Government Money to Discriminatory Schools

[Phatscotty]

edit

You don't have any understanding of what this thread is about, do you?

hehe, wrong thread. I try to stay out of you guys's

Sorry

[GBU56]

They are trying to force it on us, force it in our schools, force it in the workplace, in our church. All of a sudden we have to change everything into our new hijacked defintions. Anyone who disagrees with the new highjacked definitions must be put out of business, and the schools must be flipped upside down.

That's why it's Nazi tactics. Look at the absurdity of calling someone who thinks marriage is between a man and a woman is now a bigot. It's totally absurd! That's all marriage has ever been!

You don't have any understanding of what this thread is about, do you?

Nazi tactics????? Nazis were throwing homosexuals into Concentration Camps. Does your head rattle when you bounce up and down?

[Woodruff]

edit

You don't have any understanding of what this thread is about, do you?

hehe, wrong thread. I try to stay out of you guys's

Sorry

Fair enough. Lord knows I've quoted the wrong people at times "because that's who I quoted last".

[Upgrayedd]

"Rights issues", by which you probably mean institutionalized discrimination, can affect the population in a significant way, therefore your reasoning is flawed.

Isn't that what this thread is about? Institutionalized discrimination.

Key word is significant. Population affected in this case should also be looked at.

[yang guize]

do you think that all religious schools should be refused government money? or just religious schools like this that is not accepting of gay families?

it sounds like you are just complaining because you think gays and straight people are equal. therefore you will not let anyone believe differently. unfortunately for you, it is not your position to force your value system on every other citizen of your country.

your choice is either:
- official recognition of and support for all religious values, whether or not you personally agree with them.
- no official recognition of or support for any religious values.

essentially, if you ask your government to fun some people but not others then you are asking your government to regulate morality.

[GreecePwns]

Exactly. Which is why government funding should not go to private schools. This money can be used to fund a myriad of other things that don't involve imposing morality on citizens.

[PLAYER57832]

do you think that all religious schools should be refused government money? or just religious schools like this that is not accepting of gay families?

it sounds like you are just complaining because you think gays and straight people are equal. therefore you will not let anyone believe differently. unfortunately for you, it is not your position to force your value system on every other citizen of your country.

your choice is either:
- official recognition of and support for all religious values, whether or not you personally agree with them.
- no official recognition of or support for any religious values.

essentially, if you ask your government to fun some people but not others then you are asking your government to regulate morality.

And the first casualty when religion is infused into government is other religious beliefs... which is why it is CHURCHES and not, as many try to claim, some "liberal crazies" that have historically fought the strongest for independence. Of course, the liberal and liberaterian views each agree with the churches in this, but do note that church involvement was central.

[PLAYER57832]

Homosexual example: no you shouldn't care about what other people have the "right" to do. You are not them, therefore you cannot speak for them. If they a problem dealing with discrimination, it's up to them to solve it. Game over, insert coin to continue.

Yeah, pretty much what a lot of people said in 1925 Germany.....

[Haggis_McMutton]

Exactly. Which is why government funding should not go to private schools. This money can be used to fund a myriad of other things that don't involve imposing morality on citizens.

+1

If you want to indoctrinate your kids you can do it on your own dime.

[Upgrayedd]

Homosexual example: no you shouldn't care about what other people have the "right" to do. You are not them, therefore you cannot speak for them. If they a problem dealing with discrimination, it's up to them to solve it. Game over, insert coin to continue.

Yeah, pretty much what a lot of people said in 1925 Germany.....

The Weimar Republic was discriminating! THE HORROR

FYI Nazis didn't come to power until 1933 and by 1943 discrimination was the LEAST of Germany's problems (much less homosexual discrimination). Your post is completely nonsensical.

[Frigidus]

do you think that all religious schools should be refused government money? or just religious schools like this that is not accepting of gay families?

it sounds like you are just complaining because you think gays and straight people are equal. therefore you will not let anyone believe differently. unfortunately for you, it is not your position to force your value system on every other citizen of your country.

your choice is either:
- official recognition of and support for all religious values, whether or not you personally agree with them.
- no official recognition of or support for any religious values.

essentially, if you ask your government to fun some people but not others then you are asking your government to regulate morality.

Good point. Why are we giving money to religious schools again?

