Florida Appeals Court Strikes Down School Vouchers

Larry Hewitt wrote:

> "Chris Dalland" <cdalland.RemoveThis@cfl.rr.com> wrote in message
> news:xREAd.155195$8G4.5463@tornado.tampabay.rr.com...
>
>>>those without kids are the ones paying most of the
>>>taxes.
>>>
>>
>>How is that???
>
>
> Assuming you work for 47 years (18 to 65), only about half of that time ---
> or less - are you the parent of a school-aged child. This time is also early
> in the parent's career, and salaries increase with time, so parents tend to
> earn a lot more once their kids are out of school. That is, people earn a
> whole lot more - and pay a whole lot more in taxes - in the second half of
> their career than in the first. Take into consideration that parents pay a
> whole lot less in taxes (extra deductions) . Now throw in adults that never
> had children and it is apparent that parents of kids in school pay less
> towards their education than adults without kids in school.
>
> larry

You're exaggerating the degree to which this occurs by assuming that
school expenses are paid for primarily through income taxes -- however
in many, if not most, places, property taxes are the primary source of
school taxes. Those with kids who own homes pay just as much in the way
of property taxes as do those owning comparable homes who don't have kids.

Obviously, though, the main point is about people helping pay for the
cost of educating kids that are not theirs. Since we don't just make all
parents pay out of their own pocket to educate their own kids, people
without kids help finance the costs of educating other peoples' kids.
Does that strike you as some kind of injustice? Or just a poor
investment?
 >> Stay informed about: Florida Appeals Court Strikes Down School Vouchers 

"Larry Hewitt" <larryhewi.DeleteThis@comporium.net> wrote in message
news:cqvd2u$4lcv$1@news3.infoave.net...
>
> "Chris Dalland" <cdalland.DeleteThis@cfl.rr.com> wrote in message
> news:xREAd.155195$8G4.5463@tornado.tampabay.rr.com...
>> > those without kids are the ones paying most of the
>> > taxes.
>> >
>> How is that???
>
> Assuming you work for 47 years (18 to 65), only about half of that
> time ---
> or less - are you the parent of a school-aged child. This time is also
> early
> in the parent's career, and salaries increase with time, so parents tend
> to
> earn a lot more once their kids are out of school. That is, people earn a
> whole lot more - and pay a whole lot more in taxes - in the second half of
> their career than in the first. Take into consideration that parents pay a
> whole lot less in taxes (extra deductions) . Now throw in adults that
> never
> had children and it is apparent that parents of kids in school pay less
> towards their education than adults without kids in school.
>
> larry
>
>


Whoa Larry. In California, there is a tax ceiling known as Prop. 13. It says
in a nutshell that property taxes do not increase over time. So, a guy buys
a house and raises a family. Assuming he continues to live in that house,
his taxes remain flat and the increases are very small. By the time his kids
are finished with school, he is still paying the same tax on his home, but
the new neighbor that is now struggling to raise a new family has a
significantly higher tax basis, and pays WAY more, very often more than
double, the tax that the old guy that is done raising his family. So, while
the old guy does make more money by this time, he pays less tax.

And, everybody in a society benefits from educated children. Even if the
children are educated in religion at the direction of their parents.
 >> Stay informed about: Florida Appeals Court Strikes Down School Vouchers 

"johnebravo836" <johnebravo836 RemoveThis @yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:33gs5iF40lph4U1@individual.net...
>
>
> Larry Hewitt wrote:
>
> > "Chris Dalland" <cdalland RemoveThis @cfl.rr.com> wrote in message
> > news:xREAd.155195$8G4.5463@tornado.tampabay.rr.com...
> >
> >>>those without kids are the ones paying most of the
> >>>taxes.
> >>>
> >>
> >>How is that???
> >
> >
> > Assuming you work for 47 years (18 to 65), only about half of that
time ---
> > or less - are you the parent of a school-aged child. This time is also
early
> > in the parent's career, and salaries increase with time, so parents tend
to
> > earn a lot more once their kids are out of school. That is, people earn
a
> > whole lot more - and pay a whole lot more in taxes - in the second half
of
> > their career than in the first. Take into consideration that parents pay
a
> > whole lot less in taxes (extra deductions) . Now throw in adults that
never
> > had children and it is apparent that parents of kids in school pay less
> > towards their education than adults without kids in school.
> >
> > larry
>
> You're exaggerating the degree to which this occurs by assuming that
> school expenses are paid for primarily through income taxes -- however
> in many, if not most, places, property taxes are the primary source of
> school taxes. Those with kids who own homes pay just as much in the way
> of property taxes as do those owning comparable homes who don't have kids.
>

The same thing holds true for ALL taxes. Twenty-three year old parents tend
not to buy $450,000 houses. And around here - as in many states - property
taxes are paid on autos, boats, campers and such. Again, 23 year old parents
don;t tend to own a Caddy, a Winnebago, and a houseboat.

