Like I predicted, US Supreme Court Rules Vouchers Const

[Guest]

No, no, no. The state cannot regulate the curriculm of a private religious school. If these religious schools want to teach their students that the road to heaven depends on how many jews they can kill, they can teach that. However sick it may seem to you and I. These religious schools can teach whatever they wish. They are protected by the free exercise of religion clause in the first amendment. You certainly don't want to mess with that fundamental right, I hope. You see the problems. The court didn't think this through. Maybe the legislatures of the various states will. Whether or not vouchers will play a part in the school system is now up to the state legislatures.

[Guest]

I wish to respond to this debate.My opinion about a lot of things is well known. I am free to offer my opinion. But it is only my opinion. You should make up your mind.I speak as a parent in Oregon, who was seeing his children just waste away in public education. My wife saw it too, so she/we decided to home school. My wife, who did not pay attention in her school life, was the teacher. She is 45. She taught home school every day, and went to work every evening. We used a secular courseware, from "Calvert Schools". $550.00 a student, they even send the crayons. Books are "real", you know, McGraw Hill. Lesson plan is excellent. Two kids, one in 4th, one in 6th the lesson plans have one study Middle East, while the other studies other civilizations. Anyway...My kids took the finals this year. Got A's. My kids have never gotten A's. My kids only missed two days home school this year. In public school, my older son missed weeks. He hated the environment. He hated the violence. He hated the hatred.Our public schools are "borked". (Man...I like that word!) Competition will do them good. Vouchers don't have to go to "religious schools". btw, I consider myself a Christian, or better, a man with God. OTOH, I prefer a secular education and a religious home life. So...to those who are worried about loosing the current public education system, I say good riddance. Let them feel the heat of competition. I work for a world famous, world-class company. Today we got EOY results. We made money. We all profited. Last year, we were way behind. This year, we all worked hard to beat the competition. Competition is good for the soul.Cheers to all,bt

[Guest]

And the US of A becomes closer and closer to Taliban Afghanistan, another religious state. Allelujah!

[Guest]

>And the US of A becomes closer and closer to Taliban Afghanistan...Spare the heck outa me.Cheers,bt

[Sonar5 3]

Great addition to the debate, well reasoned, well thought out, and really shows your depth. Thanks for contributing.Joehttp://home.attbi.com/~jranos/mysig.jpg http://avsim.com/hangar/air/bfu/logo70.gif

[Guest]

""Vouchers don't have to go to "religious schools""True, they go to the parents to do with what they choose. ""And the US of A becomes closer and closer to Taliban Afghanistan""While I think that statement was very well thought out by a true academist;No, that's no exactly correct. The Taliban will be here attending their quickly put together schools (ie; Taliban High) under student visas.. Paid for by my tax money. Why do I think that's funny??? Geez; it's really not funny. It could very likely happen. Not likely in Michigan though. If I remember correctly, we voted down vouchers for that very reason.

[gosta 0]

One thing I did not see mentioned is the fact, that similar schemes have been tried out unsuccessfully in other countries (Britain, for example). What all those had in common was an unwillingness of conservative governments to spend any money on education, and all were sold to the parents under the guise of better choice. All it led to, was a rapid deterioration in the quality of education - which is something the US definitely can not afford. To the politician, this doesn't matter, though - by the time parents have figured out that it was all a scam, he'll have been re-elected a few times, and by the time the kids are old enough to vote, he'll be retired. Cheers,Gosta.

[Sonar5 3]

Gosta, Gosta, Gosta, what will we do....First off, in The United States, the Federal Government doesn't control the education system, the individual States do.So even though the vouchers were upheld as Constitutional, does not mean every state will have the same voucher system. It will up to each individual state whether they begin a program and how that program is structured.Here is how it works in my state, where challenges were dismissed and our program was upheld.In Illinois:It is an Education Tax Credit ProgramIt is important to define Tax Credit. (A tax credit is a refund of taxes already paid by the person)The Tax Credit is Maximum $500 in Illinois.So if you paid $4000 in tuition, etc for a year like I did, you subtract $250 off the top, then multiply by 25% 4000-250=37503750 x 25% = $937.50, so I get back $500.The threshhold is $2250 for a full refund. Someone who paid $1800 in tuition would receive a $387.50 refund.Now, the taxes that I paid to the Public School District that my kids do not attend was $2635 for the tax year of 2001.So all in all after my refund, I paid $6135 for two children for last year between taxes and tuition. Now if I sent my kids to the public school, I would have saved $3500, and the burden on the school system would have been a lot more than the $500 I got back because I pay the $2635 regardless of where my kids go to school.Now imagine the burden of Hundreds of Thousands of kids on a flawed system like Cleveland if Secular and Religious alternatives did not exist.I will be ahppy to answer any questions on this that you may have.Regards,Joe :-wavehttp://home.attbi.com/~jranos/mysig.jpg http://avsim.com/hangar/air/bfu/logo70.gif

