Which is preferable: Secular Education or Theocracy?

reply to post by adjensen


OK then let me ask you this. What will stop people from doing the same thing as people are already doing when given the choice to attend the schools they want?

With a voucher you give them the choice..right? That is what you advocate.

Why would they not do what is already happening?

reply to post by Grimpachi


Again, you're not making any sense with this comparison.

For university, people have three choices:

1) Don't go
2) Go to a public institution, which is generally less expensive
3) Go to a private institution, which is generally more expensive

For K-12, people have two choices:

1) Go to public school, which is free
2) Go to private school, which costs money

How are these the same thing, and why do you keep ignoring the fact that an open market for education would invariably result in better schools? You're so hung up on your opinion that people will ignore quality in favour of segregation that you're throwing out the baby with the bathwater.

Again, my suggested choices for people to opt from:

1) Go to public school, which is free
2) Go to private school, which is free

If the public school is better, most rational people will send their kids there.

It's possible I am just not understanding this voucher system properly....
How is it economically viable? Would it be economically discriminating? I think those are the most important points I can't wrap my head around now. Also, it kinda seems like another system that only takes urban environments into consideration. I could be wrong, maybe someone can explain it to me.

Most people I know, even if they got back the money they paid toward school taxes to spend anywhere they want, would still not be able to afford any of the private schools. How does the voucher system address that for example? Also, where does all the start up cash for all the new schools come from? These are the kinds of things I just can't understand for a start.

wildtimes
reply to post by OptimusSubprime

 

Why are you presenting an "either/or" scenario? Why can't we have the liberty to choose what is best for ourselves and our children and leave each other alone?

We should, we do, and we can. I'm asking what Christian would-be Theocrats find wrong with Progressive thinking; how they got the impression they did, and what they think the "Progressives" are trying to do!

Well, I think that you are generalizing a little. I would say that there are more Christians than not who aren't "Theocrats". Having said that, I can only speak for myself, but my problem with Progressivism is that Progressive ideology has replaced God with government. I can't help but wonder why Progressives refer to their ideology as "progress". Our society as a whole has decayed, or REGRESSED morally at an alarming rate since Progressivism came on to the scene in the early 20th century. Since Woodrow Wilson we have seen more government and less God. That is my problem in a nut shell. You see, you feel that you don't want God forced down your throat, and I feel that I don't want government forced down my throat. There is a happy medium somewhere, but Progressives refuse to live in that happy medium because their ultimate goal is not progress at all.. it is complete control over the population, and in my opinion that is, well, for lack of a better word... satanic.

reply to post by adjensen


You know I really cant tell if you do not understand or if you are just trying to avoid the question.

Let me try to break it down to a very simple explanation then I will ask again.

You advocate changing the system from what it is today where the 2 choices exist. One choice if free i.e. public the other is paid by those who go to that school i.e. private. You would change it to where a voucher(the money that would have gone to public i.e. free) would then pay for the families choice of school i.e. private.


Question: what stops people from self segregating just like they already do with college?

reply to post by Grimpachi

Question: what stops people from self segregating just like they already do with college?

I don't see how you've proven that people "self segregate" in college -- you cited an article from 1995, which related to only one part of the country and failed to provide any evidence that "free choice" is what resulted in the findings of that article. To directly answer your question, nothing prevents people self-segregating, but there is no evidence that that's what would happen.

No, I don't see "white high schools" as being the inevitable outcome of vouchers and allowing everyone free choice in where and how their children are educated.

Question: do you think that your policy of forcing people to send their children to public schools results in better schools and a better educated society?

We send kids to school to learn, not to be culturally indoctrinated, and it seems like that's your only motive here.

reply to post by TKDRL


A voucher system would establish that education is a commodity, and if you pay taxes, you are entitled to the education of your choice.

As it works today, the property taxes of the entire community are pooled, and anyone who lives in that community is entitled to send their kids to public school in that community at no charge. If a person wants to send their student to a private school, they still have to pay those taxes, but on top of that, they have to pay tuition at the private school (which is $3,000 a year at my local Catholic school, for example.)

Optimally, the voucher would be the equivalent of one year's tuition at the school of your choice, but that's probably unrealistic, and a more likely approach would be a credit of your property taxes that normally go to the public school -- the school doesn't get your money (since your kid isn't going there) and your tuition at the private school is subsidized for that amount instead.

reply to post by adjensen


So it would basically only help out the well off people. And leave the poor people in the dust like they already are, only with even less funding for the already supposedly underfunded schools.

reply to post by adjensen

I don't see how you've proven that people "self segregate" in college -- you cited an article from 1995, which related to only one part of the country and failed to provide any evidence that "free choice" is what resulted in the findings of that article. To directly answer your question, nothing prevents people self-segregating, but there is no evidence that that's what would happen.

