Private schools

[Fmr. Gov. NickG]

The parent will teach his or her child their religious views no matter what, I fail to see how it increases the freedom of the child as he will still have his parents' beliefs imposed on him from birth.

It would be amazingly expensive to ban private schools as well.  We'd have to pay for millions and millions more children, which would require raising taxes and hurting the economy (in addition to putting the thousands of private schools out of business).

At least the child would be exposed to other ideologies in private school....this would certainly increase his or her freedom to make educated decisions in the future.

How would getting rid of private schools hurt the economy?  Instead of paying huge tuitions to corporations, parents would just pay the government more in taxes.  This should be cheaper overall, since the public schools don't have to run a profit margin and can achieve greater economies of scale.

[Brambila]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Well, at one time it was possible to change that, but now it's is near impossible. Let me use my case as an example. If I wanted to end that, I would first have to bring the issue up with the San Francisco Unified School District. Seeing that SFUSD is run by homosexuals, they would not support me at all, but instead would call me a homophobe and I'd be on the front page of the Chronicle for discrimination of my homosexual classmates (even though I would be about 10 at this time). I would then bring it up with the state Teachers Association, but they are also run 80% by liberals (literally, that is the statistic), so I wouldn't have any help going there. As a matter of fact, I'm quite confident that it is impossible to change that any time soon. Further, it's not as if though I can simply "switch schools" as I'm sure other public schools had the same issue- I can name at least three elementary schools that have the same homosexual education going on.

Do I believe that children should be educated what the "Consensus of society believes"? Absolutely not. By that logic, a muslim in Alabama would be educated the moral values of Christianity, but of course that is upsurd, similar to your proposal. The truth of the matter is, children are going to listen to their teachers and peers just as much as they listen to their parents, so if parents do not wish their children to be educated in a pro-homosexual manner, they can't do anything about it. Further, you're automatically associating this pro-homosexual belief to the state, meaning that the STATE supports homosexuality, which is also ridiculous, since the state has no say in it. It's okay for children to be educated on pro-homosexuality, but that should be reserved for private schools, not public. Finally, there's a contradiction- you attack private schools for teaching children ideologies, but support public school systems that teach ideologies. I think there might be a bias in your beliefs. Your idea is proposterous and hypocritical.

[John Dibble]

Yes! Of course, letting society decide what is right is the answer! We know that MOB RULE is just and effective! If society came to the consensus that we should teach our kids to hate gays, you would change your tune on that idea.

[Fmr. Gov. NickG]

It is the parents RIGHT[/i][/u] to teach their children their views of the world. I see nothing at all wrong w/that. If the child wishes to see otherwise when they get older that is their right. However their is no problem with parents teaching thier children as they wish.

I guess I just don't see it that way.  A child should not be treated like property of their parents to be used for whatever ends the parents wish.  Children are entrusted to parents on the condition that they look out for the best interests of the child.   They should not be allowed to indoctrinate their children in a way that will be harmful to the child's moral and intellectual development.

[Lunar]

At least the child would be exposed to other ideologies in private school....this would certainly increase his or her freedom to make educated decisions in the future.

I don't understand.  Are you arguing the other side?

How would getting rid of private schools hurt the economy?  Instead of paying huge tuitions to corporations, parents would just pay the government more in taxes.  This should be cheaper overall, since the public schools don't have to run a profit margin and can achieve greater economies of scale.

Average Joe, who does not send his children to private school, has to pay taxes now to send all of these new children there.  He can't pay his rent now.  Oh crap.

McDonald's now has to pay more taxes and charge more for their BigMacs.  Now all of the Average Joes who buy food there can't, and their monthly food bills go up, giving them less discretionary spending and making them less likely to buy TVs and luxury items that would help the economy.  Oh crap.

[??????????]

It is the parents RIGHT[/i][/u] to teach their children their views of the world. I see nothing at all wrong w/that. If the child wishes to see otherwise when they get older that is their right. However their is no problem with parents teaching thier children as they wish.

I guess I just don't see it that way.  A child should not be treated like property of their parents to be used for whatever ends the parents wish.  Children are entrusted to parents on the condition that they look out for the best interests of the child.   They should not be allowed to indoctrinate their children in a way that will be harmful to the child's moral and intellectual development.

A child is bound to respect the rules of the parent. Thats the way it is and should stay. The problem is people think children are really "little adults". When it reality children are naive and clueless to the real world and need to be taught by their parents about decisions, choices and consequences. It doesn't take a village to raise a child. It takes two parents, plain and simple.