> Obviously, though, the main point is about people helping pay for the
> cost of educating kids that are not theirs. Since we don't just make all
> parents pay out of their own pocket to educate their own kids, people
> without kids help finance the costs of educating other peoples' kids.
> Does that strike you as some kind of injustice? Or just a poor
> investment?
>

Neither. It is part of the cost of being a member of this society. I owe my
position in life to the advances in technology and industry made possible by
the public school education of generations before me. I am merely passing
that benefit on.

Larry
 >> Stay informed about: Florida Appeals Court Strikes Down School Vouchers 

Dana wrote:
>
> buckeye-ELO DeleteThis @nospam.net wrote:
>
> > Dana <dana DeleteThis @255.255.255> wrote:
> >
> >>:|Bob LeChevalier wrote:
> >>
> >>> Dana <dana DeleteThis @255.255.255> wrote:
> >>>>This paragraph taking from the article that jailbird posted clearly
> >>>>shows that the bill does not violate the 1st Amendment.
> >>>
> >>> The Florida court ruled vouchers unconstitutional based on the
> >>> Florida Constitution and not the 1st amendment, so your claim is
> >>> not worth addressing.
> >>
> >>
> >>:|The federal Supreme Court has already ruled on this issue, and they
> >>:|said you are wrong. So once again a leftist court will be slapped for
> >>:|trying to legislate from the bench. The people of Florida and their
> >>:|legislature enacted this law, which does not in any form violate
> >>:|Florida state Constitution, nor does it even violate the Federal
> >>:|Constitution. And the claim I made here is valid, as the anti
> >>:|religion leftist bigots who are trying to change this law, are indeed
> >>:|using Separation of church and state as an issue. An issue the law in
> >>:|question does not violate, as it clearly states nobody can be forced
> >>:|to pray or forced to accept a paticular religious belief.
> >
> > FLORIDA CONSTITUTION
>
> And again jailbird. You have no idea of what you are posting.
> The federal Supreme Court has already ruled on this issue. And they will
> rule in favor of the Florida law, just as they have for the other
> states. Again your leftists courts trying to legislate from the bench
> will be bitch slapped like they deserve.

Do you live in Florida Toilet Boy?

RT
 >> Stay informed about: Florida Appeals Court Strikes Down School Vouchers 

"Jeff Strickland" <crwlr.DeleteThis@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:10t729rcjug2ve4@corp.supernews.com...
>
> "Larry Hewitt" <larryhewi.DeleteThis@comporium.net> wrote in message
> news:cqvd2u$4lcv$1@news3.infoave.net...
> >
> > "Chris Dalland" <cdalland.DeleteThis@cfl.rr.com> wrote in message
> > news:xREAd.155195$8G4.5463@tornado.tampabay.rr.com...
> >> > those without kids are the ones paying most of the
> >> > taxes.
> >> >
> >> How is that???
> >
> > Assuming you work for 47 years (18 to 65), only about half of that
> > time ---
> > or less - are you the parent of a school-aged child. This time is also
> > early
> > in the parent's career, and salaries increase with time, so parents tend
> > to
> > earn a lot more once their kids are out of school. That is, people earn
a
> > whole lot more - and pay a whole lot more in taxes - in the second half
of
> > their career than in the first. Take into consideration that parents pay
a
> > whole lot less in taxes (extra deductions) . Now throw in adults that
> > never
> > had children and it is apparent that parents of kids in school pay less
> > towards their education than adults without kids in school.
> >
> > larry
> >
> >
>
>
> Whoa Larry. In California, there is a tax ceiling known as Prop. 13. It
says
> in a nutshell that property taxes do not increase over time. So, a guy
buys
> a house and raises a family. Assuming he continues to live in that house,
> his taxes remain flat and the increases are very small.

