Get the Kids Out - 0f public school

[PaulinVA]

Every one except the public will cost me more money. That is discriminatory and not totally freedom of choice.

Do you understand what freedom of choice is?

You are free to make any choice you are able to. If you, buffalo, do not think you can afford a particular choice, you are still free to make that choice. No one is stopping you from making that choice.

As I said earlier, I am not paying for multiple private and public school systems overlaid on each other. You get one taxpayer-supported system. If you don’t like it, work to change it or don’t put your kids in it. If it’s all you can afford, then that’s life. If you think that you should be able to send your little buffalo to any school you want, and the public should pay for it, than find a candidate for school board and support him/her.

 

[Sailor_Kenshin]

Beautiful and Sailor Kenshin, did your last posts have points or were you guys just bloviating?

Is there something wrong with teaching kids to read, write and add?

 

[eliza3b]

Get the Kids Out!

I would say to you, dear friends, it may require some sacrifice, but I urge you to send your children to godly schools. If you send them off to some public school, keep in mind that you are shooting dice with your children’s eternal souls. It is a gamble that no Christian should be willing to make.

Don’t send an eight-year-old out to take on a forty-year-old humanist. I have never seen any people more unhappy than fathers or mothers who have come to me and said, “Where did we go wrong? We gave him everything, and now he’s turned his back completely on everything we believe.” Yes, they gave him everything but a Christian education.

Dr. D. James Kennedy (Training Your Children 396060)​

St. Theresa of the Cross didn’t have a Christian education, nor did John Paul 2. Blaming a school for a child’s rejection of the faith is not acknowledging the fact that the child (or adult) has the freedom to choose whether to believe or not. Faith is a gift. Some have it, most lose it, many more will find it again.

 

[pnewton]

Before you discount the possibilty of Catholic school, sit down with admin. and discuss what you can afford. Many school/parishes are flexible in ways that aren’t readily made public. Every situation is unique.

I plan on it. There are some lines I will not cross. I will not go in debt or sell my house, for example.

 

[pnewton]

If you don’t like it, work to change it or don’t put your kids in it. If it’s all you can afford, then that’s life. If you think that you should be able to send your little buffalo to any school you want, and the public should pay for it, than find a candidate for school board and support him/her.

One of the problems faced is that the public school system is no longer subject to the public and their desires. Now, one judge here or there in another part of the country where society is odd and strange can affect schools across the country. We need to return to absolute total local control. If some individual does not like it, then like the above poster said, they are free to do something else, including move.

 

[Sillara]

Do you understand what freedom of choice is?

You are free to make any choice you are able to. If you, buffalo, do not think you can afford a particular choice, you are still free to make that choice. No one is stopping you from making that choice.

As I said earlier, I am not paying for multiple private and public school systems overlaid on each other. You get one taxpayer-supported system. If you don’t like it, work to change it or don’t put your kids in it. If it’s all you can afford, then that’s life. If you think that you should be able to send your little buffalo to any school you want, and the public should pay for it, than find a candidate for school board and support him/her.

Actually, the difficulty that I see is that buffalo (or anyone, myself included) does not have the option NOT to pay for the taxpayer-supported system. If he wants to send his children, fine. If not, well, he is still paying anyway. And if you mention the fact that those without children are also paying, well, I would suggest that they, too, not have to pay.

Schools used to be extremely local affairs, supported locally and FUNDED locally. They also produced better-educated students.

 

[PaulinVA]

How do we, as Catholics reconcile our own desires and our obligation to the people in the communities that we live in?

I live in Northern Virginia. Most of my state tax money goes to Richmond and is distributed to less fortunate parts of the state. There are some counties that could not afford a school system if it weren’t for the state money, and the lottery money (which is a tax on people who flunked statistics).

So, we are all responsible for providing an education to the next generation. Those of us with resources are obligated to help those who can not provide that education on their own

No matter if you agree with the education style or theory being used or what electives should be taught or whatever, everyone must pay for the public system because there won’t 'be a public system if you don’t. You can’t get past that.

If you want something extra for your children, you can pay for it. But, as a society, as Catholics, we can not abandon those who need our help to educate the next generation.

 

[Sillara]

The idea of a public school sounds good. In practice, well, look at what we have.

It would be much better if we could, instead, give this money to our parishes. Then they could run tuition-free parochial schools.

I realize that that will never happen, but it would be better to do it that way. I am in favor of charity and sharing. I do not think it is AT ALL helpful to involve the government. That not only puts the education in the hands of people terribly distant from the children involved, it is also a colossal waste of resources.

 

[pnewton]

So, we are all responsible for providing an education to the next generation. Those of us with resources are obligated to help those who can not provide that education on their own

You are right. I do not think anyone here is advocating that we should not have any public school system I do not even want would be considered a fair share, specifically because I know there are areas that need extra help, both geographically and academically. I would be satisfied with just half of what is spent to educate my child to redirect him elsewhere. In doing so, the public school would actually be better off because they would not have to spend the full amount educating him. One the other hand, I would have no problem those in poverty receiving a full credit to educate their child elsewhere. The poor too should be given freedom of choice for a religious education.

