Letters: School is school, not church

I don’t want my tax money going to teach a child the rosary. Neither do I want him taught to bow towards Mecca and call God “Allah.” I don’t want him chanting to Buddha or worshipping the Hindu god Shiva at school. I don’t want him told that the world is only 10,000 years old (or that evolution is a proven fact and God is dead either).

Likewise, I would not want my child going to a school that preaches that only Republicans are Christians and that homosexuals go to hell. Neither should he be expected to wear a beard or sideburns, unless he becomes an Orthodox Jew, or long dresses, no make-up and updos like United Pentecostals. A schoolchild should never have to cover her dreadlocks with a turban like the Rastafarians, unless she is one. But voucher schools could require any of that.

I am an evangelical Christian. You might think that I would like my child to go to a Christian school. But I believe religious schools are a choice for those who can afford them. It is best for parents to teach their faith to their children at home and through their house of worship.

School is for teaching children to read, do math, learn history and science, and learn to get along with others, including those who don’t look or act like them, and to decide what they want to do in life and to become who they want to be. Sometimes kids and teachers pray in public school. I prayed for and about my students daily since 1972. Students gathered for prayer spontaneously in hallways on standardized testing days. But no one should be required to pray in school, and my tax money must not go to teaching or condemning anyone’s religion. Class time should not be spent in worship on my dime.

Public schools are best for children unless parents pay for the alternative themselves, the exception being for some children with extreme special needs. Parents should have choice in schools, but those choices must be among public schools with special programs or policies — science, the arts, uniform-free, independent or highly structured learning, special-education magnets, advanced education for the gifted, vocational programs, college prep, work-ready, even military-style programs. All programs must be offered in public schools, and adequate money spent to make each public school a quality school.

Vouchers lead to discrimination and paying for someone else’s religion. They are unconstitutional and wrong for Louisiana and America. If parents want their children to attend private schools, they need to gather the funds from relatives, as a friend of mine’s family did and pay for them themselves.

Rhonda Browning

educator

Baton Rouge

Comments

1) Comment by potkcalb - 12/06/2012

"immoral and immoral concepts" Your Brain. What brain?

2) Comment by nimby? - 11/06/2012

Your Brain just reminded me why we became teachers ; fortune and fame , yeah , that's the ticket ....

3) Comment by RationalOne - 11/06/2012

Your Brain, just curious. What kinds of immoral/amoral concepts are public schools teaching?

4) Comment by Chrilter - 11/06/2012

Your Brain( should be Your Brain on Drugs).....wow, you apparently havent read the legislation allowing these vouchers and other "school choice" legislation....The Mr. John White himself has said that he thinks that having teachers with accreditation is not important to him and that letting anyone with a college degree teach in the classroom....This is what his former organization Teach for America is all about. Just experiment with everything. That works well for the 10% of those experiments that turn out well but what about the 90% that failed to work. Just look at the RSD, this is a terribly flawed plan that should have taken 5 years and ALOT more debate to really nail down a plan rather than RAMMED through in 2 weeks of 1 legislative session. Finally, you should be ashamed of railing against teachers who have one of the most thankless jobs in this country. We, as taxpayers, (because we are FORCED to pay them like you say) pay them as little as possible, but we ask them to work from 7am- to well after the last school bell rings. Not to mention grading papers. Parent-teacher conferences. Helping out with extra-curricular activities for students. All for as little money as possible. Hmmm, I wonder why we can't get more good teachers??!!....you should applaud teachers who care enough to write letters and try to advocate for their students

5) Comment by Your Brain on Steroids - 11/06/2012

Rhonda, what you conveniently ignore and avoid is that as taxpayers we are FORCED to pay for YOUR salary regardless of how good a teacher you are. NO ONE is FORCING students to go to any religious school. It is an OPTION that the parents can DECIDE on. Forcing students to go to public schools that are inferior and teach immoral and amoral concepts is what is bringing this about in the first place. Clean up your mess first then start complaining. Public schools and most public school teachers are an absolute joke and nothing but an indoctrination mechanism for the deviancy of today's liberal society. Giving vouchers allows those who actually are PAYING TAXES to make a decision on how those dollars they paid are being used.