Invald assumption - most people "move on up" as their family gorws and thier
affluence increases.

larry

By the time his kids
> are finished with school, he is still paying the same tax on his home, but
> the new neighbor that is now struggling to raise a new family has a
> significantly higher tax basis, and pays WAY more, very often more than
> double, the tax that the old guy that is done raising his family. So,
while
> the old guy does make more money by this time, he pays less tax.
>
> And, everybody in a society benefits from educated children. Even if the
> children are educated in religion at the direction of their parents.
>
>
>
 >> Stay informed about: Florida Appeals Court Strikes Down School Vouchers 

"Ron Baker, Pluralitas!" <oscar RemoveThis @bellsouth.net.pa> wrote:

>
>:|news:jde3t0h959vrj1ig6ssr3dkv9rp9sc3g2n@4ax.com...
>> "Ron Baker, Pluralitas!" <oscar RemoveThis @bellsouth.net.pa> wrote:
>>

>> >"Bob LeChevalier" <lojbab RemoveThis @lojban.org> wrote in message
>> >> do what you are talking about at the university level - hence the
>> >> recent case where government money in Washington state could pay for
>> >> other degrees but could not pay for a theology degree for a would-be
>> >> minister. But private religious schools generally advertise their
>> >> entire curriculum being "pervasively religious"; it isn't

>> "Ron Baker, Pluralitas!" <oscar RemoveThis @bellsouth.net.pa> wrote:
>> >:|Really? Can you support that?
>> >:|My non-Catholic friends who sent their daughter to
>> >a Catholic school would probably never have chosen
>> >:|one like you describe.

><buckeye-ELO RemoveThis @nospam.net> wrote in message
>> Yes I can and have but you seem to be in ignore mode now with regards to
>>my posts. Not uncommon when a person realizes they abe being blown out of
>>the water with facts vs their unsubstantiated opinions

