certainly wouldn't be required to do so. No one is suggesting that the secular public schools with no religious aspects be eliminated, only that parents who wish to should be allowed. So the children you are talking about are no worse off under a voucher system. And if the Moslem (or GOGIC OR AME) community is large enough, it's entirely possible that some enterprising adherents will start up a school compatible with their beliefs, thus giving those students other options. |
#433
|
|||
|
|||
School Choice (was How Children REALLY React To Control)
"Circe" wrote in message news:7tgFc.12607$Qj6.6466@fed1read05...
abacus wrote: "Circe" wrote in message news:zaEEc.10202$Qj6.1748@fed1read05... This doesn't address the question posed. In fact, most wealthy white families, whether racist or not, send their children to different (usually must better) schools than from where most of poor minority children attend even though when they are all attending public schools But this is primarily because they don't live in the same neighborhoods where the poor minority children live and therefore don't share the same neighborhood schools. I will add that there are wealthy minority families, though there are proportionately fewer of them, and their kids don't tend to go to school with the poor minority kids, either. Ditto the poor white kids, who usually don't go to the same schools as either the rich white or rich minority kids. IOW, the segregation we have now is based more on means than on race (though means and race are certainly tightly intertwined in our society). The difference between the current system and the one Nathan is advocating is that the means to achieve school segregation would be coming from the government instead of from individuals. I'm sorry, but I don't follow how you go from the premise (current segregation, which occurs just as much or more in the public school sphere as the private school sphere, is based more on means than on race) to the conclusion (a voucher system would allow school segragation to come from the government rather than individuals). Could you provide some justification for this? Because if the government gives me money that allows me to put my children in a segregated private (and whether it's segregated by race, religion, culture, or some other measure isn't really material to me) school, it's subsidizing and supporting that segregation in a way that it's not when the reason my school is segregated is because of the demographic make-up of the neighborhood in which I live. The demographic make-up of my neighborhood is based not on government interference (at least, not any more), but on the type/cost of housing available in my area and the relative economic well-being of the people who live there. There's nothing to STOP a minority family (whether it's minority on the basis of race or the basis of religion doesn't matter) from moving into my neighborhood and attending my public school, because my public school accepts all comers provided they live within its boundaries. By comparison, if the schools are segregated by choice supported by a governmental voucher system, then a private school can and probably *will* tell me to take my children elsewhere if they don't meet the school's entry requirements (whatever they're based on), even if I'd *like* to send them there. Ma'am. I can't fathom why you would be interested in sending your children to a school that would have a policy of deliberate segregation based on race. I certainly wouldn't. OTOH, I don't particularly care if other parents want to do so. Further, I think this is an ancillary issue. It would be easy enough to simply impose the requirement that schools accepting vouchers have a policy of non-discrimination. Even if the Malcolm X academy for militant black male muslims was required to accept white atheist females, I suspect that segregation would still occur, just as it still exists in many neighborhoods. But thank you for explaining. Personally, I don't think that there's much difference between government support for segregation through subsidized education, which you don't support, and government support for segregation through subsidized housing, which you do support, but I can at least understand the distinction you are making here. Put another way, my kids *are* minorities in my neighborhood. I'm white, but their father is of Mexican descent. Moreover, we're Unitarian-Universalists with an atheist bent in a neighborhood where virtually everyone is a Christian of one stripe or another. But no one can keep my kids out of our wonderful public school. Is the population of the school mostly white and Christian? You betcha! But my kids can go there and their rights are not trampled by its curriculum because it's not just for whites or just for Christians. And that's the way schools supported by taxpayers *ought* to be (at least IMO). Ma'am, just as you would do not want your children's rights trampled by the curriculum, neither do other parents. Some parents feel that our current schools do that to them. Since their beliefs are incompatible with our secular public school (i.e. they could not be introduced without trampling over the rights of people like you), why do you object providing other options so that their children may attend a school compatible with their values? How would you feel about having to make the choice of either having your children attend such a school or having to pay $1,000's yearly to fund a different education for them? I will add that I think the best way to attack the problem of failing schools is not to give parents vouchers to use for school tuition, but to give them the equivalent amount in funds for housing so that they can afford to live in a neighborhood with better public schools. An interesting idea. |
#434
|
|||
|
|||
School Choice (was How Children REALLY React To Control)
toto wrote in message . ..
