Hillary’s Demagogic Response To Vouchers

[Fitz]

coyote:

NEA = Nation Endowment for the Arts?

I don’t get the connection.

NEA is National Education Association

 

[mlchance]

PLAL:

I am against vouchers. I believe if vouchers are given to private schools, then the government will be interfering with private school education (tell us what books have to be used, etc).

Where is the evidence this is true. Voucher programs exist in several places in the U.S., including, IIRC, Washington, D.C. Has the gov’t tried to interfere with private school education in any of these programs? If so, how?

– Mark L. Chance.

 

[Magster]

PLAL:

As for Hilary Clinton, I cannot stand her views. I am embarrased to say she grew up in my state (IL) and went to Maine South HS.

Your embarassment is now shared by a large number of us New Yorkers whom she purportedly represents as a Senator. That her views on abortion, school vouchers, etc., are way out of line with the thinking of myself and many, many others, only demonstrates that she doesn’t really care to “represent” the concerns of many of her constituents, only her own political agenda that, unfortunately, has been shaped by, and fosters, the culture of death.

 

[PLAL]

mlchance:

Where is the evidence this is true. Voucher programs exist in several places in the U.S., including, IIRC, Washington, D.C. Has the gov’t tried to interfere with private school education in any of these programs? If so, how?

– Mark L. Chance.

Mark,

So you do not think the government will some time down the road place “conditions” on the private schools in order to get the vouchers? If so, I think you are very nieve.

PLAL

 

[mlchance]

PLAL:

So you do not think the government will some time down the road place “conditions” on the private schools in order to get the vouchers? If so, I think you are very nieve.

That’s your answer to my questions. Another question followed by a poorly-spelled insult. Let’s try this again. You say:

PLAL:

I am against vouchers. I believe if vouchers are given to private schools, then the government will be interfering with private school education (tell us what books have to be used, etc).

I ask: Where is the evidence this is true? Voucher programs exist in several places in the U.S., including, IIRC, Washington, D.C. Has the gov’t tried to interfere with private school education in any of these programs? If so, how?

Answer the questions rather than dodge the issue and toss in cheap shots.

– Mark L. Chance.

 

[manualman]

PLAL,

Whether you intend it or not, catholics like you are supporters of the steady destruction rate of catholic schools in America. As the cost of living escalates AND public schools continue raise their taxes on homes, catholic schools are forced to offer higher pay to keep qualified teachers. This triple whammy has pushed catholic elementary grade tuition to close to $4,000 per kid in my area.

How many families can afford to pay for their kids educaton twice? Not so many. As the enrollments dwindle and there are fewer kids in the classroom, the remainder have to cough up even more to make up the teacher salary and overhead costs.

Because of catholics like you, I’m not sure at all that I can afford to send my two kids to catholic schools. If we all lined up and supported modest vouchers ($3,000 or so), we’d have a landslide, the catholic school system would rebound AND public schools would still get to keep a substantial amount of tax money for kids they don’t have to pay to educate. I’m OK with that compromise.

Now, you tell me this: Why should we be worried that the government will attempt to interefere in faith instruction at voucher schools? In 60ish years of federal college financial aid programs I know of no cases where the Feds tried to force a Catholic college to drop teaching aspects of the faith to qualify for financial aid. What’s different about elementary ed?

 

[LittleRose]

manualman:

PLAL,

I know of no cases where the Feds tried to force a Catholic college to drop teaching aspects of the faith to qualify for financial aid. What’s different about elementary ed?

Keep in mind that the financial aid goes to** the student,** and not the college. Also, it would be very difficult for politicans to explian why they wish to make it difficult for religious people to recieve a college education, especially if any of them are people of color. Additionally, much of the financial aid that goes to college students from the Federal government is in the form of loans, which are paid back with interest. A very profitable arrangement when you think about how much more income tax revenue is generated from students who take their college education and get higher paying jobs.

That being said…

The primary difference between elementary/secondary school and college is that college is not compulsory, whereas children are required by law to attend grade school. Somewhere along the line, it was decided that not only should everyone have the right to access elementary and secondary education, they should be required to access it.

The second issue is that education of children is an essential tool for maintaining cultural unity. It is not just a place for learning the “Three R’s” it is also a place where children learn to govern themselves by societal norms. The public school system, to some people, is a place where children should go to learn how to become good citizens, which means they are going to be taught values that someone determines are the correct ones. Unfortunately, when people like Hilary Clinton and those in charge in the NEA (and its related subsidiaries like the CTA, in my state of California), and the people in the Calfornia Department of Education determine what these are, it often includes the kind of sex-ed that some people have already referred to on this page. People like Senator Clinton, and some in the California state government are hostile to private education and home schooling because these are places where children are taught things that are contrary to their views on family and sexuality. They are worried that kids might be taught that there is one God, that homosexuality is wrong, that marriage should be a permanent union between a man and a woman, that unborn life is precious, that contraception is immoral, and that sex should be reserved for marriage. Hilary Clinton opposes vouchers because she does not want taxpayer money to pay for this kind of instruction, and she is using buzz-words and fears of terrorism to mask her true agenda.

While there may not be widespread interference in the Catholic *school *system yet, there is already interference in Catholic hospitals that refuse to perform tubal ligations vasectomies, abortions, and other procedures contrary to Catholic teaching. This has generated a certain level of distrust between Catholics, Catholic institutions, and the Government.

As someone pointed out earlier, “government money” is, really our money, but the government does not always do with it what we would like. Can you see why some of us do not want to give people like Senator Clinton an excuse to interfere in Catholic elementary and secondary schools?