Catholic leaders push school vouchers at Capitol

[incense]

abc27.com/story/16567823/school-voucher-supporters

abc27.com/story/16567823/school-voucher-supporters

Catholic leaders push school vouchers at Capitol

Archbishop Charles Chaput was inundated with complaints after school closings in Philadelphia. Chaput unleashed a few complaints of his own in his weekly column.

“Some Catholics, too many, seem to find it easier to criticize their own leaders than to face the fact that they’re discriminated against every day of the year. They pay once for public schools; then they pay again for the Catholic schools,” he wrote.

Andy Hoover of the ACLU says the recent voucher bills would let private schools do the discriminating with no oversight on who they accept or reject.

“They could deny admission to kids based on religion, disability, ethnicity, and language skills, sexual orientation, and sexual gender identity,” he said.

Chaput also blamed the Capitol. He wrote: “Catholics should hold public leaders, beginning with our elected officials in Harrisburg, to an equally demanding standard.”

He wants vouchers, and Harrisburg Bishop Joseph McFadden agree

“In totalitarian governments, they would love our system,” he said. “This is what Hitler and Mussolini and all those tried to establish a monolith so all the children would be educated in one set of beliefs and one way of doing things.”

The Lifesitenews story is at this link: lifesitenews.com/news/pennsylvania-bishop-slams-public-schools-says-hitler-and-mussolini-would-lo/

 

[johnnykins]

Sorry, I disagree. You touch government money and you give them control. If Catholics want Catholic education we need to pay for it. With all due respect to the Bishops et al., but wanting the government to pick up the tab is a cop-out. Catholics supported Catholic education when it was Catholic. Now, the main argument you hear is, “it’s better than the public schools and cheaper than non-sectarian private schools.”

If that’s the real mission of Catholic schools - and way, way, way too often it is - then it needs to drop the “Catholic” bit and just say “we give a good (but often not great) education at cut rate prices”

Catholic schools lost their distinctive edge when they ceased to be Catholic and simply became a school with one period set aside for “I’m OK/You’re OK” syncretic milquetoast new age babbling.

Hopefully things are changing, but the answer is NOT government money.

 

[incense]

Sorry, I disagree. You touch government money and you give them control. If Catholics want Catholic education we need to pay for it. With all due respect to the Bishops et al., but wanting the government to pick up the tab is a cop-out. Catholics supported Catholic education when it was Catholic. Now, the main argument you hear is, “it’s better than the public schools and cheaper than non-sectarian private schools.”

If that’s the real mission of Catholic schools - and way, way, way too often it is - then it needs to drop the “Catholic” bit and just say “we give a good (but often not great) education at cut rate prices”

Catholic schools lost their distinctive edge when they ceased to be Catholic and simply became a school with one period set aside for “I’m OK/You’re OK” syncretic milquetoast new age babbling.

Hopefully things are changing, but the answer is NOT government money.

I’ll use the bishop’s own words to answer you, they seem appropriate:

“Some Catholics, too many, seem to find it easier to criticize their own leaders than to face the fact that they’re discriminated against every day of the year. They pay once for public schools; then they pay again for the Catholic schools,” he wrote.

 

[johnnykins]

I’ll use the bishop’s own words to answer you, they seem appropriate:

“Some Catholics, too many, seem to find it easier to criticize their own leaders than to face the fact that they’re discriminated against every day of the year. They pay once for public schools; then they pay again for the Catholic schools,” he wrote.

Yes, because it’s clear that the leaders haven’t thought it through. Hence they deserve criticism. Catholics are NOT discriminated against because they opt to pay for private education. Catholics are foolish, and Bishops stunningly so, to think if the government pays for private education the Government will not have the right to tell the Church what to do with that education.

One would think that what’s happening with hospitals, healthcare, adoptions, etc. would be an alarm to the Church leaders that they will lose every time when they opt to feed at the government trough.

The Bishops are plain wrong on this - and trying to deflect that is just another example of their continuing ineptitude. If Catholics want Catholic education we need to pay for it ourselves and keep the government’s hands off.