[gosta 0]

Well, in Britain (or Germany), for example, education isn't controlled by the central government either. It's in the hands of local authorities (federal states in Germany). The LEA opt-out scheme in Britain was not imposed on any authority by the central government. The fun part is in the way the money is distributed. Children who are sent to independent schools do not attend the LEA funded schools. The LEA schools receive their funding based on the number of pupils they have. As your kids are now at independent school, the LEA school gets less. Suddenly the LEA has more money to spend. In comes the central government that says: Wow, look how well you're doing, let's cut your budget, and give a nice tax cut to all the people. And the public education system goes down the drain.If your public school district keeps on receiving the same amount of tax money as it is now (adjusted for RPI), then the scheme could work. But having seen similar initiatives before, I feel the school district's budget is going to be cut somewhere down the line as a result of this.Cheers,Gosta.

[Sonar5 3]

Again,I have to object to your analogies. This topic is on educational vouchers upheld by The Supreme Court of The United States, and not about Germany or The UK, or any other countries. Comparisons on this issue are neither relevant nor appropriate considering the context at hand.Please keep the topic in line with my original thread considering United States law on this issue.I Thank You as I have no desire to hop around the world learning other educational systems or laws, when the topic does not concern those programs.Regards,Joe :-wave.http://home.attbi.com/~jranos/mysig.jpg http://avsim.com/hangar/air/bfu/logo70.gif

[gosta 0]

>Again, >>I have to object to your analogies. This topic is on >educational vouchers upheld by The Supreme Court of The >United States, and not about Germany or The UK, or any other >countries. I am aware of that - I believe it is mentioned in the topic of the thread. However, in your earlier post you said:'In many large districts like Chicago, there are magnet schools which students get an opportunity to attend if they are lucky enough to get in.What I see happenning is many more of these types of schools will be opened where financing them was an issue in the past.This will open up the opportunity for students and parents to finally have an alternative to the public school system where they may not have been eligible before because of financial circumstances.If you take my analogy as a possibility, I am optimistic that this will be the result.I love education and wish a quality education for every CITIZEN, (not illegal alien) in this country. And especially in economically depressed areas.'Would it not be interesting to see, why this has not happened in places where similar schemes to the voucher ones in the US have operated for quite some time now?A vital part of education is the ability to learn from others' mistakes.Cheers,Gosta.

[Sonar5 3]

You said:"Would it not be interesting to see, why this has not happened in places where similar schemes to the voucher ones in the US have operated for quite some time now?"Honestly it would not, because you have to do a comparison of all 50 states individually with each system since we are a states rights republic.You would have to compare and contrast the Laws of Illinois, California, Texas, etc... individually with Germany, France, UK, etc...See my point.Each of our 50 states have different laws concerning education, as it is not a federal system.If the Supreme Court had ruled differently, it would not have adversly affected the program in Illinois. What it means is if someone objects to a similar program, the court would likely, but not a guarantee, would strike down the objection.The force of that ruling is not necessarily the ruling, but the fact that is sets a precedence for other lawsuits to depend on.I apologize as this is a very complicated subject for those not familiar with the United States form of Government. Regards,Joe :-wavehttp://home.attbi.com/~jranos/mysig.jpg http://avsim.com/hangar/air/bfu/logo70.gif

[Guest]

Well I thought I'd give my response a day or two since I didn't want to be hasty with its content. So, I've spent the past two days reading the few threads you have posted to.All I can say is: I find it amazing that anyone responds to you at all Joe. I find your tone and intent to be in the worst taste in many of the messages you've posted over the past few days. Not only do you laugh at others at any opportunity, but you are outright rude and talk down to even some of those who's positions are similar to yours.To those whom you disagree, you treat like utter waste product. You wrap your ideas and your "facts" in speech that attempts to demean both them and their ideas in any way possible. Your attack strategy is full of references to the stupidity of those whom your current focus is upon and the superiority of your own "learning". You wrap what might otherwise be good points within cocoons of complete disdain for your current "opponent". These thinly veiled tactics seem designed to muddle the issues you argue into personal confrontations with your targets.And to make it worse, I see no reason for you doing any of the above. You actually present some valid arguments that might otherwise influence the opinions of those who disagree with you. These discussions the past few day have been highly interesting topics... My opinions on them have been influenced somewhat away from their original form from the likes of posts by lawyerpilot, Braun and Rich. Yours on the other hand make any gains in that area hard to keep.I indeed had you pegged wrong before these past few days. And its sad really, because I held respect for your opinions in the past. Some of your arguments are indeed well formed and wholly valid: but their presentation ruins any influence they might contain - at least upon me.And so I leave you to your own. And wish you well in the future in all your endeavors.Take care,Elrond