6) Comment by Chrilter - 11/06/2012

Also, give it up Dawson, Tea_slayer has completely debunked your argument about pell grants vs primary/secondary education (you do know that people are not going to agree with you just because you keep saying the same thing over and over right?) Public education is paid for by all taxpayers and thats the way it should be. Its ridiculous to think that by giving up on certain parts of the population that this will "cure" the problem. Newsflash: That doesnt work. You have to fix the problem instead of just moving it around. That's like trying to get rid of clutter by just stuffing everything in the closet. The problem is still there, just in a different place.

7) Comment by Chrilter - 11/06/2012

It seems that most of those in favor of vouchers/scholarships are completely ignorant of reality....Just look at the reality of the situation. There "were" 5100 slots for parents to "choose" from. Almost all of those slots are going to schools who are doubling their enrollment or more. Where are they going to find the facilities to do this? the teachers? the other school staff necessary to run the school? what about the books? what about the curriculum?.....and not to mention, that is only for these 5100 available spots RIGHT NOW....People, you are asking for shady businessmen to rob you blind and the real losers are going to be the children who will have to constantly change schools because the one they are attending has shut down due to bankruptcy or whatever else. This legislation was passed through WAY TOO FAST. While no one can see all the consequences of this legislation, even a simple look finds serious problems that were not dealt with. FIX the public schools, FUND them adequately, and HOLD accountable the parents as well as the students and you will see real positive change

8) Comment by RationalOne - 11/06/2012

Generally a good letter, but why would you be against teaching that evolution is a fact? It's as factual as the world being a sphere.

9) Comment by Sandy - 11/06/2012

Vouchers allow parents to pay for the private school of their choice without also paying for the public school that was not satisfactory in the first place. I don't see what is wrong with that. It seems much fairer than requiring the parent to pay for both a failing public school AND a private school just to give their child the chance at a quality education. Many parents simply can't afford to do both. Vouchers will enable the less well-off to have access to quality schools. What is wrong with that?

10) Comment by Dawson - 11/06/2012

I agree completely Nimby, which is why failure is an important part of society. A portion of government counts the majority of its voter base as people it guarantees to shield from failure. This is the root cause of the problem.

11) Comment by Dawson - 11/06/2012

The pell grant argument is real and you can site as many articles as you like that show what you believe to be some sort of evidence that the voucher system is unconstitutional. A parent that receives government money as an entitlement, hand out, subsidy or whatever you want to call it is not beholden to the government on how its spent. School vouchers are not an endorsement of a religion. The government is not telling recipients they can only spend them on Christian Schools, Muslim Schools, etc so your argument doesn't hold up. By the way, public education isn't free.

12) Comment by nimby? - 10/06/2012

Tea_Slayer , a view from behind the teachers' desk ; in too many schools , too many situations far more time and resources are involved with students not wanting an education than is with those who do , seems like a waste . as we are servants of the public teachers have no choice in their clientele , your child is lucky ....

13) Comment by Tea_Slayer - 10/06/2012

And I guess you skipped this article ---http://theadvocate.com/news/3031431-123/vouchers-eyed-for-big-boost This is just the tip of the iceberg. there are many religious "schools" that previously had 10-20 students that are accepting 100-300 vouchers

14) Comment by Tea_Slayer - 10/06/2012

Dawson, Parental involvement is the key to a good education. And with parental involvement, a child can still get an excellent education in the "failing schools" Just because some students (and their parents) don't care about education, doesn't prevent my child from excelling. My child attends a "C" school in EBR. I guess you gave up your voucher is a Pell Grant ridiculousness. You just shifted tactics to when your argument was shredded. "Public education is free?" You know you are twisting teh argument, but it serves your purpose to lie, so have at it. No one is listening to your drivel

15) Comment by nimby? - 10/06/2012

Dawson , my wife and I were children of the 60's , very radical , liberal views . we wanted to help , to change the world . I went into teaching , she into social services . after a while we learned the people we were trying to , wanting to help weren't that helpless . wanted a hand out , not a hand , "where's mine ?" no incentives for bettering themselves , no consequences for dishonesty . estimates of fraud in welfare , social services paid near 30 percent . and religion ; I see no problem with the study of religions(not just christianity) and their effects on the world , as an elective . might not paint a pretty picture ....