 

[incense]

Yes, because it’s clear that the leaders haven’t thought it through. Hence they deserve criticism. Catholics are NOT discriminated against because they opt to pay for private education. Catholics are foolish, and Bishops stunningly so, to think if the government pays for private education the Government will not have the right to tell the Church what to do with that education.

One would think that what’s happening with hospitals, healthcare, adoptions, etc. would be an alarm to the Church leaders that they will lose every time when they opt to feed at the government trough.

The Bishops are plain wrong on this - and trying to deflect that is just another example of their continuing ineptitude. If Catholics want Catholic education we need to pay for it ourselves and keep the government’s hands off.

So let’s say that the government says that since you deduct your mortgage interest from your income tax, they can therefore tell you what house you can buy. Or you can’t deduct. Or , let’s say the government says that since you deduct your dependents on your income tax, they can now tell you how many children you can have. Or you can’t deduct. And then one day they say you have to do what they say no matter who pays for it, because doing otherwise is simply hatred.

Exactly at what stage are you going to stand up and say that you’re a citizen too, and you have the right to pursue happiness? At what point will you say that you can’t take away my money and then use it against me to change my values, attitudes and beliefs?

At what point will you quit huddling in a ball and pretend that if you don’t make any noise, they won’t notice you and let you have freedom?

At what point will you realize you are already discriminated against? Perhaps you don’t know the history of public schools. That they were implemented because the protestants were afraid of a counter reformation with the influx of Irish and Italians. They charged Catholics taxes and then taught against the Catholic faith in the schools. (Much like now, except it’s totally anti-Christian).

 

[JimG]

Sorry, I disagree. You touch government money and you give them control. If Catholics want Catholic education we need to pay for it. With all due respect to the Bishops et al., but wanting the government to pick up the tab is a cop-out. Catholics supported Catholic education when it was Catholic. Now, the main argument you hear is, “it’s better than the public schools and cheaper than non-sectarian private schools.”

If that’s the real mission of Catholic schools - and way, way, way too often it is - then it needs to drop the “Catholic” bit and just say “we give a good (but often not great) education at cut rate prices”

Catholic schools lost their distinctive edge when they ceased to be Catholic and simply became a school with one period set aside for “I’m OK/You’re OK” syncretic milquetoast new age babbling.

Hopefully things are changing, but the answer is NOT government money.

You accept government money, you give the government control. But that’s exactly why the government ought not to be involved in education at all.

Give parents control, not government.

Right now, the only way parents can exercise control over their children’s education is by choosing where they live–which school district. Let parents control education, not government.

And actually, if government wants to fund education, the money should follow the students. That way, students and their parents decide which schools to spend their money on. That’s pretty much the way the GI Bill works.

 

[JReducation]

“Some Catholics, too many, seem to find it easier to criticize their own leaders than to face the fact that they’re discriminated against every day of the year. They pay once for public schools; then they pay again for the Catholic schools,” he wrote.

Yes, because it’s clear that the leaders haven’t thought it through. Hence they deserve criticism. Catholics are NOT discriminated against because they opt to pay for private education. Catholics are foolish, and Bishops stunningly so, to think if the government pays for private education the Government will not have the right to tell the Church what to do with that education.

Actually, that’s not the case. The State of Florida gives vouchers to students with special needs. They can attend any private school of their choice, including Catholic. The check is issued monthly in the name of the parent, but sent to the school. The parent must go to the school to sign it.

By doing it this way, the state is not funding the school, but funding the child. The check will go where the child goes. And the state does not have any authority over the school, its policies or curriculum, because it’s not paying the school. It’s reimbursing the parent from tax money that the parent is not using.

In Florida, the state and the parent both win, because the public school to which the child would normally attend gets to keep a very large portion of that money. The parent does not get 100% of the money allocated for the child’s education. He may get 60% and the local school gets the other 40% and does not have the expense of teaching that child or overseeing his education.

In other states, where the state pays for special needs kids to attend private schools, the state pays the schools directly. However, this places a great financial and personnel burden on those school districts. Those kids must have an IEP and the home school must send a teacher to monitor the IEP, meet with teachers and parents. Now you have the state paying for a private school tuition and paying one of its teachers to oversee something that the state can hardly control. At the end of the day, there are federal laws that allow the parent to sue the school district if the school district fails to provide what the child needs or interferes when someone else provides it. This happened in DC when the school district objected to crucifixes in Catholic classrooms where there were kids funded with public money. The parents sued the District of Columbia when the Catholic Schools told the parents that they would have to take their children elsewhere, because the crucifixes were not coming down.