However, the issue of public schools is not about money, it is about control. Control the education system of the next generation and you control the nation.

 

[PaulinVA]

pnewton, I don’t see how taking money out of public schools would make them better. Allowing people to take public money to educate their children in a private school is elitist. It discriminates against those who can’t afford the remaining part of the private school tuition.

I understand the idea that we should be able to educate our children the way we want, but I don’t quite understand the idea of public money going to religious schools.

There are religious schools I don’t want to support, as was discussed earlier in this thread.

 

[buffalo]

pnewton, I don’t see how taking money out of public schools would make them better. Allowing people to take public money to educate their children in a private school is elitist. It discriminates against those who can’t afford the remaining part of the private school tuition.

I understand the idea that we should be able to educate our children the way we want, but I don’t quite understand the idea of public money going to religious schools.

There are religious schools I don’t want to support, as was discussed earlier in this thread.

It will force competition which will close bad schools.

 

[Shin]

If a public school can’t be allowed to fail, why should anyone who works in it ever try to succeed?

How hard do you work at a job you can’t be fired from? Hm? Where the worse you do the more money people say you should get?

Know any businesses that operate that way? Feel free to start one. Just don’t force me to pay for it and to send my children to its tender and gentle care!

 

[Cobbfmly]

With a voucher system how do you…

make sure private schools (mostly non-Catholic) don’t raise their tuition by the amount of the voucher, thereby making it so only the children that could afford to go without the voucher are able to attend?

make sure the voucher provides enough money for the needs of disabled children can be meet by the private schools they are moved to? Otherwise, disabled children with parents who are willing to go to the effort to move them but don’t have the financial means could be stuck in failing schools or with children who’s parent’s don’t care about education.

 

[buffalo]

With a voucher system how do you…

make sure private schools (mostly non-Catholic) don’t raise their tuition by the amount of the voucher, thereby making it so only the children that could afford to go without the voucher are able to attend?

make sure the voucher provides enough money for the needs of disabled children can be meet by the private schools they are moved to? Otherwise, disabled children with parents who are willing to go to the effort to move them but don’t have the financial means could be stuck in failing schools or with children who’s parent’s don’t care about education.

A voucher is designed to do only one thing. The school tax money can be sent to the school of your choice. Nothing more nothing less.

 

[pnewton]

pnewton, I don’t see how taking money out of public schools would make them better. Allowing people to take public money to educate their children in a private school is elitist. It discriminates against those who can’t afford the remaining part of the private school tuition.

While you take money out, you reduce the task by a commensurate amount. What is difficult to understand about this? The same illogical objection is constantly raised. Yes, there would be more money, but also a correspndingly fewer children.

What is elitist is the NEA thinking that they have an inherent inalienable right to be the ones to shape the minds of the young. What is elitist is stating that only the rich should have any choice in education and the poor deserve zero choice. After all, they are poor and ignorant so no doubt the State makes a better caretaker than the parents. The know what is best for the children and how best to educate kids to maintaint their power base.

 

[pnewton]

There are religious schools I don’t want to support, as was discussed earlier in this thread.

There are a whole slew of federal programs I do now want to support, including some in the public school systems. It this were an agruement, it would be highly *against *the public school system.

 

[pnewton]

If a public school can’t be allowed to fail, why should anyone who works in it ever try to succeed?

Herein lies the problem. Not only in matters of success, but also indoctrination. The NEA and their ilk knows that without being able to maintain a forced government monopoly on the system, the style of some teachers to indoctrinate rather than educate would not be tolerated. Economics would force districts to limit schools to education.

 

[buffalo]

While you take money out, you reduce the task by a commensurate amount. What is difficult to understand about this? The same illogical objection is constantly raised. Yes, there would be more money, but also a correspndingly fewer children.

What is elitist is the NEA thinking that they have an inherent inalienable right to be the ones to shape the minds of the young. What is elitist is stating that only the rich should have any choice in education and the poor deserve zero choice. After all, they are poor and ignorant so no doubt the State makes a better caretaker than the parents. The know what is best for the children and how best to educate kids to maintaint their power base.

Great post

 

[pnewton]

The truth is, the public school system could work beautifully, just not in America. Besides the basics, history needs to be taught, not current events; government, not civics; academic clubs allowed, not life-style clubs.

Yes, I am fine with excluding Christian agendas along with humanistic and perverted agendas. Bar the newspapers and let the parents raise the child in religious, moral and political areas.

 

[barb_finnegan]

While you take money out, you reduce the task by a commensurate amount. What is difficult to understand about this? The same illogical objection is constantly raised. Yes, there would be more money, but also a correspndingly fewer children.

What is elitist is the NEA thinking that they have an inherent inalienable right to be the ones to shape the minds of the young. What is elitist is stating that only the rich should have any choice in education and the poor deserve zero choice. After all, they are poor and ignorant so no doubt the State makes a better caretaker than the parents. The know what is best for the children and how best to educate kids to maintaint their power base.

I second that !

And I went to public school myself!

I’m not married-and so not a parent-but I can understand the feelings of good parents who want to give the right formation to their children. It’s not easy to raise kids in the kind of society we have today.