16) Comment by Dawson - 10/06/2012

@Nimby...I think what you suggest is an impossibility. Parental responsibility in many cases is a thing of the past. Over the last 40 or 50 years the government has become the parents to many which has lead to generational dependence on government. Until you re- institute personal responsibility and make people accountable for their own actions they will continue to fail to see the importance of their actions and fail to educate themselves and their own. When you have a government that attempts to eliminate failure through entitlement then that same government only guarantees that same failure.

17) Comment by Dawson - 10/06/2012

Public education is free? Then why do I have to pay for someone else's child to attend? That premise in itself is the cause of many of the problems in government programs. "It's free" shout the government lovers as the producers dwindle. I digress...school vouchers so that parents can decide what is best for their children to flee from failing schools is not a government endorsement of a religion. The only one's that will make this argument are the same one's that are against school and parental choice. Hmmm, I wonder which side of the isle those stand on?

18) Comment by nimby? - 10/06/2012

vouchers , public schools , private schools , religion , evolution , creationism . none of this is important if we don't get the children , their parents to realize the importance of an education , get them in school , keep them there . can we do that first ?

19) Comment by Tea_Slayer - 10/06/2012

Dawson, your argument is bogus and any intelligent person can see that. Public primary and secondary education is compulsory and free to all. Public post-secondary education is NOT. Your argument falls apart there. I have attached some reading material for you It seems that the Supreme Court agrees that there is a distinction between using public funds for elementary/secondary education and post-secondary "Due to the impressionability of young people, the Supreme Court has distinguished between the use of government funds in colleges and elementary and secondary schools, where funding might be construed as government endorsement of the religious message. This distinction was first articulated in Tilton v. Richardson, 403 U.S. 672 (1971), in which the Court held that “There are generally significant differences between the religious aspects of church-related institutions of higher learning and parochial elementary and secondary schools. [C]ollege students are less impressionable and less susceptible to religious indoctrination.” ---http://www.aclu.org/FilesPDFs/factsheet%20-%20voucher%20vs.%20pell%20grants.doc ///\\\ Still want to make your specious argument?

20) Comment by Dawson - 10/06/2012

Public schools aren't free either. A voucher pays for a portion of a students education exactly as a pell grant does. In some cases the voucher may cover all of the cost and at some colleges the pell grant covers all of the cost. Where is the false equivalency? Either way you look at it, it is government money going to a religious institution.

21) Comment by Scrooge - 09/06/2012

unanswerable questions? Since when don't parents have a choice where to send their children? Who is against this? Why is an avowed anti-government advocate advocating state support of parochial schools or even public funding of schools without oversight of the funds, period? Wouldn't it be naive, even dumb, to assume that private and religious enterprises are free from human tendencies, including greed and exploitation of fellow men? Obviously, irrespective of religious issues, there are not nearly enough slots in private schools, which really makes the "choice" issue a bit ludicrous and enactment of it discriminatory. Selective admissions diminishes that "choice" just as unfettered liberty to do as one pleases diminishes true liberty. We all have limitations, isn't that reason for the obsession with guns?

22) Comment by Tea_Slayer - 09/06/2012

Dawson, ublic colleges aren't free. Your comparison of vouchers to Pell Grants is an excellent example of a false equivalency.

23) Comment by Dawson - 09/06/2012

Giving a school voucher in this case, a pell grant in another or providing bus transportation to Catholic School students in EBR is not organizing, integrating, inculcating, approving or sanctioning of a religion. Many people forget the second part of the 1st or "prohibiting the free exercise thereof". The unanswerable questions: Why shouldn't parents be allowed to choose the school in which their children will attend? Why is anyone against an individual's choice for the education of their kids? To think or believe that only government can answer todays social questions is the root of the very problems we have in society.