I live in the real world you say there is no evidence. What is your explanation for these?

Historically black colleges and universities

Do you have any idea why there is not an over segregated white university basis? You should look into it. It has to do with government interference.

No, I don't see "white high schools" as being the inevitable outcome of vouchers and allowing everyone free choice in where and how their children are educated.

You are naive then. There would also be black, Hispanic, and ...well I already said all of this before to you.

Question: do you think that your policy of forcing people to send their children to public schools results in better schools and a better educated society?

Absolutly not. That would be horrible forcing people to send children to public school.

What country is that happening in I can tell you it isn't in the US.

We send kids to school to learn, not to be culturally indoctrinated,

Agreed so why are you for it?

and it seems like that's your only motive here.

Just the opposite. I am against indoctrination whether it is religious cultural or bi cultural. A voucher system would encourage indoctrination of all those things. How can you be so blind to it.

reply to post by TKDRL

So it would basically only help out the well off people. And leave the poor people in the dust like they already are, only with even less funding for the already supposedly underfunded schools.

What?

No, it would be exactly the opposite. The current system discriminates against poor people, because they are forced to accept whatever is offered in the local public school, while the wealthy can take their kids out of those crappy schools and put them in better private schools.

How on earth do you conclude that a voucher system would hurt the poor? They would have the exact same opportunity to put their kids in a better school.

reply to post by Grimpachi

What is your explanation for these? Historically black colleges and universities

Again, what does that have to do with vouchers?

Absolutly not. That would be horrible forcing people to send children to public school.

That is what you're advocating by saying that people sending their kids to private schools results in segregation. If you're advocating the status quo, you're saying that it is okay for wealthy people to put their kids in better schools, and it is not okay for poor people to put their kids in better schools.

But you ducked the question -- do better schools result from an open market, as I suggest?

reply to post by adjensen


How do you figure? Last I checked, poor people don't own homes, so they don't pay property taxes, so they would get no voucher at all? People with larger homes, would get larger vouchers, people with multiple homes would get multiple vouchers, so it would really only be compounding the inequality even more. Unless I am still not understanding the concept here lol.

reply to post by TKDRL


Good point.

However, they indirectly pay property taxes if they rent, so it could be sorted out. And it speaks to my point that education is a commodity, so a "one year's education" voucher would be preferable.

wildtimes
I am sick and tired of the Rightwingers demonizing and vilifying "Progressives." So, my question is to you "God-fearing believers" -
what is it you think the "Progressives" are trying to do??

What is it you want the country to look like? And WHY? If you could wake up tomorrow morning and everything was, in your opinion, finally perfect - what would the day be like for you? For your children? Your family?

It feels as though you consider "Progressives" THE ENEMY - and I don't understand why anyone wants a stagnant or "regressive" society.

We need to make PROGRESS. Have any of you even really LOOKED at the Progressive Movement's various organizations, movers and shakers, platforms, etc? If so, what 'outlet(s)' did/do you use to make your assessment? What is your fundamental problem with a secular society that allows religious options (pro, con, neutral)? Not Glenn Beck's, or Pat Robertson's, or Rush Limbaugh's, or Fox News's. What is YOUR personal, fundamental problem with Progress?

Education toward adult achievement and life skills does NOT need to include "God." It is maths, science, history (whether or not history is "accurate" is a fine subject), social studies, civics, classical philosophy, literature, reading and writing, and whatever "tech" is deemed most important that should be taught in schools.

I realize I'm opening myself up to bunches of ridicule, backlash, and preaching here. So, I would ask that each respondent come to the table with a clearly formed, calm opinion based on the following premises:

Morals do not come from "religion".

No one "religion" is the "only, true, correct one."

Children do best in life when allowed to make up their own minds based on KNOWLEDGE of all options, and CRITICAL THINKING.

Progressivism is NOT communism.

So - what do you all think would improve if the entire country became a Theocracy?

edit on 1/28/14 by wildtimes because: (no reason given)

How about morals, and values, and ethics.

Right now, religion is the only ideology that teaches that. Common Core doesn't. The public school system doesn't.

reply to post by adjensen


So basically, if I have a kid, I get one voucher for one year school. I can redeem said voucher at any school within reasonable distance. Is that the idea? I think for that to happen, the whole thing would have to be reformed from the bottom up. I can't see any prep school allowing the riffraff in without being forced to do so. They would be hiring lawyers to find any loophole they could, requiring uniforms that cost absurd amounts of money for example.

adjensen
reply to post by Grimpachi

 

You said.

To directly answer your question, nothing prevents people self-segregating, but there is no evidence that that's what would happen.

I answered.

What is your explanation for these? Historically black colleges and universities

Again, what does that have to do with vouchers?

Duh. I have been telling you that all this time. They would segregate with a voucher program Stop going in circles.

That is what you're advocating by saying that people sending their kids to private schools results in segregation.

