'Intelligent-design' school board ousted in Penn

How would vouchers stop someone from being an absolute ignorant fool and asserting that they can redefine what science is? What'll they redefine next ... pi???The problem is not with the schools, but those who think they can redefine knowledge, who think they know more from their vantage point of ignorance than professionals in the various fields of science, or who think because they survived high school they can develop a valid school curriculum.They are the ones that create the fights that waste the time of schools and kids, and try the patience of reasonable people who have to fix up the messy aftermath.Stop interfering with school and see if you still need vouchers to provide an education.

---

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand

​

RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.

Where does the money for the vouchers come from? Space aliens?It comes from the education funds that used to go to the public school for the student, less an administrative fee. Net value to the student: less than before. Net value to the public school: less than before. Including yours.

---

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand

​

RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.

You did not answer the question: where does the money for the vouchers come from? Presumably space aliens at this point. Voodoo economics at work again?Personally I have no problem with having {kids\parents} choosing non-science courses all the way through high-school if they have such a desire, as that would leave the science classes to those students that did want to learn the facts.We could easily have high school courses in various trades to allow the kids an opportunity to move directly into the work force from high school. We could also have arts and crafts and culture classes to prepare students for the life of an {artist\poet\musician\etc} after high school.We don't need a voucher system to accomplish this.Of course the {kids\parents} would also be choosing a course of study that would preclude any higher education in any scientific field, but that is part of what making choices entails. No, I don't want YOU deciding what is taught as science.How many average parents do you know that are actually qualified to teach biology? If they are not qualified to teach a subject then how do they know enough about the subject to talk meaningfully about how it is taught?Parents can decide which schools their children go to, choosing the program that best fits their desired level and kind of education for their kids.As the kids move into high school parents can advise their kids which courses to take too, but to meet your narrow criteria they would also be deciding every single course the child takes - whether the child wants to or not.Deciding what education is best for their kids (where to send them, what courses to enroll them in) and being able to intelligently decide what actually goes into that education process are two different things.Parents do NOT get to decide what history is (let's eliminate the holocast from the text), or what math is (let's make pi = 3.0, just for the kids). Parents do NOT get to decide what chemistry is, what physics is or what biology is, or what the definition of science is.These are established fields of study based on the knowledge accumulated in each field. Teaching anything less is not teaching those fields but a cheap taudry immitation.Parents do NOT get to decide what is true.This argument is a strawman and invokes the fallacy of prejudicial language because it is false from the start and has no real legs to stand on.Enjoy.

---

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand

​

RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.

And while there may be economies of scale (larger schools better able to bear the cost of the facilities), there certainly is a point of diminishing return when a school can no longer afford the facilities at all. My points are that the vouchers don't necessarily solve anything - throwing money at the problem in not necessarily the answer.The only thing that vouchers provide is a means to finance the development of more schools.If the problem is that there are too few schools, then build more schools.If the problem is NOT that there are too few schools, then building more schools will not solve the problem.To properly address the question of the value of vouchers you have to know the costs of the system as a whole, and any failure to address the whole picture is cherry-picking the elements to show a benefit for a position and ignoring the other consequences. This is what randman is doing.Any system that divides the school population into two financially distinct groups and proceeds to give more advantages to one group than another is discriminatory.

---

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand

​

RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.