Homosexual example: no you shouldn't care about what other people have the "right" to do. You are not them, therefore you cannot speak for them. If they a problem dealing with discrimination, it's up to them to solve it. Game over, insert coin to continue.

Yeah, pretty much what a lot of people said in 1925 Germany.....

The Weimar Republic was discriminating! THE HORROR

FYI Nazis didn't come to power until 1933 and by 1943 discrimination was the LEAST of Germany's problems (much less homosexual discrimination). Your post is completely nonsensical.

Oh man, she got the date wrong. You totally countered her point there. Well played.

[yang guize]

LOL.

Nazis didn't come to power until 1933 and by 1943 discrimination was the LEAST of Germany's problems

from what i have heard, there was a european holocaust that was run by the germans during world war 2 (so it was going on during 1943).

it was so serious that in europe they still arrest and punish people who were involved in killing jews at this time. it sounds to me that discrimination caused some fairly big problems during the nazi's leadership.

[Upgrayedd]

LOL.

Nazis didn't come to power until 1933 and by 1943 discrimination was the LEAST of Germany's problems

from what i have heard, there was a european holocaust that was run by the germans during world war 2 (so it was going on during 1943).

it was so serious that in europe they still arrest and punish people who were involved in killing jews at this time. it sounds to me that discrimination caused some fairly big problems during the nazi's leadership.

1. You need to learn what discrimination means
2. You need to learn what holocaust means
3. You need to learn what context means

P.S. You should also look into the fact that not only Jews died during WW2

[PLAYER57832]

Homosexual example: no you shouldn't care about what other people have the "right" to do. You are not them, therefore you cannot speak for them. If they a problem dealing with discrimination, it's up to them to solve it. Game over, insert coin to continue.

Yeah, pretty much what a lot of people said in 1925 Germany.....

The Weimar Republic was discriminating! THE HORROR

FYI Nazis didn't come to power until 1933 and by 1943 discrimination was the LEAST of Germany's problems (much less homosexual discrimination). Your post is completely nonsensical.

Yeah, I picked 1925 for a reason. See, waiting until an oppressive regime is already in power is pretty much too late to fight oppression.

But if you have trouble understanding what I wrote, then you should try some basic English classes (not mention a few history classes).

Then again, answers like this are likely humerous to most people here...

LOL.

Nazis didn't come to power until 1933 and by 1943 discrimination was the LEAST of Germany's problems

from what i have heard, there was a european holocaust that was run by the germans during world war 2 (so it was going on during 1943).

it was so serious that in europe they still arrest and punish people who were involved in killing jews at this time. it sounds to me that discrimination caused some fairly big problems during the nazi's leadership.

1. You need to learn what discrimination means
2. You need to learn what holocaust means
3. You need to learn what context means

P.S. You should also look into the fact that not only Jews died during WW2

LOL... LOL... LOL

For fun, how about you provide us with your "definitions" ..... It should prove interesting...

[PLAYER57832]

Oh man, she got the date wrong. You totally countered her point there. Well played.

Actually, no, I did not... (read my last response to him)

[Upgrayedd]

Homosexual example: no you shouldn't care about what other people have the "right" to do. You are not them, therefore you cannot speak for them. If they a problem dealing with discrimination, it's up to them to solve it. Game over, insert coin to continue.

Yeah, pretty much what a lot of people said in 1925 Germany.....

The Weimar Republic was discriminating! THE HORROR

FYI Nazis didn't come to power until 1933 and by 1943 discrimination was the LEAST of Germany's problems (much less homosexual discrimination). Your post is completely nonsensical.

Yeah, I picked 1925 for a reason. See, waiting until an oppressive regime is already in power is pretty much too late to fight oppression.

But if you have trouble understanding what I wrote, then you should try some basic English classes (not mention a few history classes).

Then again, answers like this are likely humerous to most people here...

LOL.

Nazis didn't come to power until 1933 and by 1943 discrimination was the LEAST of Germany's problems

from what i have heard, there was a european holocaust that was run by the germans during world war 2 (so it was going on during 1943).

it was so serious that in europe they still arrest and punish people who were involved in killing jews at this time. it sounds to me that discrimination caused some fairly big problems during the nazi's leadership.

1. You need to learn what discrimination means
2. You need to learn what holocaust means
3. You need to learn what context means

P.S. You should also look into the fact that not only Jews died during WW2

LOL... LOL... LOL

For fun, how about you provide us with your "definitions" ..... It should prove interesting...