24) Comment by Scrooge - 09/06/2012

"public schools in EBR are a proven experiment of failure." Not quite, there is that anomaly of BRH (and other schools) which outperforms any private school based on ACT and Sat Scores. Parents have that choice already, and the majority of white folks in BR are obviously availing themselves of that choice. if the sanctimonious privileged wish to provide the scholarships for others, that is their business. A public education is crucial for Louisiana, if you think it is so bad now, just think if had there been no public education in Louisiana? This is a firstly social problem, not an educational one, but no politician is willing to make the decision to address it. We no longer live in the 18th century. If one believes that the elimination of government will cause people to live in good will and harmony and afford opportunities for everyone, (yes, others beside oneself do exist), then the cloud cuckoo subdivision has plenty of lots for sale.

25) Comment by potkcalb - 09/06/2012

Dawson you can pray all you want to on the street corner, but religion cannot bet organized, integrated, inculcated or receive official approval or sanction of a school funded by tax payers.That is the meaning of freedom from religion.

26) Comment by Dawson - 09/06/2012

Accountability of taxpayer money? That added with anything government is an oxymoron. The question is why isn't it about freedom of choice? Why shouldn't a parent be able to choose what school their kids attend? Why is that such a hard question to answer? This may be an "unproven experiment" but the public schools in EBR are a proven experiment of failure.

27) Comment by Scrooge - 09/06/2012

It is not about "freedom of choice" , "quality education" or any of the other propaganda terms of "choice" it is about the use of taxpayer money without accountability in an ideologically driven, unproven experiment. If private schools can do such a great job of educating disadvantaged students, great. Lets see the data proving it. The only citation is the NO RSD but apparently the results of 2/3 of the schools are being ignored to make the case. Unless a strict disciplinary environment is enacted this is all just political fluff. Meanwhile, the time and expense will be in the courts, regardless of what dilettante commentators on an internet bulletin board may say or think.

28) Comment by Dawson - 09/06/2012

Sorry Tea Slayer...Here you go in a nice easy to read format "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof". Issuing a school voucher is by no means establishing a religion. Now, if government only offered these vouchers and told families they could only use them to go to Catholic Schools then you may have an argument. If an individual receives a government subsidy the Congress cannot prohibit the free exercise therof by disallowing that individual to spend said subsidy as individual sees fit. No where does the Constitution guarantee freedom FROM religion? Example: If I wish to pray out loud to a god of my choice on a street corner and 25 agnostics and 14 atheists are around they cannot stop me from doing so. Why someone asinine may ask: Because the constitution doesn't guarantee freedom FROM religion it only guarantees freedom OF religion.

29) Comment by Tea_Slayer - 09/06/2012

Most asinine statement of the day goes to Dawson. "...the constitution guarantees freedom of religion not freedom from religion." Freedom from the intrusion of religion into our government and our lives is exactly what the 1st Amendment guarantees.

30) Comment by Dawson - 09/06/2012

Then as ScotB pointed out you should first sue the Federal Government to stop Pell Grant hand outs or government guaranteed student loans for students that elect to attend schools like Notre Dame or Georgetown. If the voucher is given to the parent and that parent chooses to spend it on a school of their choice then it has no more to do with government than a person that gets unemployment or welfare choosing to give part of it to their church on Sunday. Why are some so against freedom of choice for families in failing schools? Even though the constitution doesn't mention "separation of church and state" the constitution guarantees freedom of religion not freedom from religion.

31) Comment by Scrooge - 09/06/2012

What if a taxpayer is a fervent anti-Catholic, or Mormon, or Baptist, etc. etc. and dos not want his tax money to support the particular object of his prejudices? How would he be ensured that his tax contributions are not supporting his fervent opposition and that an unequal amount is not supporting it ? Unfortunately, the divisiveness and sheer rancor engendered by this issue will keep it in the courts forever. It should be obvious that espousal of any particular religion in public schools is not prudent, including the funding. There are many who believe it is their moral responsibility to impose (as opposed to convince) their religion on others, which is not quite consistent with the founding principles of the United States. In case anyone misses it, I said religion, not any Deity to preempt the obvious.