On Fri, 2 Jul 2004 12:46:56 -0500, "Nathan A. Barclay" wrote: Not true. Why not simply allow the public schools to have the same small class sizes that promoted the learning instead of handing money to *new* schools that factor that in. Because it would cost more - at least in an "apples and apples" comparison where the same number of students are educated using public money either way. The voucher schools cost more. Read the stats I posted. I read those stats. That's not the conclusion I drew from them. |
#435
|
|||
|
|||
School Choice (was How Children REALLY React To Control)
"R. Steve Walz" wrote in message ... It doesn't matter, all hobbies have the same status as religion That's not true, though, when government funds art, music, and literature classes while refusing to fund religion classes. |
#436
|
|||
|
|||
School Choice (was How Children REALLY React To Control)
Nathan A. Barclay wrote:
"R. Steve Walz" wrote in message ... It doesn't matter, all hobbies have the same status as religion That's not true, though, when government funds art, music, and literature classes while refusing to fund religion classes. --------------------------- Sure, but govt can't finance religion, it's the one hobby govt is not allowed to support. Religion still has the same status as a hobby does! Steve |
#437
|
|||
|
|||
School Choice (was How Children REALLY React To Control)
"toto" wrote in message ... On Fri, 2 Jul 2004 12:46:56 -0500, "Nathan A. Barclay" wrote: Not true. Why not simply allow the public schools to have the same small class sizes that promoted the learning instead of handing money to *new* schools that factor that in. Because it would cost more - at least in an "apples and apples" comparison where the same number of students are educated using public money either way. The voucher schools cost more. Read the stats I posted. I did - and my lie detector started sounding warning bells every which way. I assume you've seen my analysis? |
#438
|
|||
|
|||
School Choice (was How Children REALLY React To Control)
abacus wrote in :
FWIW, there are a significant number of government funded religious schools in Britain.**IME*of*these*schools,*the*amount*of*reli gion*in*the curriculum would be significantly less then the US advocates of religious schools would think appropriate. I think there is a large segment of the population here that would like some religious content in their children's schools - i.e. a prayer at the beginning of the day, religious motifs allowed on the walls, religious stories occasionally told -**without*it*being*at*the same level as our current religious schools. That is about the level of religious content of schools here. Another difference is that most schools have an annual Christmas play, which may be based around the Biblical nativity play. We do have lessons in what could best be descibed as "comparitive religion": learning about other religions. Most schools in Britain have a school uniform: one school I pass frequently has many girls wearing a white hijab (sp? - Muslem head-dress). Because they are all white I assume that this is a set piece of uniform. I don't know how this would be handled in the US, if a school was to have a uniform. PS some crossposts snipped -- Penny Gaines UK mum to three |
#439
|
|||
|
|||
School Choice (was How Children REALLY React To Control)
On Mon, 5 Jul 2004 17:38:41 -0500, Penny Gaines wrote
(in article ): abacus wrote in : FWIW, there are a significant number of government funded religious schools in Britain.**IME*of*these*schools,*the*amount*of*reli gion*in*the curriculum would be significantly less then the US advocates of religious schools would think appropriate. I think there is a large segment of the population here that would like some religious content in their children's schools - i.e. a prayer at the beginning of the day, religious motifs allowed on the walls, religious stories occasionally told -**without*it*being*at*the same level as our current religious schools. That is about the level of religious content of schools here. Another difference is that most schools have an annual Christmas play, which may be based around the Biblical nativity play. We do have lessons in what could best be descibed as "comparitive religion": learning about other religions. Most schools in Britain have a school uniform: one school I pass frequently has many girls wearing a white hijab (sp? - Muslem head-dress). Because they are all white I assume that this is a set piece of uniform. I don't know how this would be handled in the US, if a school was to have a uniform. PS some crossposts snipped Just to remind any of the U.S. guys: that's a "state religion" that is being discussed in ref to education. And a reminder that whatshisname once said: (remember "Episcopal" is the westside version of the Church of England and part of the so-called "Anglican Communion" (until the U.S. gets kicked out: -------------------------------------------------------- I promised you a letter on Christianity, which I have not forgotten. On the contrary, it is because I have reflected on it, that I find much more time necessary for it than I can at present dispose of. I have a view of the subject which ought to displease neither the rational Christian nor Deists, and would reconcile many to a character they have too hastily rejected. I do not know that it would reconcile the _genus irritabile vatum_ who are all in arms against me. Their hostility is on too interesting ground to be softened. The delusion into which the X. Y. Z. plot shewed it possible to push the people; the successful experiment made under the prevalence of that delusion on the clause of the constitution, which, while it secured the freedom of the press, covered also the freedom of religion, had given to the clergy a very favorite hope of obtaining an establishment of a particular form of Christianity thro' the U.S.; and as every sect believes its own form the true one, every one perhaps hoped for his own, but especially the Episcopalians & Congregationalists. The returning good sense of our country threatens abortion to their hopes, & they believe that any portion of power confided to me, will be exerted in opposition to their schemes. And they believe rightly; for I have sworn upon the altar of god, eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man. But this is all they have to fear from me: & enough too in their opinion, & this is the cause of their printing lying pamphlets against me, forging conversations for me with Mazzei, Bishop Madison, &c., which are absolute falsehoods without a circumstance of truth to rest on; falsehoods, too, of which I acquit Mazzei & Bishop Madison, for they are men of truth. -------------------------------------------------------- Gray Shockley -------------------------------------------------------- X, Y, Z is not as simple as A, B, C. |
#440
|
|||
|
|||
School Choice (was How Children REALLY React To Control)
"Penny Gaines" wrote in message ... abacus wrote in : FWIW, there are a significant number of government funded religious schools in Britain. IME of these schools, the amount of religion in the curriculum would be significantly less then the US advocates of religious schools would think appropriate. I think there is a large segment of the population here that would like some religious content in their children's schools - i.e. a prayer at the beginning of the day, religious motifs allowed on the walls, religious stories occasionally told - without it being at the same level as our current religious schools. That is about the level of religious content of schools here. Another difference is that most schools have an annual Christmas play, which may be based around the Biblical nativity play. We do have lessons in what could best be descibed as "comparitive religion": learning about other religions. Most schools in Britain have a school uniform: one school I pass frequently has many girls wearing a white hijab (sp? - Muslem head-dress). Because they are all white I assume that this is a set piece of uniform. I don't know how this would be handled in the US, if a school was to have a uniform. The same way-our Moslem girls wear their head coverings in a color to match the uniform (white or dark blue). Uniform colors are white, Navy, Khaki, and red. PS some crossposts snipped -- Penny Gaines UK mum to three |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
HALF OF KIDS IN FOSTER CARE NEEDLESSLY | Malev | General | 0 | December 12th 03 03:53 PM |
| | Kids should work... | Kane | General | 13 | December 10th 03 02:30 AM |
Kids should work. | LaVonne Carlson | General | 22 | December 7th 03 04:27 AM |
New common sense child-rearing book | Kent | General | 6 | September 3rd 03 12:00 PM |