[Bandit3 the Worker]

On the other hand I did go to a really bad public school system (not the urban system I graduated from). I wouldn't want its values indoctrinating anyone.

[MarkDel]

[quote

If you are not happy with the ideology of the public schools, you can change it through the political process.  This is not true of private schools.  

I think that at young ages, children should be taught what the consensus of society believes they should be taught.  They should not be excluded from society because their parents disagree with it.  If parents want to teach their children about their religion or ideas, they can do this in addition to a public education, not instead of it.

Once a child reaches high school age, I think they are old enough to make judgements about which interests and ideologies to pursue on their own, which is why I don't think private high schools are as troubling.

Freedom Burns asked me in another thread why I thought the Democratic Party was such a profound evil in America...there are several reasons, but I think Nick's post above is a pretty good example of why I am so terrified of the Democratic Party.

[John Dibble]

It is the parents RIGHT[/i][/u] to teach their children their views of the world. I see nothing at all wrong w/that. If the child wishes to see otherwise when they get older that is their right. However their is no problem with parents teaching thier children as they wish.

I guess I just don't see it that way.  A child should not be treated like property of their parents to be used for whatever ends the parents wish.  Children are entrusted to parents on the condition that they look out for the best interests of the child.   They should not be allowed to indoctrinate their children in a way that will be harmful to the child's moral and intellectual development.

1. Teaching children your values is not treating them like property - it's preparing them to function in society based on the principles by which you live. What's wrong with that?

2. And who determines what's in the child's best interests? Society? I think not. Society can be wrong you know. No, I'll look out for the best interest of my children by teaching them the values I think are important.

[AuH2O]

hmm well I actually kind of like it when some idiot Democrat makes a bonehead proposal.

Though I can't say I'm afraid of them. If they make enough people mad, we'll be absolved of the problem anyway...

[MarkDel]

My god...think about this statement for a second...

"CHILDREN ARE ENTRUSTED TO THEIR PARENTS"

If that doesn't sound like Communism to me...wow

NickG, my man, you are scaring the living sh*t out of me. I never pictured you in the same category as guys like BetterRedThanDead and some of the other true marxists, but you may be in that category based on some of the things you've said tonight.

[??????????]

My god...think about this statement for a second...

"CHILDREN ARE ENTRUSTED TO THEIR PARENTS"

If that doesn't sound like Communism to me...wow

NickG, my man, you are scaring the living sh*t out of me. I never pictured you in the same category as guys like BetterRedThanDead and some of the other true marxists, but you may be in that category based on some of the things you've said tonight.

The schools are teaching kids this garbage Mark.

[MarkDel]

My god...think about this statement for a second...

"CHILDREN ARE ENTRUSTED TO THEIR PARENTS"

If that doesn't sound like Communism to me...wow

NickG, my man, you are scaring the living sh*t out of me. I never pictured you in the same category as guys like BetterRedThanDead and some of the other true marxists, but you may be in that category based on some of the things you've said tonight.

The schools are teaching kids this garbage Mark.

StatesRights,

Well, they won't be teaching my kids that, I assure you, not if they hope to live their life in peace and harmony. Anyone who attempts to indoctrinate my kid, whether it be from the far left or the far right, is going to see their personal harmony disrupted in a way they will NOT appreciate.

[Fmr. Gov. NickG]

At least the child would be exposed to other ideologies in private school....this would certainly increase his or her freedom to make educated decisions in the future.

I don't understand.  Are you arguing the other side?

How would getting rid of private schools hurt the economy?  Instead of paying huge tuitions to corporations, parents would just pay the government more in taxes.  This should be cheaper overall, since the public schools don't have to run a profit margin and can achieve greater economies of scale.

Average Joe, who does not send his children to private school, has to pay taxes now to send all of these new children there.  He can't pay his rent now.  Oh crap.

McDonald's now has to pay more taxes and charge more for their BigMacs.  Now all of the Average Joes who buy food there can't, and their monthly food bills go up, giving them less discretionary spending and making them less likely to buy TVs and luxury items that would help the economy.  Oh crap.

Sorry....I clearly meant public schools in my first sentence.

As to the second point, well, that all depends on where you place the tax burden.

[Fmr. Gov. NickG]

My god...think about this statement for a second...

"CHILDREN ARE ENTRUSTED TO THEIR PARENTS"

If that doesn't sound like Communism to me...wow

NickG, my man, you are scaring the living sh*t out of me. I never pictured you in the same category as guys like BetterRedThanDead and some of the other true marxists, but you may be in that category based on some of the things you've said tonight.