32) Comment by Dawson - 09/06/2012

Good point ScotB...a school voucher would be no more unconstitutional (which it is not) than a Pell Grant that goes to a religious college or university. The liberty blocking, freedom to choose groups (Unions and Democrats) only talk about the constitution when it threatens to encumber on an entitlement program they depend on to keep power in the political climate.

33) Comment by Dawson - 09/06/2012

@Twinkie1cat...under-performers are not just limited to teachers. Every group has under-perfomers. The question is why do we need an organization to protect them and use tax payer money to do it? The good teachers will always have a job. If the teachers are really trying to protect the children then the teachers would be for 100% school choice and let the parent and students decide where they should attend school. The greatest fear with the Unions and Democrats is, if given choice these families will not choose to attend the schools the Union's run. If the choices offered by the Unions are so good and in the best interest of the child then why does the Union have to force people to choose them?

34) Comment by Dawson - 09/06/2012

But DMJ..Individual choice is constitutional and the Dems and Unions attempt to block it in every way possible.

35) Comment by twinkie1cat - 09/06/2012

Yep. Teacher. Somebody has to speak up for the children from a point of reference of knowing school culture and as an advocate for the children. I think we have a few others around here.

36) Comment by Whatnow - 09/06/2012

@ABayouBoy, twinkie1cat is either one in the same as Rhonda Browning or her twin.

37) Comment by ABayouBoy - 09/06/2012

@twinkie1cat, Let me guess, you are most likely a teacher....or related to one anyway.

38) Comment by twinkie1cat - 08/06/2012

ScotB: This is America and freedom of religion means freedom of religion for everyone. This is not the Middle East where a person can be persecuted for not being a Muslim, nor France where you can be jailed for wearing religious symbols. This is a free country and we must stand up for those whose faith we do not understand or agree with if we wish to maintain our own freedom. This is also why NO TAXPAYER MONEY SHOULD BE USED TO PAY FOR RELIGIOUS SCHOOLS. NOBODY'S RELIGION. Now I will address your indoctrination complaint with a question: How is it so different if you teach a child to recite the rosary and venerate the Virgin Mary than if you teach them to bow in prayer 5 times a day toward Mecca and venerate Mohammed? They serve the same purpose, which is teaching religion. The only difference is the God they are addressing, and some would argue that it is the same God just a different pathway.

39) Comment by twinkie1cat - 08/06/2012

Dawson, I fear you have been listening to the false prophets and false teachers sent to deceive by the Jindal administration. Teachers are not the underperformers and the cause of the problems with the schools. They are the VICTIMS of the politicians, administrators who got their jobs based on who they know rather than what they know, the Louisiana Family Forum, a conservative lobby and hate group, and the Jindalites themselves who have pulled out the supports from beneath the non-profits that make it easier for children to learn by providing them with safe housing, after school programs, food, and medical care. And the teacher victims are trying to protect the other victims, the children, who, while the teachers can advocate, they can't. Tenure offers teachers some degree of protection from the Jindalites and that is why he wants to get rid of it.

40) Comment by phil - 08/06/2012

This is easy. I could go into religion and schools and evolution and other topics. I will just simply say - I DO NOT WANT MORE OF MY MONEY GOING INTO TAXES, and I do not want my tax money going, going, gone!

41) Comment by ScotB - 08/06/2012

Also, I don't see this as an establishment issue, since the money follows the parental choice and is not forced on them. Much like Pell grants can be used to attend a religious based university or a historically black college, the government provides funding and the individual makes the choice.