>> But here. This would apply across the country in more cases then those you
>> might find or describe:
>>
>> The Participating Schools. There are 122 private schools in the city of
>> Milwaukee that would have been eligible to participate in the Amended
>> Choice Program during the 1995-96 school year. See Agreed Upon Statement
>:|of
>> Facts, 24. Of those, 89 are sectarian and 33 are nonsectarian. Id., 25.
>> Approximately 84 percent of the pupils who attended private schools
>> during the 1994-95 school year attended religious schools. Id., 26.
>>
>> The parties have provided the Court, as part of the Agreed Upon Statement
>> of Facts, the mission statements and other written materials prepared by
>> many of the religious schools that notified the Superintendent of Public
>> Instruction of their intent to participate in the Amended Choice Program
>> during the 1995-96 school year. Id., 27, Exhibit E. Those materials make
>> clear that religion is a pervasive part of each student's educational
>> experience at these schools. The participating schools announce
>> forthrightly that their mission is religious and that religious doctrine
>> will be instilled in their students:
>>
>> * "Oklahoma Avenue Lutheran School is an integral part of the ministry of
>> Oklahoma Avenue Lutheran Church." Exhibit E to Agreed Upon Statement of
>> Facts, p. 535.
>>
>> * "The mission of St. Leo and St. Rose Catholic schools is to share in the
>> parish evangelization effort through providing quality Catholic education
>> in grades pre-kindergarten through eight." Id. at 720.
>>
>> * "The continuing purpose of St. Matthew Ev. Lutheran Church and School is
>> to go and tell the pure Gospel of Jesus Christ for the conversion of
>> unbelievers and the strengthening of believers in faith and Christian
>> living." Id. at 750.
>>
>> * "St. Paul's Lutheran School exists to: -assist Parents in training
>> children in God's ways, teach God's Word to children, and -make disciples
>> of children." Id. at 790.
>>
>> * "We believe our school exists to carry out the Savior's command to 'go
>> and make disciples" (Matthew 28:19). Consequently, our school's primary
>> reason for existence is to be a tool for bringing young souls to faith in
>> Jesus...." Id. at 275 (Fairview Lutheran School).
>>
>> * "A prospective student whose parents are not members of a church will be
>> considered as mission prospects. Christ Lutheran Church/School considers
>:|it
>> a responsibility to teach the Word of God to those who have not heard this
>> blessed Word." Id. at 198.
>>
>> * "The objectives of the [Clara Muhammad School] are: 1. To foster within
>> each student the principle of submissions to the will of Allah (God) as
>:|the
>> essential element in achieving human excellence." Id. at 227.
>>
>> * "Holy Redeemer Christian Academy is an integral part of the ministry of
>> Holy Redeemer Church of God in Christ." Id. at 399.
>>
>> * "As a Catholic high school, [Divine Savior Holy Angels High School] is
>> dedicated to promoting the beliefs and traditions of the Catholic Church."
>> Id. at 234.
>>
>> * "The Yeshiva Elementary School of Milwaukee was initiated by members of
>> the Orthodox Jewish Community with the following objectives as their
>:|goals:
>>
>> To teach elementary school children Torah and Mitzvos in accordance with
>> the ideals and aspirations of Torah as espoused by the G'Dolei Yisroel in
>> order to provide the excellence in Orthodox Jewish Education which will
>> prepare our children to attend the finest seminaries, Yeshivas and
>> institutions of Jewish higher learning. " Id. at 966.
>>
>> * "The function of St. Bemadette Day School is to provide for Christian
>> individuals opportunities for growth in faith, for formation, for
>> development." Id. at 614.
>>
>> * "First and foremost Garden Homes Lutheran Church conducts and maintains
>a
>> Christian elementary school to assist Christian parents in the training an
>d
>> nurturing of their children in the Word of God." Id. at 316.
>>
>> As the schools' literature emphasizes, one of the primary means by which
>> these schools accomplish their religious missions is by integrating the
>> religious and secular aspects of the schools' educational programs.
>>
>> * "In keeping with the purpose of our school, our curriculum is taught in
>> the setting of God's Word. Religion is not only taught as a subject, but
>> our teachers have been trained to integrate God's Word across the
>> curriculum. ... Our curriculum offerings place Christ as the focal point
>> for all study," Id. at 414, 417 (The Lutheran Chapel of The Cross Church
>> and
>> School) .
>>
>> * "Each class is taught by a dedicated Christian teacher who believes in
>> Biblical concepts of salvation. Teachers strive to build into the
>> curriculum a philosophy of Christian living that includes moral and
>> spiritual values." Id. at 471 (Milwaukee Junior Academy (Seventh-day
>> Adventist)).
>>
>> * "Emmaus Lutheran Church and School is a Christian institution, NOT a
>> private school. The Holy Gospel is the center of our curriculum." Id. at
>> 259." "[Elverything that confronts the child in the educational program
>> offered by St. Matthew Ev. Lutheran School will be presented in the light
>> of His inspired, inerrant word of truth and power." Id. at 750.
>>
>> * "The children will be thoroughly trained in the fundamental subject
>:|areas
>> needed for a successful life here on this earth. It is our aim that these
>> subjects be taught in accordance to Scripture and that all things related
>> to the children's educational life be permeated with God's
>> Word." Id. at 792 (St. Paul's Lutheran School).
>>
>> * "Christian teachings are fostered in all classes, but especially in the
>> religion program." Id. at 106 (All Saints Catholic Elementary School).
>>
>> * At St. Veronica Catholic Elementary School, "Christian-Centered
>> Education" means "Integrating Catholic faith in all academic areas." Id.
>:|at
>> 841.
>>
>> * "The students of St. Alexander's are not only taught the basic truths of
>> their religion; they are also exposed to the Christian attitudes and
>> ideologies which pervade their school environment." Id. at 553.
>>
>> * "The message of Jesus is taught in religion classes and other curricular
>> areas. ... Because of the nature of a Catholic school, religion is taught
>> daily as part of the curriculum. Catholic values are also incorporated
>:|into
>> all other aspects of the curriculum." Id. at 614, 617 ( St.Bernadette
>> School).
>>
>> * "The Bible forms the core and center upon which all instruction is
>:|based.
>> Each day is opened with a devotion followed by instruction in Christian
>> doctrine and Bible study. Our school gives due instruction in all branches
>> of academics, which are required by the State of Wisconsin. All subjects
>> are taught by a Christian teacher in the light of God's Word,
>> emphasizing God's love for all men through Jesus." Id. at 131 (Bethlehem
>> Lutheran School).
>>
>> * "All subject areas in our school are Christ-centered," Id. at 323
>(Gospel
>> Lutheran School).
>>
>> * "We Believe...that the Christian School, where every subject is taught
>> from the Christian point of view, related to the teachings of Christianity
>> and permeated with the spirit of Christianity, can be more successful in
>> leading children to a vital Christian life than any other agency, except
>> the Christian home." Id. at 534 (Oklahoma Avenue Lutheran School).
>>
>> * "We teach all the traditional subjects, but we teach them
>> differently--from a Christian perspective." Id. at 526 (Mount Olive
>> Lutheran School).
>
>:|You pasted that from the ACLU suit against Milwaukee.