YES. Now you are getting it.

you're saying that it is okay for wealthy people to put their kids in better schools,

Explain what part of a voucher system will stop or change that?

and it is not okay for poor people to put their kids in better schools.

Are you saying poor people have not put their kids in better schools? Where is the evidence that a voucher system leads to better schools. I believe it would lead to worse schools I have already outlined why that would be based off of monitary reasons. Go back and read I have explained that to you before.

But you ducked the question -- do better schools result from an open market, as I suggest?

Actualy I have answered you just were not paying attention. This post.

I do not believe a voucher system leads to better schools. If you believe otherwise show me the evidence for such.

reply to post by TKDRL


So your theory is that it won't work because you have a fantasy that it won't?

I'll ask you the same question that I asked Grimpachi -- do you think that an open market for education, as opposed to the current model, which forces everyone but the wealthy to send their kids to public schools, would not result in better schools and teaching methods?

reply to post by adjensen


It's not a fantasy, you can see it in reality. Rich people like their private riffraff free prep schools, and country clubs etc. Do you really think they would not fight to keep it that way?

As for your question, I still fail to see where the capital is going to come from to build all these new schools. And where the capital is going to come from to hire people to work in them before they start making a profit. I am not sure if it would work or not, in theory free market is great. In the real world, there is no such thing as a free market.

beezzer

wildtimes
I am sick and tired of the Rightwingers demonizing and vilifying "Progressives." So, my question is to you "God-fearing believers" -
what is it you think the "Progressives" are trying to do??

What is it you want the country to look like? And WHY? If you could wake up tomorrow morning and everything was, in your opinion, finally perfect - what would the day be like for you? For your children? Your family?

It feels as though you consider "Progressives" THE ENEMY - and I don't understand why anyone wants a stagnant or "regressive" society.

We need to make PROGRESS. Have any of you even really LOOKED at the Progressive Movement's various organizations, movers and shakers, platforms, etc? If so, what 'outlet(s)' did/do you use to make your assessment? What is your fundamental problem with a secular society that allows religious options (pro, con, neutral)? Not Glenn Beck's, or Pat Robertson's, or Rush Limbaugh's, or Fox News's. What is YOUR personal, fundamental problem with Progress?

Education toward adult achievement and life skills does NOT need to include "God." It is maths, science, history (whether or not history is "accurate" is a fine subject), social studies, civics, classical philosophy, literature, reading and writing, and whatever "tech" is deemed most important that should be taught in schools.

I realize I'm opening myself up to bunches of ridicule, backlash, and preaching here. So, I would ask that each respondent come to the table with a clearly formed, calm opinion based on the following premises:

Morals do not come from "religion".

No one "religion" is the "only, true, correct one."

Children do best in life when allowed to make up their own minds based on KNOWLEDGE of all options, and CRITICAL THINKING.

Progressivism is NOT communism.

So - what do you all think would improve if the entire country became a Theocracy?

edit on 1/28/14 by wildtimes because: (no reason given)

How about morals, and values, and ethics.

Right now, religion is the only ideology that teaches that. Common Core doesn't. The public school system doesn't.

Beezer that has got to be the biggest load of crap you have written. I generally like your posts. Lately though it seems like someone hacked your account.

Killing, raping and looting have been common practices in religious societies, and often carried out with clerical sanction. The catalogue of notorious barbarities – wars and massacres, acts of terrorism, the Inquisition, the Crusades, the chopping off of thieves’ hands, the slicing off of clitorises and labia majora, the use of gang rape as punishment, and manifold other savageries committed in the name of one faith or another — attests to religion’s longstanding propensity to induce barbarity, or at the very least to give it free rein. The Bible and the Quran have served to justify these atrocities and more, with women and gay people suffering disproportionately. There is a reason the Middle Ages in Europe were long referred to as the Dark Ages; the millennium of theocratic rule that ended only with the Renaissance (that is, with Europe’s turn away from God toward humankind) was a violent time.

Morality arises out of our innate desire for safety, stability and order, without which no society can function; basic moral precepts (that murder and theft are wrong, for example) antedated religion. Those who abstain from crime solely because they fear divine wrath, and not because they recognize the difference between right and wrong, are not to be lauded, much less trusted. Just which practices are moral at a given time must be a matter of rational debate. The “master-slave” ethos – obligatory obeisance to a deity — pervading the revealed religions is inimical to such debate. We need to chart our moral course as equals, or there can be no justice.

TKDRL
reply to post by adjensen

 

It's not a fantasy, you can see it in reality. Rich people like their private riffraff free prep schools, and country clubs etc. Do you really think they would not fight to keep it that way?

We aren't talking about "prep schools", we're talking about public versus parochial schools.

No, Catholic schools would not reject someone because they aren't wearing a Lacoste shirt.