42) Comment by ScotB - 08/06/2012

I confess. I am also concerned about taxpayer dollars subsidizing religious based schools. Mostly where they subsidize religions other than Christianity, I admit. Children are impressionable and should not be indoctrinated (at least, not outside of their homes). But in the end, if the parents get to choose the school, at least they will make that choice for their kids. The challenge is when the only well performing school is run by the local mosque, for example. Then the parents are forced with choosing to give their children a decent education at the sacrifice of being subjected to indoctrination to an unwanted value system. And the choice is similar for those parents who don't follow Christianity. I think most parents would choose values over education, in this instance. In the end, I still like giving the parents the choice and letting the funding for education follow the child, not the institution.

43) Comment by DMJ - 08/06/2012

Dawson, that's all fine and good...but none of the stuff you don't want your tax dollars going to are unconstitutional. I think you missed the point, bub.

44) Comment by Dawson - 08/06/2012

I don't want my tax money going to union pensions and guaranteed job benefits for under-performers. I don't want my tax money going to generational welfare. I don't want my tax money going to a failing public school system or a failing CATS system. What I do want is what every liberal or union member is afraid of.. individual choice.

45) Comment by Whatnow - 08/06/2012

DMJ and potcalb, http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/04/us/04scotus.html. It seems if the school itself receives the money, instead of the parents, then they wouldn't be allowed to teach religion.

46) Comment by teacherguy - 08/06/2012

Teachers in the Louisiana Federation of Teachers have been reprimanded by John White, State Superintendent, for filing a lawsuit to determine if this is a violation of the 1st Amendment...could it be possible that teachers, omg, are doing what the general population should be doing? From Geaux Teacher! blog site: The LFT’s allegations about Act 2 go deeper than the inappropriate bundling of objectives. Included in the suit are charges that the Act: •Unconstitutionally diverts MFP funds from public schools to private and religious institutions, citing Article VIII, Section 13(b) which states that the formula “shall be used to determine the cost of a minimum foundation program of education in all public elementary and secondary schools as well as to equitably allocate the funds to parish and city school systems.” •Diverts funds approved by local voters for specific purposes to private, religious and charter schools that were not included in the ballot language. •Was adopted in violation of the Louisiana Constitution - Article III, Section 2A(3)(a) and Article III, Section15(G) – which specify the number of votes an item must receive in order to be appropriately adopted by the Legislature.

47) Comment by potkcalb - 08/06/2012

Yes DMJ its a blatant violation of the First Amendment.

48) Comment by DMJ - 08/06/2012

Rhonda raises an interesting question....if a religious school gets government money and subsequently endorses/teaches a particular religion, isn't that a violation of the 1st Amendment, which states that government cannot establish religion? If a Catholic school, for instance, gets government money, should it still be allowed to teach that eating the body and blood of a guy who died 2000 years ago is a holy sacrament to little kids who's parents might not be total nutters? I think more attention should be given to such a scenario...

49) Comment by DMJ - 08/06/2012

Amen!!

50) Comment by twinkie1cat - 08/06/2012

jdk: Yes, historically schools were started by churches. They had human rights agendas as the Bible requires and knew that educated people were more likely to be able to have a decent life. As a matter of fact, The Methodist church was started by John Wesley as a charitable endeavor----to teach the poor children who slaved in the factories 6 days a week instead of going to school to read and to give them something to do that kept them off the streets on Sunday. Wesley did not originally intend to start a church. Yes, the Bible was used to teach in the early schools and quotes from the Bible as early texts such as The Horn Book and the Blue Back Speller. Moral teaching (today called Values Education) was part of the curricula. The Bible was often the only book available. People often became literate by reading the Bible. You use what you have. Today the Bible is still quoted or referenced in public schools. That does not mean they are teaching religion. The Bible is also literature. The churches were more than a place to worship on Sunday. They were community centers, much as the black churches were in the Civil Rights era and some churches that host AA meetings and community organizations continue to be today. They had the only facilities appropriate for large gatherings and the staff and a volunteer contingent available to do the work. Often the ministers were among the few people who could read and write. But today America is more diverse religiously. We don't have separate states for Catholics or Jews as in colonial times. African-Americans, whites and latinos live next door. People with disabilities are less likely to be locked up in institutions and have been served in the public schools, by federal law, since 1975. Poor children are expected to go to high school, not drop out after the 5th or 8th grade to work on the farm or in a factory. Different races and ethnicities go to school together. And only public schools can accommodate those differences and give everyone a quality education. And that is what the citizens must demand. Not vouchers for a select few that any school would want to take on.