Your point, if you have one?

Both sides stipulated that the above was true, accurate and valid.
Therefore, legally speaking it is valid, true and accurate.

>:|The US Supreme Court decided in favor of the city.

False.
The Milwaukee case was rejected by the USSC. Perhaps because it was
tainted.

>:|They said the Amended Choice Program did not voilate
>:|establishment because it treated all religions equally, secular
>:|schools were available, and parents had a fair choice.

A extremely political and conservative USSC ruled that the voucher scam
ooops, scheme in Cleveland passed muster by a 5-4 vote. Hardly a ringing
endorsement of vouchers.

I suggest you get a handle on exactly what that means, and I further
suggest you get a handle on the fact the there are previous USSC rulings
pertaining to vouchers that still stand, Nyquist being one and what that
can mean for vouchers overall.

I would then recommend that you try and grasp the effect that Locke v Davey
has with regards to vouchers in general and what effect , if any, Locke v
Davey may have on the Cleveland ruling. Does it weaken it, leave it the
same or strengthen it?

Next try to understand that the USSC ruing did not require states to have
vouchers, nor did it overturn the 37 or so state constitutions that forbid
vouchers in those states.

Finally explain why State and Federal courts continue to shoot down various
voucher scams, oooops schemes because they violate the Establishment
Clause.
 >> Stay informed about: Florida Appeals Court Strikes Down School Vouchers 

"Jeff Strickland" <crwlr.DeleteThis@yahoo.com> wrote:
>"Bob LeChevalier" <lojbab.DeleteThis@lojban.org> wrote in message
>news:kc56t09j9sfprlh3q6c1umu3uaj1e8dkj1@4ax.com...
>> "Jeff Strickland" <spamcatcher.DeleteThis@yahoo.net> wrote:
>>>> Yes, I've changed my mind on that.
>>>> I'm in favor of a straight voucher system.
>>>> The complete prohibition of transfering funds to sectarian
>>>> entities is voided.
>>>> The schools system gives the parents vouchers, the parents
>>>> give the voucher the to the school, the school trades the voucher
>>>> for money from the keeper of the funds.
>>>
>>>That's the way I look at it as well. The government money flows to the
>>>parents, who in turn direct where it is used.
>>
>> That is not what he said. The government money flows from the "keeper
>> of the funds" (the government agency administering vouchers) and the
>> school.
>
>Come on Bob! You must be a product of public education! It is exactly what
>he said, and nothing like what you said.

What part of "the school trades the voucher for money from the keeper
of the funds" do you not understand? That is the only mention of
money in his paragraph, and the money is going from the government to
the school. The parents see *nothing* except the voucher, and they
might not even see that, since the "voucher" might be nothing more
than their identification on a list of those allowed to enroll in an
alternate school which can get reimbursed for proof of that
enrollment.

The voucher is not money itself, any more than the coupons you get
every week in the mail are money (a voucher is something like a
coupon; indeed, I got an ad from the local Toyota dealer with a
"voucher" good for $500 in purchasing the Toyota of my choice when
taken to that dealer).

lojbab
--
lojbab lojbab.DeleteThis@lojban.org
Bob LeChevalier, Founder, The Logical Language Group
(Opinions are my own; I do not speak for the organization.)
Artificial language Loglan/Lojban: http://www.lojban.org
 >> Stay informed about: Florida Appeals Court Strikes Down School Vouchers 

"Jeff Strickland" <crwlr.RemoveThis@yahoo.com> wrote:
>And, everybody in a society benefits from educated children. Even if the
>children are educated in religion at the direction of their parents.