Taking care of children is a privilege and not a right in our society.  If you abuse your children, or use drugs, or do other things that are harmful to them, the state can take you them away.  

I just see certainly types of ideological and religious indoctrination as emotional abuse, especially when ones does not permit their children to experience the world of choices around them.

[MarkDel]

My god...think about this statement for a second...

"CHILDREN ARE ENTRUSTED TO THEIR PARENTS"

If that doesn't sound like Communism to me...wow

NickG, my man, you are scaring the living sh*t out of me. I never pictured you in the same category as guys like BetterRedThanDead and some of the other true marxists, but you may be in that category based on some of the things you've said tonight.

Taking care of children is a privilege and not a right in our society.  If you abuse your children, or use drugs, or do other things that are harmful to them, the state can take you them away.  

I just see certainly types of ideological and religious indoctrination as emotional abuse, especially when ones does not permit their children to experience the world of choices around them.

Nick,

I understand that, even if I don't agree with it, but who gets define what constitutes emotional abuse? So in your mind, a person who makes his child attend church every Sunday and sends him to a religious school where he is taught a strict code of ethics and morals IS GUILTY OF CHILD ABUSE? And where exactly does the line get drawn? How many hours of religious attendance would be enough for you to bring in Janet Reno's armed guards to take away my child for "his own welfare"?

If taking care of children is a privilege, why don't we need a license to have one? Hacing and taking care of children is a right....one can forefeit that right only through activity which amounts to criminal behavior...ie...physical abuse, neglect, etc...it's like voting is a right, but a person can forefeit that with criminal activity, it's the same concept.

[John Dibble]

My god...think about this statement for a second...

"CHILDREN ARE ENTRUSTED TO THEIR PARENTS"

If that doesn't sound like Communism to me...wow

NickG, my man, you are scaring the living sh*t out of me. I never pictured you in the same category as guys like BetterRedThanDead and some of the other true marxists, but you may be in that category based on some of the things you've said tonight.

Taking care of children is a privilege and not a right in our society.  If you abuse your children, or use drugs, or do other things that are harmful to them, the state can take you them away.  

I just see certainly types of ideological and religious indoctrination as emotional abuse, especially when ones does not permit their children to experience the world of choices around them.

Care to be more specific? Because it seems to me you are comparing abuse and neglect to teaching kids religion. I have no problem at all with people teaching their kids their religion(and this is coming from a guy who tells fundamentalists their God is evil!).

[cwelsch]

I am horribly offended by the severe authoritarianism of this poll.  This is a completely tyrannical and totalitarian policy.  Banning private schools is how dicators consolidate power.  This is ridiculous.

Of course there should be alternative methods of education than just state control.  This is not a communist dictatorship or a fascist state.

I normally don't throw around these terms so easily, but I want to stress just how absolutely unacceptable this policy really is.

[Bandit3 the Worker]

I am horribly offended by the severe authoritarianism of this poll.

I am horribly offended by the severe authoritarianism of my private high school.

[Brambila]

I am horribly offended by the severe authoritarianism of this poll.

I am horribly offended by the severe authoritarianism of my private high school.

I'm horribly confused on why the hell you go there.

[MarkDel]

I am horribly offended by the severe authoritarianism of this poll.  This is a completely tyrannical and totalitarian policy.  Banning private schools is how dicators consolidate power.  This is ridiculous.

Of course there should be alternative methods of education than just state control.  This is not a communist dictatorship or a fascist state.

I normally don't throw around these terms so easily, but I want to stress just how absolutely unacceptable this policy really is.

Cwelsch,

I totally agree.

[Bandit3 the Worker]

I'm horribly confused on why the hell you go there.

I don't. I haven't been back in 15 years.

[MarkDel]

I'm horribly confused on why the hell you go there.

I don't. I haven't been back in 15 years.

Bandit,

That's only because of the Restraining Order though...LOL

[Bandit3 the Worker]

That's only because of the Restraining Order though...

That's only because I'm smarter than that jerk of a principal.

[MarkDel]

Bandit,

Come on, tell the truth once and for all. Are you a legitimate LUNATIC or are you a clever Republican who has invented a character designed to make Liberals look bad? I go back and forth on whether you are some Conservative who laughs his ass off when he types this stuff, or whether you are former "short bus" material who is about as lucid as John Nash on acid.