The parents won the law suit on the grounds that removing the kids from those schools would deprive them of an education that the state had failed to provide in the first place. Otherwise, the kids wouldn’t be there. But it had already been proven in due process hearings that the state could not provide and the courts ordered the state to pay for private education.

When the state tried to regulate the religious environment, it crossed a line in the sand. Its intervention threatened the education of the kids. The ruling of the federal court that heard the case was that the state could not tell a parent that they could not place the child in a religious school, if that school provided what the state could not provide.

Florida avoids all that hassle of due process by simply giving out vouchers. It avoids having to pay its staff to visit private schools and spend endless hours in meetings at private schools, by paying the parent, not the school.

The program started for kids who had an IEP and has worked so well that it’s being expanded to kids are are gifted and have no place to go in the public schools. The parent can apply for the scholarship and take his kid and money where ever he wants to.

There are states where the precedent has been set and proven that it’s doable and legal. The system is a little complex, but it works well. You have to qualify and the dollar amount of your “scholarship” (they don’t want to call it a voucher) is based on a score. The higher your score, the higher the dollar amount that you, the parent, gets.

This leaves the private and religious schools free of government interference, because the parent is free to take the student to any school. As I said, the money is issued to the parent, not to the school. It travels with the student. In Florida, it’s called a scholarship rather than a voucher.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

 

[johnnykins]

So let’s say that the government says that since you deduct your mortgage interest from your income tax, they can therefore tell you what house you can buy. Or you can’t deduct. Or , let’s say the government says that since you deduct your dependents on your income tax, they can now tell you how many children you can have. Or you can’t deduct. And then one day they say you have to do what they say no matter who pays for it, because doing otherwise is simply hatred.

Exactly at what stage are you going to stand up and say that you’re a citizen too, and you have the right to pursue happiness? At what point will you say that you can’t take away my money and then use it against me to change my values, attitudes and beliefs?

At what point will you quit huddling in a ball and pretend that if you don’t make any noise, they won’t notice you and let you have freedom?

At what point will you realize you are already discriminated against? Perhaps you don’t know the history of public schools. That they were implemented because the protestants were afraid of a counter reformation with the influx of Irish and Italians. They charged Catholics taxes and then taught against the Catholic faith in the schools. (Much like now, except it’s totally anti-Christian).

I know the history quite well. They are not discriminating against Catholics now contrary to your assertion. If you want a private Catholic education, we need to pay for it. “We” means ALL Catholics, not just parents. The golden rule always applies: those with the gold rule. However you get money from the government you run the serious and real risk of having the government make you dance to their tune. We see that everywhere especially now in healthcare and adoptions. Why do you believe that education is different?

Is it possible the government will nonetheless require things even if no money/tax deductions are available? Sure. But, if they pay for it, the chances of it sticking are much much better.

Frankly, after 12 years of Catholic education and sending my own kids to Catholic schools I don’t want the government involved. And with vouchers, deductions and grants, etc., they are involved. Bad, Bad, Bad idea.

If the Bishops and Catholics are serious about a Catholic education they need to:1. Make sure it is Catholic and not Catholic light, Catholic absent or anti-Catholic (I’ve seen all of them); 2. make it a real priority - that is really spend MONEY on it; 3. Get ALL Catholics to pay for it; 4. encourage vocations to teaching (when was the last time you heard a Bishop or parent really praise and support teaching orders, encouraging a vocation to teach the faith?); 5 teach the faith and secondarily teach secular subjects.

Honestly, AB Chaput seems to be a great leader who probably got a bit (not totally!) blindsided by this whole thing in Philly. BTAIM, with apologizes to Shakespeare, the problem is not in the stars (or the government) it is in ourselves, Bishops, teaching orders, parents, laity in general, for not demanding, providing and supporting Catholic education.

Blaming the government when our own leadership have failed, and the grass roots Catholics have failed - and where money is coming out of ones pockets - makes any complaint very suspect and weak.