No one else benefits from a child educated in religion, other than the
church of that religion (and arguably the child for those who think
that religion is something worth having).

lojbab
--
lojbab lojbab.RemoveThis@lojban.org
Bob LeChevalier, Founder, The Logical Language Group
(Opinions are my own; I do not speak for the organization.)
Artificial language Loglan/Lojban: http://www.lojban.org
 >> Stay informed about: Florida Appeals Court Strikes Down School Vouchers 

"Jeff Strickland" <crwlr DeleteThis @yahoo.com> wrote:
>"Bob LeChevalier" <lojbab DeleteThis @lojban.org> wrote in message
>news:bt56t0lji86g6hqt70jj5pef3t6jkr7l9j@4ax.com...
>> "Ron Baker, Pluralitas!" <oscar DeleteThis @bellsouth.net.pa> wrote:
>>>How is school choice selfish?
>>
>> Parents are selfish for their own interests and those of their kids
>> (as they perceive them). The state is charged with protecting the
>> interests of the citizenry at large. Those without kids in school
>> have substantially different priorities for education than those with
>> kids in school, and those without kids are the ones paying most of the
>> taxes.
>
>You are so completely and totally full of shit! Nobody has a greater
>interest in the education of a child than the child's own parents, crappy
>parents notwithstanding.

I said nothing about "greater". I said "different priorities". The
businessman down the street gains NOTHING from your kid being educated
in religion; he does potentially gain by your kid being educated in
marketable skills and the responsibilities of citizenship in our
nation.

lojbab
--
lojbab lojbab DeleteThis @lojban.org
Bob LeChevalier, Founder, The Logical Language Group
(Opinions are my own; I do not speak for the organization.)
Artificial language Loglan/Lojban: http://www.lojban.org
 >> Stay informed about: Florida Appeals Court Strikes Down School Vouchers 

"Ron Baker, Pluralitas!" <rbaker4 RemoveThis @msnn.com> wrote:

>:|buckeye-ELO@nospam.net wrote in
>:|news:f9a2t0lf6mcnc2vebfnkjcqridk3vkqh4e@4ax.com:
>
>> "Ron Baker, Pluralitas!" <oscar RemoveThis @bellsouth.net.pa> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>><buckeye0ELO RemoveThis @nospam.net> wrote in message
>>>:|news:akm0t056u5pf5mkp7f9vvvq91240iq765b@4ax.com...
>>>> "Ron Baker, Pluralitas!" <oscar RemoveThis @bellsouth.net.pa> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> >
>>>> ><buckeye0ELO RemoveThis @nospam.net> wrote in message
>>>> >:|news:a550t098nnpn5jn1ncudhtut1pm6l8i5i9@4ax.com...
>>>> >> CHURCH & STATE DECEMBER 2004 page 3 (243)
>>>> >> AU BULLETIN
>>>> >> http://www.au.org/site/PageServer?pagename=cs_2004_12
>>>> >> [EXCERPTS]
>>>> >>
>>>> >> Florida Appeals Court Strikes Down School Vouchers
>>>> >>
>>>> >> A state appeals court has struck down Florida's voucher
>>>> >> program,
>>>:|holding
>>>> >> that it clearly violates a provision of the Florida
>>>> >> Constitution by funneling tax money to religious schools.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> The 1st District Court of Appeal, sitting as a full panel en
>>>> >> bane,
>>>:|ruled
>>>> >> Nov. 12 that Gov. Jeb Bush's Florida Opportunity Scholarship
>>>> >> Program
>>>(OSP)
>>>> >> fails to pass constitutional muster.
>>>> >
>>>> >:|Interesting.
>>>> >
>>>> >I wonder what the consensus is on this here in a.a.
>>>> >
>>>> >:|Even though I am an atheist I think the separation argument
>>>> >:|to block vouchers is bogus. (I have some guesses about
>>>> >:|the real reasons behind the opposition.) With some minor
>>>> >:|regulations and controls I see no reason that religious schools
>>>> >:|should not be allowed to be part of the public education
>>>> >:|system.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> How well do you know American History, history or education in
>>>> this country, the function and purpose of religious schools, etc?
>>>
>>>I know it as well as they taught me in public school.
>>>
>>>I know George Carlin is a product of Catholic schools.
>>>
>>>I know people, very non-Catholic people, who sent their
>>>:|children to Catholic schools because they were better than
>>>:|the public schools.
>>>
>>>I know that Patrick Moynahan said that a school's proximity
>>>:|to the Canadian border is a better predictor of its quality
>>>:|that the amount of money spent per pupil.
>>>
>>>I know that the Chicago school system (an exception to the
>>>:|Moynahan observation) had one of the
>>>:|highest spendings per student when the federal government
>>>:|stepped in an took it over due to corruption and incompetence.
>>
>
>:|Switching to my other news reader because this didn't
>:|show up on my main one.
>
>> In other words you don't know much of anything on the subject.
>
>(I guess I can still handle this level of ad hom.)
>

Your posts indicate you don't know much about the topic. Label however you
wish to label it


>>
>> Let me give you some info on the topic
>>
>> First and foremost private schools are not much better if any better
>> than comparable public schools.
>
>:|That is not an argument against private schools.