FYI Nazi party had popular support and few people even tried fighting it's oppression. If the majority of Germans really wanted to they'd have had no problem kicking the Nazi's out. FAIL.

[jimboston]

This school should not receive any Federal tax money. As an aside, I also don't understand why they would reject this, given they "could save the kid"...shouldn't they be thinking that way?
http://www.koat.com/news/new-mexico/albuquerque/School-rejects-3-year-old-because-parents-are-gay/-/9153728/15665304/-/aadto3/-/index.html

Maybe the "gayness" with "infect" the other students?

Question... why would anyone want to go to a private school that doesn't want them or accept their lifestyle?

[PLAYER57832]

Homosexual example: no you shouldn't care about what other people have the "right" to do. You are not them, therefore you cannot speak for them. If they a problem dealing with discrimination, it's up to them to solve it. Game over, insert coin to continue.

Yeah, pretty much what a lot of people said in 1925 Germany.....

The Weimar Republic was discriminating! THE HORROR

FYI Nazis didn't come to power until 1933 and by 1943 discrimination was the LEAST of Germany's problems (much less homosexual discrimination). Your post is completely nonsensical.

Yeah, I picked 1925 for a reason. See, waiting until an oppressive regime is already in power is pretty much too late to fight oppression.

But if you have trouble understanding what I wrote, then you should try some basic English classes (not mention a few history classes).

Then again, answers like this are likely humerous to most people here...

LOL.

Nazis didn't come to power until 1933 and by 1943 discrimination was the LEAST of Germany's problems

from what i have heard, there was a european holocaust that was run by the germans during world war 2 (so it was going on during 1943).

it was so serious that in europe they still arrest and punish people who were involved in killing jews at this time. it sounds to me that discrimination caused some fairly big problems during the nazi's leadership.

1. You need to learn what discrimination means
2. You need to learn what holocaust means
3. You need to learn what context means

P.S. You should also look into the fact that not only Jews died during WW2

LOL... LOL... LOL

For fun, how about you provide us with your "definitions" ..... It should prove interesting...

FYI Nazi party had popular support and few people even tried fighting it's oppression. If the majority of Germans really wanted to they'd have had no problem kicking the Nazi's out. FAIL.

and you feel this disputes what I said, how, exactly?

See my point is that we don't want to copy pre WWII Germany... We DO fight oppression, here, which is why the objections to tax dollars being used to promote one religious viewpoint.

[jimboston]

They do accept children who are not Roman Catholic, though we have to pay more money.

This is a misleading statement.

You don't pay more because you're not Roman Catholic.

You pay more because you are not a member of the parish.

Roman Catholic's who belong to another parish would also pay more than a local parishioner.

Note... the discount to parishioner's is a reflection of the fact that they make donations to the church weekly.

(or at least they are supposed to... and many parishes track how much based on the envelope which people use.)

(Technically a catholic is supposed to donate 10% of his/her income to his/her parish... though around here very few actually do that much.)

[PLAYER57832]

Question... why would anyone want to go to a private school that doesn't want them or accept their lifestyle?

I half answered this above. Without knowing the individual circumstances, I can only speculate. However, few people are fortunate enough to have an ideal school nearby. You make what trade-offs you need to find the best choice available.

To be more specific, if the only other choice were a program in a gang ridden area or just a really poor program, then one might choose this. For me.. while I am sending my son to a Roman Catholic program despite not agreeing with the Roman Catholic church, I would draw the line at much more of a compromise. (and even in this case, will likely not have my son continue past the first few years there).

[Upgrayedd]

Homosexual example: no you shouldn't care about what other people have the "right" to do. You are not them, therefore you cannot speak for them. If they a problem dealing with discrimination, it's up to them to solve it. Game over, insert coin to continue.

Yeah, pretty much what a lot of people said in 1925 Germany.....

The Weimar Republic was discriminating! THE HORROR

FYI Nazis didn't come to power until 1933 and by 1943 discrimination was the LEAST of Germany's problems (much less homosexual discrimination). Your post is completely nonsensical.

Yeah, I picked 1925 for a reason. See, waiting until an oppressive regime is already in power is pretty much too late to fight oppression.