 

[incense]

However you get money from the government you run the serious and real risk of having the government make you dance to their tune. We see that everywhere especially now in healthcare and adoptions. Why do you believe that education is different? .

See, that’s why what Catholic Charities in Illinois did is so scandalous. Renouncing their faith instead of fighting in the courts. You actually think that it’s proven that they can’t receive the money to help kids? THEY DID NOT CHALLENGE IT !!! They took the easy way to keep their jobs.

Jesus said something about how he wished the good would work for good as hard as the wicked work to get what they want. (The parable of the bad steward who forgave his bosses debts.)

 

[JReducation]

I know the history quite well. They are not discriminating against Catholics now contrary to your assertion. If you want a private Catholic education, we need to pay for it. “We” means ALL Catholics, not just parents. The golden rule always applies: those with the gold rule. However you get money from the government you run the serious and real risk of having the government make you dance to their tune. We see that everywhere especially now in healthcare and adoptions. Why do you believe that education is different?

Is it possible the government will nonetheless require things even if no money/tax deductions are available? Sure. But, if they pay for it, the chances of it sticking are much much better.

Frankly, after 12 years of Catholic education and sending my own kids to Catholic schools I don’t want the government involved. And with vouchers, deductions and grants, etc., they are involved. Bad, Bad, Bad idea.

If the Bishops and Catholics are serious about a Catholic education they need to:1. Make sure it is Catholic and not Catholic light, Catholic absent or anti-Catholic (I’ve seen all of them); 2. make it a real priority - that is really spend MONEY on it; 3. Get ALL Catholics to pay for it; 4. encourage vocations to teaching (when was the last time you heard a Bishop or parent really praise and support teaching orders, encouraging a vocation to teach the faith?); 5 teach the faith and secondarily teach secular subjects.

Honestly, AB Chaput seems to be a great leader who probably got a bit (not totally!) blindsided by this whole thing in Philly. BTAIM, with apologizes to Shakespeare, the problem is not in the stars (or the government) it is in ourselves, Bishops, teaching orders, parents, laity in general, for not demanding, providing and supporting Catholic education.

Blaming the government when our own leadership have failed, and the grass roots Catholics have failed - and where money is coming out of ones pockets - makes any complaint very suspect and weak.

Did you read my post above of how Florida does it? It gives the parents back part of their money and the state has no more authority over these private schools than it already does with regard to licensing, safety requirements, record keeping and other red tape that you must go through to open any kind of private school in the State of Florida.

The state law does not allow the state to interfere in the school’s moral, social skills, culture and values education. That is not the purpose of the scholarship. The purpose is to give parents school choice. If the state crosses that line, the parents have a right to sue the government and the school has the right to cease accepting the scholarship.

This began as a pilot program for students with special needs and the plan is to extend it to gifted and talented students, as they too are considered to have special needs. I’m not sure when that is to happen, because I don’t work with that system. But I know about it, because my nephew and niece used the scholarship to attend a Catholic school in Florida.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

What makes it impossible for other states to imitate this model?

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

 

[johnnykins]

Did you read my post above of how Florida does it? It gives the parents back part of their money and the state has no more authority over these private schools than it already does with regard to licensing, safety requirements, record keeping and other red tape that you must go through to open any kind of private school in the State of Florida.

The state law does not allow the state to interfere in the school’s moral, social skills, culture and values education. That is not the purpose of the scholarship. The purpose is to give parents school choice. If the state crosses that line, the parents have a right to sue the government and the school has the right to cease accepting the scholarship.

This began as a pilot program for students with special needs and the plan is to extend it to gifted and talented students, as they too are considered to have special needs. I’m not sure when that is to happen, because I don’t work with that system. But I know about it, because my nephew and niece used the scholarship to attend a Catholic school in Florida.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

What makes it impossible for other states to imitate this model?

