Billions in taxpayer dollars now go to religious schools via vouchers

[T. A. Gardner]

Again, I do not believe government should pay for any private school.

Whereas, if government is involved in education, and wants the best outcomes, that would argue that vouchers for any school that meets some minimum set of standards, religious, secular, private, or whatever, would be the best. Leave it up to parents to decide what's best for their kids rather than force kids into a one-size-fits-all system based on Victorian era principles that fails the vast majority of children.

 

[ExpressLane]

US taxpayer money should not be used to support religious institutions.

If the Public schools were doing their jobs this wouldn't even be an issue. The bottom line religious schools are doing a better job for less money. Parents can't wait around until public schools get their acts together.

 

[T. A. Gardner]

The TAXPAYERS ARE THE GOVERNMENT, and it's their choice.

Vouchers allow the TAXPAYERS to CHOOSE where their own education dollars go, which appalls the totalitarians like you.

It's not the job of taxpayers to be forced to pay for the DNC via Teachers' Unions

What appalls the Left isn't taxpayer funding of schools but rather that they don't have 100% control over the education process in schools the parents choose in these voucher systems. They don't want students to be able to have free thinking or ideas of their own in the slightest.

 

[Bigdog]

No, government should not pay for religious education.

Gov't should not deny any parent, especially the poor, the right to send their children to a religious school. Freedom of religion is a right.

No one is being forced to attend religious schools.

Public education is socialist which is why failed schools don't go out of business.

WE must restore capitalism to our education system for everyone. The socialist monopoly on education needs to end.

 

[RB 60]

No, religious schools, not just private schools.

Yep. Those too.

 

[ZenMode]

Then improve them.

Which means throw more and .ore money at it, indefinitely, and hope.

Never mind that the government has had centuries to create equal learning opportunities. We will just give them more money and hope that something magically changes.

 

[cawacko]

It's easy to be an ideologue on the internet. IRL people vote with actions and it's why even in places like SF, LA and NYC we see so many people send their kids to private schools - even religious ones.

I'll share my experience. I went to Catholic School. It was:

1) extremely diverse - racially, ethnically and economically
2) we had Jewish, Muslim and atheist kids who attended
3) it was very progressive (in fact my school is one of only 60 in the country to have AP African American history)

Why did such a diverse group attend a Catholic school? It's both an excellent school and because many didn't want to attend Oakland public schools.

So people are free to say they don't like religion. But non Catholic private schools usually cost about double the amount. For some, writing that $50K/yr check for their kid's education is nothing. But for many it's not an easy task, hence the appeal of Catholic schools.

 

[Hume]

Which means throw more and .ore money at it, indefinitely, and hope.

Never mind that the government has had centuries to create equal learning opportunities. We will just give them more money and hope that something magically changes.

And you think closing every school will make one or two schools perfect because 200 kids are in one class.

 

[Hume]

Gov't should not deny any parent, especially the poor, the right to send their children to a religious school. Freedom of religion is a right.

No one is being forced to attend religious schools.

Public education is socialist which is why failed schools don't go out of business.

WE must restore capitalism to our education system for everyone. The socialist monopoly on education needs to end.

You missed the point of the thread. Public money for religious instruction.

 

[Hume]

It's easy to be an ideologue on the internet. IRL people vote with actions and it's why even in places like SF, LA and NYC we see so many people send their kids to private schools - even religious ones.

I'll share my experience. I went to Catholic School. It was:

1) extremely diverse - racially, ethnically and economically
2) we had Jewish, Muslim and atheist kids who attended
3) it was very progressive (in fact my school is one of only 60 in the country to have AP African American history)

Why did such a diverse group attend a Catholic school? It's both an excellent school and because many didn't want to attend Oakland public schools.

So people are free to say they don't like religion. But non Catholic private schools usually cost about double the amount. For some, writing that $50K/yr check for their kid's education is nothing. But for many it's not an easy task, hence the appeal of Catholic schools.

The issue has nothing to do with whether the schools are good.

The issue is that public money should not pay for religious instruction.

 

[Bigdog]

You missed the point of the thread. Public money for religious instruction.

No, you miss the point of freedom of religion. It is the taxpayer money and choice at an individual level.

It is still separation of State and church ... because the gov't is not forcing anyone to go to a religious school.

 

[Hume]

No, you miss the point of freedom of religion. It is the taxpayer money and choice at an individual level.

It is still separation of State and church ... because the gov't is not forcing anyone to go to a religious school.

I don't want to pay for Christians teaching their religion.

 

[Bigdog]

I don't want to pay for Christians teaching their religion.

So you want to dictate to "poor" parents the type of school they want their children to attend. I think they should have a choice just like rich white libs do.

There are lots of gov't expenditures that I do not want to pay for.

 

[Hume]

So you want to dictate to "poor" parents the type of school they want their children to attend. I think they should have a choice just like rich white libs do.

Yes, I want public money to go to public schools and not religious institutions.

 

[Bigdog]

Yes, I want public money to go to public schools and not religious institutions.

That is totalitarianism. Freedom for thee (wealthy), but not for me. This is about parental choice for THEIR children.

Do you want to ban all religious schools in the name of 'equity'?

 

[Hume]

That is totalitarianism. Freedom for thee (wealthy), but not for me. This is about parental choice for THEIR children.

Do you want to ban all religious schools in the name of 'equity'?

You miss my point. PUBLIC money should not fund RELIGIOUS institutions.

 

[Bigdog]

You miss my point. PUBLIC money should not fund RELIGIOUS institutions.

And my point is that parents should be able to choose the School that they feel is best for their own children. That includes the right of religious freedom granted in the Constitution.

The gov't should not be a dictator.

 

[Hume]

And my point is that parents should be able to choose the School that they feel is best for their own children.

I do not agree.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Wrong again, dumbfuck. USNEWS k-12

• Massachusetts. #1 in Pre-K-12. #10 in Best States Overall. ...
• New Jersey. #2 in Pre-K-12. #14 in Best States Overall. ...
• Connecticut. #3 in Pre-K-12. #20 in Best States Overall. ...
• New Hampshire. #4 in Pre-K-12. #2 in Best States Overall. ...
• New York. #5 in Pre-K-12. ...
• Utah. #6 in Pre-K-12. ...
• Illinois. #7 in Pre-K-12. ...
• Wisconsin. #8 in Pre-K-12.

Fourth grade was the worst few years of your life, wasn’t it, Rufus?

Sure, since you offer such a reliable source, who could doubt a good little Stalinist like you?

 

[Uncensored2008]

Because they can be selective on their enrollment.

Unlike you, I don't just make shit up:

{
Charter schools have evolved over the course of two decades, and their students now show greater academic gains than their peers in traditional public schools, according to a new report from a group of researchers who have studied the evolution of charters since 2000.

The study, which examined student performance in 6,200 charter schools from 2014 to 2019, marks a turning point in the understanding of charter school performance. It’s the third study of its kind from researchers at the Center for Research on Education Outcomes, or CREDO, after the center’s earlier studies found that charter school students performed either worse than or about the same as their peers in traditional public schools.

From 2014 to 2019, charter school students gained, on average, the equivalent of 16 days of learning in reading and six days in math over their peers in traditional public schools. Eighty-three percent of charter school students performed the same as or better than their peers in reading, and 75 percent performed the same as or better in math, according to the study, which includes data from 29 states, New York City, and the District of Columbia.}

Charter Schools Now Outperform Traditional Public Schools, Sweeping Study Finds

Researchers who have studied the evolution of charter schools over two decades find that their performance has improved over time.

www.edweek.org