But if you have trouble understanding what I wrote, then you should try some basic English classes (not mention a few history classes).

Then again, answers like this are likely humerous to most people here...

LOL.

Nazis didn't come to power until 1933 and by 1943 discrimination was the LEAST of Germany's problems

from what i have heard, there was a european holocaust that was run by the germans during world war 2 (so it was going on during 1943).

it was so serious that in europe they still arrest and punish people who were involved in killing jews at this time. it sounds to me that discrimination caused some fairly big problems during the nazi's leadership.

1. You need to learn what discrimination means
2. You need to learn what holocaust means
3. You need to learn what context means

P.S. You should also look into the fact that not only Jews died during WW2

LOL... LOL... LOL

For fun, how about you provide us with your "definitions" ..... It should prove interesting...

FYI Nazi party had popular support and few people even tried fighting it's oppression. If the majority of Germans really wanted to they'd have had no problem kicking the Nazi's out. FAIL.

and you feel this disputes what I said, how, exactly?

See my point is that we don't want to copy pre WWII Germany... We DO fight oppression, here, which is why the objections to tax dollars being used to promote one religious viewpoint.

So because one ultra-oppressive state failed that means all forms of oppression, no matter how minor, will also fail. Wut. What about Rome, Ancient China, pre-modern USA - they were all oppressive and yet they did extremely well for themselves, affording their citizens higher standards of living than was the norm for their times and leaving behind legacies that would persist for thousands of years.

[PLAYER57832]

They do accept children who are not Roman Catholic, though we have to pay more money.

This is a misleading statement.

You don't pay more because you're not Roman Catholic.

You pay more because you are not a member of the parish.

Roman Catholic's who belong to another parish would also pay more than a local parishioner.

Note... the discount to parishioner's is a reflection of the fact that they make donations to the church weekly.

(or at least they are supposed to... and many parishes track how much based on the envelope which people use.)

(Technically a catholic is supposed to donate 10% of his/her income to his/her parish... though around here very few actually do that much.)

This might be true where you live, but not here, probably because there have been a lot of organizational changes and flux here. (but that is just a guess). At any rate, yes, it is because the local churches contribute to the school. Anyway, my point was not that the extra fee is inappropriate, but that I am willing to pay it.

We are eligible for some scholarships, though. (those not administered by the Parish or Diocese) and we can "pay ahead" through what they call a "script" program -- where we buy essentially gift cards (at cost) that we can use in various stores. Various stores kick back a percentage to the school account.. Walmart is 1% (not that I shop there any ... ), our local grocery store varies from 3%-sometimes 5% specials. ETC. (I think a lot of private schools do this now.. its a good way to earn money without it really costing anything, IF you only buy cards for stores where you really would shop).

[PLAYER57832]

Too many quotes to include.. see the above dialogue for context

So because one ultra-oppressive state failed that means all forms of oppression, no matter how minor, will also fail. Wut. What about Rome, Ancient China, pre-modern USA - they were all oppressive and yet they did extremely well for themselves, affording their citizens higher standards of living than was the norm for their times and leaving behind legacies that would persist for thousands of years.

Pretty much exactly the opposite of what I said. I said it is important to fight small oppressions before they get too big to counter.

You, to contrast, seem bent on claiming that a school refusing to admit a 3 year old from a homosexual family should be able to get whatever tax dollars they want, that opposing that somehow makes us the "oppressors".

It doesn't matter how little the tax payment is, the point is if they are promoting religion, they should not be getting any tax dollars.

[jimboston]

Exactly. Which is why government funding should not go to private schools. This money can be used to fund a myriad of other things that don't involve imposing morality on citizens.

+1

If you want to indoctrinate your kids you can do it on your own dime.

The only problem is that the gov't takes so much money for education... and they often fail to provide that service in the public system.

I am torn on this issue... I don't want gov't money going to discriminatory schools.... or extreme religious schools that could be preaching hate.

... at the same time I don't like my take dollars wasted on the public system.

I am also annoyed by the fact that the mandate for the school system keeps growing. They used to just have to educate kids. Now they provide counseling, health care, food, etc. etc. This is part of the reason they suck at education. They should focus on their core job.

[GreecePwns]

Could they not take the money going to private schools and spend it on literally anything? I don't know the intricacies of budgeting, but there is some general fund that the money can be put to.