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

Yes I read it. give it time … Like a Ponzi scheme it might work for a while. Worked with healthcare for a couple generations - and adoptions. In each case it perverted both parties. The Church needs to spend less time worrying about getting or keeping government money. It’s ultimately a very bad deal for HMC…

 

[incense]

Yes I read it. give it time … Like a Ponzi scheme it might work for a while. Worked with healthcare for a couple generations - and adoptions. In each case it perverted both parties. The Church needs to spend less time worrying about getting or keeping government money. It’s ultimately a very bad deal for HMC…

So if you think it’s about the money, how can the Catholic hospitals be saved? Are you suggesting that we pay for medicare and medicaid, but then must pay again at a Catholic hospital because it cannot take government money?

So that means we pay twice for medical care, hospital services, education, adoption services, foster care services and … Let’s just suppose they let us keep doing that, because you think they’re fair and not after our destruction, how can the average Catholic afford to do it?

But they’re not going to let us do it, right now you can hide by not taking the money, but not for much longer. The battle is here and now. If you hide, there will be no one to challenge your oppression when you do emerge.

 

[johnnykins]

So if you think it’s about the money, how can the Catholic hospitals be saved?

Yes, it’s about money in very large part - see your own question at the end of your own second paragraph. Of course, there are bigger money questions, too. As for Catholic hospitals, I think they are already on their way out - look at the sister thread on Catholic West.

Are you suggesting that we pay for medicare and medicaid, but then must pay again at a Catholic hospital because it cannot take government money?

I am suggesting that Medicare, Medicaid and other government payor programs have led to the decisions by hospitals that are inimical to the faith despite protestations to the contrary. The decision by Catholic West to cease to be Catholic is a prime example. Catholic healthcare is, IMHO, no different from secular healthcare. Ok you get a crucifix in the room. Otherwise - zip in any meaningful way. I don’t see that as a good thing for the Church.

So that means we pay twice for medical care, hospital services, education, adoption services, foster care services and …

yes, if you think there is a difference worth paying for - I sure don’t see it.

Let’s just suppose they let us keep doing that, because you think they’re fair and not after our destruction, how can the average Catholic afford to do it?

I do think they are after the destruction of the faith - and by getting us to buy in they get their claim to tell us what to do.That’s precisely why we shouldn’t take the money. Your last question highlights the real issue here, and what I believe is the real issue with the Bishops - money. Everyone wants the money, and no one wants to pay.

But they’re not going to let us do it, right now you can hide by not taking the money, but not for much longer. The battle is here and now. If you hide, there will be no one to challenge your oppression when you do emerge.

I’m suggesting the way to fight the battle is to suck it up and pay the cost of the battle.

 

[incense]

I do think they are after the destruction of the faith - and by getting us to buy in they get their claim to tell us what to do.That’s precisely why we shouldn’t take the money. Your last question highlights the real issue here, and what I believe is the real issue with the Bishops - money. Everyone wants the money, and no one wants to pay.

I’m suggesting the way to fight the battle is to suck it up and pay the cost of the battle.

We live in this country, we are citizens too. I’m not an isolationist from my own country, indeed the Pope has called us to speak publicly about our faith and morals and to show how the natural law makes us free. To give (name removed by moderator)ut on law.

If there was no other thing to do, your proposals would have merit. Why you are willing to give up your rights as a citizen and demand that other Catholics do so is beyond me. We’ve lost one battle and you’re ready to concede the whole war.

Your ideas might work in a vacuum, in outer space, where everything is ideal and you don’t have to take into consideration all those little things that affect your ideals, like having to have food and shelter. Thank God our Bishops aren’t telling us to go eat cake too.

The following fact might make you realize that there will be no buying a separate Catholic service. No one will be able to afford it.

Here’s just part of what he means by “untenable”: Were Notre Dame to drop coverage for its 5,229 employees, the HHS penalty alone would amount to $10 million each year.

online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970203718504577179110264196498.html#cb=f2957841d4f5378&origin=http%3A%2F%2Fonline.wsj.com%2Ff1d32e43d60a78b&relation=parent&transport=postmessage&frame=f2af99508b024&error=unknown_user

 

[JReducation]

Yes I read it. give it time … Like a Ponzi scheme it might work for a while. Worked with healthcare for a couple generations - and adoptions. In each case it perverted both parties. The Church needs to spend less time worrying about getting or keeping government money. It’s ultimately a very bad deal for HMC…

That’s a major concern, because what it’s saying is that the American people have lost control of their government. In time, the government will wiggle its way around the law, change laws at its will and pleasure and the American people are unable to do anything to stop it.