Odd comment on your part.

>> Historically speaking there are two ways in which to establish a
>> religion and maintain that establishment. The school system and oath
>> for public office.
>>
>> The primary function of a private religious school is to produce the
>> next generation of believers of the parent religion, its dogma, tenets
>
>:|In as much as my father's primary function was to produce
>:|the next generation of believers.

Even odder comment on your part.
But one that firther demonstrates you don't know the tpoic very well.

The primary function of religious schools is to advaznce their religion to
the next generation. After all, unless a religion can get the state to
underwrite and support it, then it meends followers to support it.

The public support of religion violates the Establishment Clause.

Thus, your comment of church state separation argument being bogus is
false. It is far from beign bogys.

Thus your comment that religious schools should be paert of the public
school system would also violate the Establishment Clause.


>> etc. Thus their primary function is to teach religion, the religion of
>> the parent church/religion, etc. Oh yes, they teach secular things but
>> religion is also mixed into that as well.
>>
>> Regardless of your own personal feelings about church state arguments
>> being bogus, you are incorrect.
>
>:|An iron-clad assertion.
>

Factually shown. See above, see below


FOR STARTERS WITH MORE IN DEPTH INFORMATION:

ULTIMATE VOUCHER SERIES Updated PARTS I-IX

http://groups-beta.google.com/group/alt.politics.usa.constitution/brow...frm/thr
http://makeashorterlink.com/?L28F24C1A


79. A Bill for the More General Diffusion of Knowledge (1778)
http://members.tripod.com/~candst/jefflaw1.htm

80. A Bill for Amending the Constitution of the College of William and
Mary, and Substituting More Certain Revenues for Its Support (1779)
http://members.tripod.com/~candst/jefflaw2.htm

81. A Bill for Establishing a Public Library (1779)
http://members.tripod.com/~candst/jefflaw3.htm

A Bill Establishing a Provision for Teachers of the Christian Religion
(1784)
http://members.tripod.com/~candst/assessb.htm

James Madison's Memorial and Remonstrance (June,1785)
http://members.tripod.com/~candst/memorial.htm

Jefferson's Bill for Religious Freedom (Passed December, 1785)
http://members.tripod.com/~candst/statute.htm

Excerpts from James Madison's Detached Memoranda (written after 1817)
http://members.tripod.com/~candst/detach.htm

Issue Related Historical Data

Short General History of The Federal Government and Education
http://members.tripod.com/~candst/educ.htm

Historical Data Against "Vouchers"
http://members.tripod.com/~candst/vouchist.htm

>:|Dude, there are thousand if not tens of thousands of words in all that.
>:|Could you give more direct pointers or quotes of the parts
>:|that support your position?

Dude, that is a cop-out. One could read every word in everyone of those
URLs in a relative short period of time.

You suffer from a short attention span?
Perhaps you don't really want to know the facts, etc.

But here, try this:

* The Professor Marci A. Hamilton Series
http://members.tripod.com/~candst/hamilton.htm
The federalist Society For Law and Public Policy
Studies. Charitable Choice, Remarks of Professor Marci Hamilton
http://www.fed-soc.org/Publications/practicegroupnewsletters/PG%20Link...harchoi

* Why the Supreme Court's Recent Vouchers Opinion Was Wrong, and Also
Typical of the Court's Establishment Clause Approach
http://writ.news.findlaw.com/hamilton/20020701.html

* Churches, Children, and Government Money: How Faith-based Initiatives
And Vouchers Can Increase Churches' Accountability
http://writ.news.findlaw.com/hamilton/20020228.html

* Vouchers, Religious Schools, and the Establishment Clause: Why The
Supreme Court Will Probably Strike Down Ohio's Voucher System
http://writ.news.findlaw.com/hamilton/20011122.html

***************************************************************************************
Vouchers: Our Position
http://members.tripod.com/~candst/