51) Comment by shad-o - 08/06/2012

I agree. I want my little girl to be well educated and I want her to form her own opinions and draw her own conclusions about everything. Parental engagement and guidance is a must as well. I think both school's and church's are of major importance in our children's lives and they can work in tandem to help groom a well-adjusted child. Having said that, I think that they should not be combined. There is a difference between learning skills such as math that you need to support yourself in life and church where you learn about faith and fellowship.

52) Comment by Tea_Slayer - 08/06/2012

the old "christian nation" meme. Sorry if i don't follow you down that rabbit hole. Have fun in your delusion...

53) Comment by potkcalb - 08/06/2012

I'm not sure that I understand the complaints to Rhonda's letter. Forgive me if I suspect a religious agenda. I admit that I have not given much thought to charter schools or other educational programs funded by the government. My concern is that these settings not be used to incorporate, integrate, inculcate, or officially approve or sanction religion or religious activity as a function of the school.That is not to be interpreted that prayer is not permissible in these settings. Prayer is legal in all schools as it is in all agencies funded by tax payers.(See U.S. Department guidelines on school prayer).

54) Comment by jdk944 - 08/06/2012

Tea_slayer - right back at you!! If you and or Browning knew any of our American history, but of course you choose to ignore it or just don't want to know, you would both realize that "public" education included learning from the Bible. And maybe while you are at it, go back and look at why almost all the early colleges where founded on and for!! You might be enlightened, but be careful, the truth could set you free!!

55) Comment by Tea_Slayer - 08/06/2012

Off your meds, jdk? Big brother coming to get you? And InPVille, those two statements are not incongruous. My son attends Westdale Middle where he interacts with students from a wide spectrum of ethnic and cultural groups (Muslim, Hindu, Christian, African American, Asian, Latin, etc). Compare that to a parochial school.

56) Comment by jdk944 - 08/06/2012

Ms. Browning, Think about this. Who owns the schools? The government. Who mandates attendance? The government. Who staffs the schools? The government ... with government workers. Who directs the work of the schools? The government. Can you see where it is in the best interests of government to suppress dissent and originality? Can you understand why government would want a standardized citizenry? Those who dissent; those who produce originality of thought; those who exceed the standards are a threat to what? The status quo, that's what ... and government likes the calming influence of the status quo. And citizens pay for this public education with their tax dollars so they should be given a choice as to where their children go to school and what they aret taught!!

57) Comment by InPVille - 08/06/2012

"School is for teaching children to read, do math, learn history and science, and learn to get along with others, including those who don’t look or act like them, and to decide what they want to do in life and to become who they want to be. . . . Parents should have choice in schools, but those choices must be among public schools with special programs or policies — science, the arts, uniform-free, independent or highly structured learning, special-education magnets, advanced education for the gifted, vocational programs, college prep, work-ready, even military-style programs." -[**]- Isn't the thinking in the second quoted section of the above letter somewhat at odds with the thinking of the first quoted section of the letter? If you are only surrounded by people with the same interests as yourself or selected for you at an early age, in what way does this contribute to receiving a benefit of exposure of people who don't look or act like you? Doesn't it amount to another way of segregating people into different groups? How does having a child surrounded by only those interested in the arts or gifted help them understand those whose interests or talents are in the area of vocational programs or work-ready? If all programs are in one school, the students will probably tend to hang with others in their programs. But if they are in different schools, they will not even see the others unlike them during the school day.

58) Comment by dday198 - 08/06/2012

im with you but the schools with learning environment are few in ebr we need solutions to make the public schools work and no one is delivering the governor or the teachers unions.

59) Comment by cbelse1 - 08/06/2012

The only appropriate word I can think of is. . . Amen.