Or, is the Archbishop correct in saying that these things happen, because the American people allow them to happen, not because they have no control?

Let’s take the case in Florida where the scholarship program started as a pilot and has expanded into a fully legal program and is extending to a larger number of students beyond those with disabilities. If the State Legislature started to tweak the rules here and there and the schools decided that they are no longer going to admit students who come with the scholarship, because they are not going to submit to the state’s demands and the parents don’t fight back . . . that speaks volumes about the citizens of the State of Florida. Either they are indifferent, in which case they should just pay up for private education and not complain or they have lost control of the government and are living in a totalitarian society.

In both scenarios, the problem falls at the feet of the citizen, either for allowing what he can stop or for allowing himself to lose control of a government that should have been “by the people and for the people,” a “government with the consent of the governed.”

In a country where people can take the government to court and get the Supreme Court to rule against the government such as in the case of Brown vs The Board of Education, which led to the passing of PL 94-146 and we can take the government to court and the Supreme Court can rule that abortion is a constitutional right, to say that the citizens cannot take the government to court and demand that such laws as exist in Florida be protected, then the problem is not with the private school system, but with the citizens.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

 

[johnnykins]

That’s a major concern, because what it’s saying is that the American people have lost control of their government.

In case you haven’t noticed, Catholics, including nominal and dissenting Catholics, are about 25% of the populace. A very large segment of the population holds views opposed to those held by the Church - including those working for Catholic entities such as Hospitals and not to mention those actually working for the Church and its ministers.

In time, the government will wiggle its way around the law, change laws at its will and pleasure and the American people are unable to do anything to stop it.

Governments surely do that in response to political pressure. The Church has largely lost the societal fight on contraception and abortifacient drugs - hence the majority are more than happy to have them covered by health plans including Notre Dame’s., e.g. You see all this as a demonstration of government NOT being responsive to the electorate - but, I see it exactly the opposite. It’s the Constitutional guarantees against minority oppression that protect us - not a responsive government since we are in the minority. It is very much a part of constitutional interpretation that the spending power of the Government is not terribly restricted. You take their money and you allow them to make the rules. You don’t take the money and the constitutional guarantees are much stronger.

Or, is the Archbishop correct in saying that these things happen, because the American people allow them to happen, not because they have no control?

Yes - most people disagree with the Church on contraception. The Bishops lost the battle for the hearts and minds of the general populace on that - and now the Church is paying the price.

Let’s take the case in Florida where the scholarship program started as a pilot and has expanded into a fully legal program and is extending to a larger number of students beyond those with disabilities. If the State Legislature started to tweak the rules here and there and the schools decided that they are no longer going to admit students who come with the scholarship, because they are not going to submit to the state’s demands and the parents don’t fight back . . . that speaks volumes about the citizens of the State of Florida. Either they are indifferent, in which case they should just pay up for private education and not complain or they have lost control of the government and are living in a totalitarian society.

If the general population doesn’t want it - it won’t happen; otherwise it will.

This is why divorce is relatively easy; contraception is generally allowed, abortion is allowed, gay marriage is allowed - the general populace is, or is moving toward being in favor of it, not the other way around.

In both scenarios, the problem falls at the feet of the citizen, either for allowing what he can stop or for allowing himself to lose control of a government that should have been “by the people and for the people,” a “government with the consent of the governed.”

be careful how far you go with that argument - you’ll lose 100% of the time on issues like contraception and many others such a catholic ed vouchers, etc…

In a country where people can take the government to court and get the Supreme Court to rule against the government such as in the case of Brown vs The Board of Education, which led to the passing of PL 94-146 and we can take the government to court and the Supreme Court can rule that abortion is a constitutional right, to say that the citizens cannot take the government to court and demand that such laws as exist in Florida be protected, then the problem is not with the private school system, but with the citizens.

No - it’s a matter of what the people want - and what does the constitution allow.

