The rise of faith schools

I agree with Chiroptera that democracy ought to mean leaving people alone to do what they want about educating their children, and in fact about a great many other things the government has no business interfering in. What kind of "freedom" is it that requires parents to send their children to public schools if they don't want to? Why is it a problem if some children are brought up differently from others? Since when are uniformity and conformity such high values in a free society?Most of the institutions of Europe and America were founded in a Christian context and in fact served a Christian worldview, so I have no problem with government-funded Christian schools, but since the West is no longer Christian it gets very complicated dealing with the church-state problem and I'm not going to argue the point any more. If we have to pay for our own schools that's the way it goes.This message has been edited by Faith, 04-06-2006 12:47 PM

We are talking about the right to a religious education, not denying children an education but giving them one some people don't approve of.

No. It's their business.

You don't seem to mind telling other people how to raise their children. It doesn't occur to you that they may be a better judge than you, does it? It doesn't occur to you that they have a great investment in the success of their children, and the brains to determine the best direction for achieving it. Obviously not, they need you and nanny government to tell them how to run their lives and best serve their children's future. They are "misguided" according to you and that is that. I find that to be the case with liberals in general.

Well, if anecdotal evidence means anything, I've met homeschooled kids, now in their teens, who are voracious readers and have been from an early age. I thought we were talking about the right to a RELIGIOUS education, but you are bringing in completely extraneous complaints. I am all in favor of the BEST POSSIBLE education for children. I am also in favor of RELIGIOUS education. It is not helping everyone if it dictates that Christians may not have Christian education for their children. Well, why would you think I'd be for anything less? You've been assuming an awful lot. I'm for Christian kids getting a BETTER education than the public school kids and from what I've seen in both homeschooling and Christian schools this is quite possible and in fact such alternatives are growing across the country. The public schools have been progressively deteriorating over the last few decades. That is why there has been such a growth in homeschooling and founding of Christian schools.This message has been edited by Faith, 04-06-2006 08:20 PM

Interesting. You are SUPPORTING them? How about those who are homeschooling or sending their children to Christian schools who have to PAY taxes to support the public schools?

Have you calculated the amount the churches add to your property taxes? How many there are and how much they would pay and factored it all in to the total and figured your percentage from that?But those who don't use the public schools pay taxes at the exact same rate those who do use them pay.abe: By the way, what do you think of the opinion of some of the American founders that Christianity should be encouraged as it is good for the country in general?This message has been edited by Faith, 04-06-2006 08:53 PM

You are the one who brought up the tax issue by complaining about having to pay more property taxes because churches don't have to. It occurred to me to ask if you've calculated this big addition to your bill. I gather you haven't.Yes I really do not want government funding of Christian schools for the reason you gave. I do believe a little tax relief would be in order, however.Thomas Jefferson was only one of a couple hundred if you count all those of the core group who actively contributed to the founding of the nation. And even he approved the effect of Christianity on the citizenry as I recall.This message has been edited by Faith, 04-06-2006 09:12 PM

I wonder if you could find a quote to this effect? Well, I know you can't. They considered it to have an important MORAL influence on the nation. They said nothing about its being "needed" to make people "happy."This message has been edited by Faith, 04-06-2006 09:25 PM

Sneer? That was a completely straight statement. Should I put a smiley after it or something?)

Yes, thanks for the quotes, that's what I was thinking of. The word "religion" back in those days was commonly used to refer to Christianity, and that included the deist or unitarian forms in their minds by that time. Christians used the term all the time that way, though these days it has come to include all the world's religions.

I believe so but I'm not familiar with the laws about this. It does. It has something to do with authorizing educational standards at least, and homeschoolers and religious schools also have to meet these standards. This is why Christians want to leave the public schools, because as a matter of fact other people's beliefs ARE taught to their children there. Other religions are presented to them, and the "religion of secularism" is taught implicitly, and their Christian moral standards are undermined. Christians disagree with you about that. Christianity is a worldview that impinges on every subject taught in the schools.

Good points. Thanks.

OK, I will try to remember to use some qualifier like Bible-inerrancy Christians.Or how about you use some qualifier since your beliefs are the nontraditional ones.Yes there have always been Christian schools, some very good ones. In fact most of the first universities were founded to train Christian ministers. But for the most part all these originally orthodox Christian institutions have lost their first inspiration.Nobody is recommending "not exposing" children to anything. There is nothing wrong with studying other religions and I expect Christian schools to encourage this, but from a Bible-inerrancy Christian perspective. The public schools teach religion from an anthropological or literary perspective, but also allow some proselytizing, as from Muslims in recent years. As I said about the "religion of secularism" it is implicit.Bible-inerrancy Christians want to teach all subjects from the Christian worldview and that includes teaching other religions from the Christian worldview.This message has been edited by Faith, 04-07-2006 11:02 AMThis message has been edited by Faith, 04-07-2006 11:04 AM

I disagree with everything you said except about teaching Euclidean v. nonEuclidean geometry -- only because I don't know anything about it.As for the rest, you teach nothing worth learning if you do not have a strong coherent point of view. Point of view is everything.ABE: I'll add that I don't think you teach the ability to think and criticize either, unless you teach from a strong point of view. If you just teach everything as a smorgasbord from its own point of view you make critical thinking difficult to impossible.This message has been edited by Faith, 04-07-2006 11:44 AM