[Sonar5 3]

Good Morning Elrond,Please read this entire post. Thanks :-)Yes, I have a different tone when it comes to defending untruths about my country, The United States of America.My dimeanor is quite different in the MSFS, FLY, BUSH, Or Screenshot forums.I hope you can discern the difference. I am extrememly proud of my nations achievments and our history.But I will not idly stand by and let untruths go by.If I treat them the way I do with my words, it may be because I detest others posting untruths, commenting about things they have not even bothered researching, and rarely acknowledging their mistakes.I always, and I mean Always apologize in a gentlemanly manner when I am incorrect. It's called integrity.My arguments are valid, truthful, and I will not apologize for stating them. If someone does not like my tone. That is ok with me, they can CHOOSE to not read my posts and not respond. You yourself, entered this thread not by attacking the topic at hand but by choosing to opine on my choice of words.You felt the need to do that, and I am wondering myself about that. I have seen threads from even you that I did not agree with how they were phrased, yet I wouldn't respond the way you did to me out of respect.Elrond, My response to you was based on your address to me which really had nothing to do with the topic at hand.So often, I will not comment on any other country or form of government unless promted in defense because of out of hand unfactual comments.On occasion, I will even make a comment I should not have. One that no one else picked up on was my UN Kofi A. comment. I apologize as I should not have made that comment in that context. And you know what. That is what I am all about.My Integrity.I am no better than anyone else, no smarter, no richer, but I do proper factual research in my debates and the words I use are purposeful to drive home the point so that it will entice others to do their own research on topics to verify everything I say.I do this by posting relevant links to my facts and research. A fact is a fact. Period.You see, I am going to share with you what my view of this world is.**************************************The United States of America is, IMHO, fighting a War for its very right to exist. The attacks on my country are very subtle at times and add up to form untruths about my country.All one has to do is compare the pledge topic. If I were to ask others in different countries about whether or not, my laws REQUIRED citizens to say the pledge. I would bet that the majority would say we are required. I could be wrong, but prior to Wednesday, I would say the odds are with me.That is one small analogy. The Japanese were told on Okinawa and the Mainland in WWII that if captured, we would rape all their women, and eat them. This led to many deaths on the island of Okinawa by suicidal Japanese Citizens.Education, IMHO, is the key to society and the future of civilization. Yet children are being taught that The United States is evil.After WWII, we helped to rebuild the countries that initially attacked us. That is our history, yet others desire to bring us down.I have no desire for this Earth to become one country, but we can all still live in peace. I do not believe the United Nations is the answer, yet they do some very good things. We give the United nations more money than any other country. We donate more money around the world to charities and developing countries than any other country.Yet, others wish to bring us down.So when I see an attack on the very fabric of my government, I will not mince words, I will go defensive as is my privledge. the reason I am right is this. If someone states an untruth, and it is allowed to float on this forum or any other, then many read it and start to believe.The classic example is the book in France where the Author states an Aircraft never hit the pentagon. There are those who now beleive that an airplane never hit the Pentagon. That is absurd, yet allowed to propulgate.My country takes the brunt of many of the attacks on western civilization. We are the target of first choice, but we will be the victor of freedom in the end, God Willing.I am willing to give my life to defend that freedom, which I wish and pray for all people on this good Earth.If I have offended you with my words, Elrond, I am deeply sorry, and I pray you will see it in your heart to forgive me.But I will never apologize for the defense of the truth as it relates to my country, The United States of America.May God Bless You,Joe Ranos

[Guest]

Also, Schools in Michigan are funded on a per pupil basis. Schools get a fixed dollar amount per pupil (currently something like $6000 per head) so they already have to compete for students.Your first sentence I liked. I liked your 2nd sentence up until 'competing'.Schools competing for $ is complete non-sense. It's wrong. It should be illegal. IMO, they aren't acting in the best interest of the student.For the longest time, I always thought schools wanted pupils to show up so they could get a better education; that is more-and-more turning out to be not the case. Schools are wanting their pupils to show up because, at least here in AZ, pupils cannot miss more than X days per semester (13 or 14 in AZ) if the school can get the per/student allowance from the state.What schools *should* be competing for is giving students a better education, not for free money. Vouchers are an avenue to that. Catholic schools have a *much* smaller budget than their public counterparts, but look at the graduation rates and proceed-to-college rates they produce. I think there is something to be said for that.For once, my Uncle Sam is realizing that dumping huge amounts of $$ on a problem doesn't always solve the problem. It's called being financially responsible, and Uncle Sam has just got an A in Financial Responsibility 101.marco