 

[JReducation]

In case you haven’t noticed, Catholics, including nominal and dissenting Catholics, are about 25% of the populace. A very large segment of the population holds views opposed to those held by the Church - including those working for Catholic entities such as Hospitals and not to mention those actually working for the Church and its ministers. Governments surely do that in response to political pressure. The Church has largely lost the societal fight on contraception and abortifacient drugs - hence the majority are more than happy to have them covered by health plans including Notre Dame’s., e.g. You see all this as a demonstration of government NOT being responsive to the electorate - but, I see it exactly the opposite. It’s the Constitutional guarantees against minority oppression that protect us - not a responsive government since we are in the minority. It is very much a part of constitutional interpretation that the spending power of the Government is not terribly restricted. You take their money and you allow them to make the rules. You don’t take the money and the constitutional guarantees are much stronger.

Yes - most people disagree with the Church on contraception. The Bishops lost the battle for the hearts and minds of the general populace on that - and now the Church is paying the price.

If the general population doesn’t want it - it won’t happen; otherwise it will.

This is why divorce is relatively easy; contraception is generally allowed, abortion is allowed, gay marriage is allowed - the general populace is, or is moving toward being in favor of it, not the other way around.

be careful how far you go with that argument - you’ll lose 100% of the time on issues like contraception and many others such a catholic ed vouchers, etc…

No - it’s a matter of what the people want - and what does the constitution allow.

I understand what you’re saying about the general population and I agree that the majority gets its way. That’s the defect of every democracy. It’s not about what’s right or wrong, but about numbers.

However, maybe we’re looking at this too narrowly, because we’re Catholic. I’ll go back to my nephew and my niece. They get the scholarship and they use the money to pay for a Catholic education. However, there are more families getting the scholarship and using it to get an education from the Association of Private Schools, which is not Catholic. In other words, the number of Catholics who benefit from the program is very small; whereas, the number of citizens who benefit from the program is very large. My brother was telling that in Florida there are two private schools for every one public school. These are Hebrew, Catholic, Protestant and secular, but all of them private. This is a large segment of the population.

I don’t know how large, because private schools are usually smaller than public schools. That’s one of their attractions. Parents prefer 300 students over 3000. However, if the State began to tweak with the rules and these parents sit back and whine, but do nothing else, then they deserve what they get. What they’ll get is exorbitant private school tuition that they can’t afford.

Having known the Archbishop for decades (since 1971), I believe that I understand his thinking. This is the kind of thing that he’s saying. Catholics are not the only people affected by this. It’s not a Catholic issue.

Before I was a religious, I worked for a private school in Washington, DC that had a tuition of $14K per year. That’s more than many colleges. It was at that time. If such a school exists in FL, which probably does and the parents get the scholarship, which helps to reduce the expense to them, they would be foolish not to fight back if the legislators started to tweak with the rules without the consent of the people. Even if you scholar ship is for half of that amount, it’s a big help. On top of that, the local public school is making money, because the way that the program works is that the local public school to which the child would go has to keep a percentage of the total. The whole amount is not given to the parent. The amount varies depending on a score assigned to each student. I’m not sure how that scoring system works. I know that the higher the score, the larger the percentage that the parent gets.

It works well for the public school. They get free money. They don’t have to provide for those kids who are not there, but they get to count them in their census.

I think that the Floridians’ system deserves a good look. There is a precedent here and it seems to work. Nothing is perfect on this side of heaven. At times there are glitches, usually due to the economy more than the individuals involved. But it’s up and running and the public schools are not complaining. They get money and they get less students.

As I said, it benefits many people, not just people of a given religion.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

 

[unafraid]

Sometimes, rather than haraguing over the minutiae of a contested matter, I like to stand back and keep an eye out for the flies that inevitably appear, and I wait and watch to find where they eventually settle and land…and then I set my course in the opposite direction. In this instance, here are some examples: The ACLU (opposes vouchers); American atheist leader David Silverman (opposes vouchers); Homosexual Advocacy groups (oppose vouchers); Radical Socialists (oppose vouchers);etc.,etc…

Now, I must admit that I have a vested interest in favoring the cause of school vouchers, as I have two daughters that attend Catholic school. However, standing in opposition to those groups which so vociferously represent counter-cultural radicalism, leaves me in a position which I can have full moral concord with my conscience. Sometimes the merit of a thing is defined in its juxtaposition with the insufficiencies of that which stands in opposition.

Some very, very dark forces oppose school vouchers, and the last item on their agenda is the question of constitutionality.

 

[JReducation]

Sometimes, rather than haraguing over the minutiae of a contested matter, I like to stand back and keep an eye out for the flies that inevitably appear, and I wait and watch to find where they eventually settle and land…and then I set my course in the opposite direction. In this instance, here are some examples: The ACLU (opposes vouchers); American atheist leader David Silverman (opposes vouchers); Homosexual Advocacy groups (oppose vouchers); Radical Socialists (oppose vouchers);etc.,etc…

Now, I must admit that I have a vested interest in favoring the cause of school vouchers, as I have two daughters that attend Catholic school. However, standing in opposition to those groups which so vociferously represent counter-cultural radicalism, leaves me in a position which I can have full moral concord with my conscience. Sometimes the merit of a thing is defined in its juxtaposition with the insufficiencies of that which stands in opposition.

Some very, very dark forces oppose school vouchers, and the last item on their agenda is the question of constitutionality.

I agree. That’s why I say that one of the defects of democracy is that it is often about numbers or even about noise rather than about right and wrong. At the end of the day, this should not be a Catholic issue. This should be a parental issue. Parents should have the right to get back part of their tax dollars to educate their children in the school of their choice, be it Catholic, Jewish, Protestant or secular.

When I was a missionary in South America I saw an interesting system in Chile. They don’t have vouchers or scholarships. However, they do have a tax credit just as we have for those parents who are putting kids through college. Except that their tax credit covers kids of all grades. A private school tuition is tax deductable. It’s like the one that we have here for parents with dependent college children. There is not only a tax credit, there is also financial aid that the student can access through FAFSA. This is regardless of whether they attend a religious or a state school. Maybe we should consider whether to lower the grade limit to include dependent children in primary and secondary schools.

I’m not an economist. However, I have seen systems that work and that are equitable to the public and private sector. At the end of the day, the question is about morality. Every government has a duty to comply with moral law. Moral law demands that citizens be treated with fairness. To give a tax shelter to the parent of the college student and deny it to the parent of the high school student may not be too fair, especially if you’re the parent of both students.

I think that these radical groups are looking at this as a religious issue rather than a justice issue. In doing so, they may be missing an opportunity for the state to help parents and make some money for its education system. Even with the Hope Credit and the other education tax credits, the taxpayer is not getting back the full amount. The government gets to keep a portion without having to spend it on the student. It can be a win win situation.

When people put their anti-Catholic prejudice in front of their logic, they often do more harm than good.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

 

[Luna_Lovecraft]

*Archbishop Charles Chaput was inundated with complaints after school closings in Philadelphia. Chaput unleashed a few complaints of his own in his weekly column.

“Some Catholics, too many, seem to find it easier to criticize their own leaders than to face the fact that they’re discriminated against every day of the year. They pay once for public schools; then they pay again for the Catholic schools,” he wrote.*

I’m a Catholic school alumna, step-parent who pays for 1/3 of my step-daughters’ Catholic school tuition, and a tax payer. I don’t feel as if I’m being discriminated against when I pay for both my community’s public schools in addition to my step-daughters’ tuition.

I’m willing to pay for public schools just like I’m willing to pay for police and fire services services, even if I never I never call 911, even if my home owner’s association has private security. Same with public health services; I’m glad that the poor person next to me on the bus is getting her tuberculosis treated, even if it’s my money paying for her Myambutol.

If Catholic schools want to step into the shoes of the public schools, they have to be willing to do so completely, in every state and community, all the time, just like public schools do. This means accepting students who don’t speak a lick of English, students who need home health studies while they undergo chemotherapy, students who pregnant or who are parents themselves, students who aspire to Ivy League schools and students who are on probation or parole, students who are habitually truant, and students from highly mobile families. If Catholic schools are willing to provide those kinds of services and more, if they’re willing to accept every kid regardless, period, I say go for it.

But, the only Catholic high school in my community states right on its website that the minimum TOEFL score they will accept for admission is 550 and they provide no academic support services for special needs students. So should they accept public money if they can’t or choose not to provide for all students?

Luna