Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
2,500,000 members. Thank you!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Education
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 06-07-2023, 12:46 PM
 
Location: Shawnee-on-Delaware, PA
7,900 posts, read 7,240,557 times
Reputation: 15994

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by gemstone1 View Post

To my knowledge, there are no laws that support public tax funding of religious entities....perhaps someone can enlighten me.
The Government sez:
...faith-based organizations may not use direct government support to support "inherently religious" activities.

Most people would agree that educating children is not an "inherently religious" activity. Another example is feeding the poor and homeless. I volunteer at my church's soup kitchen, and there is no proselytizing or requirements of any kind. We do say an informal grace before the meal, but that's about as close as we get to religion.

https://www.hhs.gov/answers/grants-a...ney/index.html
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 06-07-2023, 01:14 PM
 
Location: Sun City West, Arizona
49,943 posts, read 23,679,247 times
Reputation: 32431
Quote:
Originally Posted by EDS_ View Post
Why should private school families be taxed to support public schools?


People on one side of the political aisle flatly demand that people on the other side pay for things the former wants not matter that most of the later find many of the spends morally and/or religiously objectionable.


I'm an atheist and have zero problem with public money going to religious institutions.
Why should I be taxed to pave the street in front of your house?

Why should I be taxed to provide you with drinking water?

Why should I be taxed to help fight WWII if I don't believe in WWII?

And on and on.

It's being part of a society, even when you don't like things the general society likes.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-07-2023, 02:14 PM
 
Location: Long Island
56,661 posts, read 25,586,303 times
Reputation: 15323
Quote:
Originally Posted by YorktownGal View Post
First of all, Catholic school do not require students to be Catholic. My son's Catholic high school had Muslim students. Muslims venerate Mary as the Mother of Jesus They also share many traditional values with Catholics.

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/09/11/n...de%20oversight.

Basically, public schools are atheist schools.

So you can all calm down now.
Those are private religious schools regardless of who they allow, students regardless of religion are taught the Catholic faith. The question is why should taxpayers fund religious schools.

No idea why you claim public schools are atheist.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-07-2023, 02:14 PM
 
7,056 posts, read 3,902,047 times
Reputation: 16114
Quote:
Originally Posted by Goodnight View Post
Those are private religious schools regardless of who they allow, students regardless of religion are taught the Catholic faith. The question is why should taxpayers fund religious schools.
They aren't funding catholic schools, they are funding the student's education at a school of his choice.


Quote:
WASHINGTON – The Supreme Court delivered a major victory Tuesday to parents seeking state aid for their children's religious school education.

The court's conservative majority ruled 5-4 that states offering scholarships to students in private schools cannot exclude religious schools from such programs.

The case was brought by three mothers of religious school students from Montana who sought $500 tuition scholarships funded by a state tax credit program. The state's highest court struck down the program, citing the separation of church and state. In response, state officials ended the entire program.

The Supreme Court's liberal justices seized on that point in three separate dissents. They said Montana solved the discrimination by ending the program.

"Petitioners may still send their children to a religious school," Associate Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg said. "There simply are no scholarship funds to be had."

But Roberts and other conservative justices said the no-aid policy had its roots in constitutional amendments in 37 states, many rooted in 19th-century anti-Catholic sentiment, that blocked religious schools from receiving public funds.

"The Blaine Amendment was 'born of bigotry' and 'arose at a time of pervasive hostility to the Catholic Church and to Catholics in general,'" he wrote. "Many of its state counterparts have a similarly 'shameful pedigree.'"
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/...id/5122877002/

Quote:
Many religious schools receive federal funding, including a large percentage of Catholic schools and school systems. Possible sources of federal funding may include:

Free or reduced breakfast and lunch programs
Special education grants
Funding for at-risk students
Technology assistance or program grants
Funding for textbook or supplies
Professional development programs for teachers and staff
School choice voucher programs
https://diabetes.org/tools-support/k...igious-schools

Quote:
The Supreme Court ruled last month that the state of Maine cannot bar religious academies from participating in a school choice program that uses public funds to pay for students’ private school educations with vouchers.

The basic premise behind school vouchers is that a family receives credit for a certain amount of public money that they can then apply toward tuition at the private school of their choice. Money that otherwise, presumably, would have flowed into traditional public and charter schools.

In addition to the usual arguments about how such a system diverts funds from needy school districts and/or skims away the best students and their highly involved parents (an argument that is also applied to charter schools yet, strangely, not to NYC’s unzoned and gifted programs), the main red flag waved to convince voters to reject school vouchers is that, since parents can use the credit at any type of educational institution, a percentage of public funds will inevitably go to private religious schools (in the same way that public funds such as Pell Grants can be used at religious colleges).

Big jump down to:

How exactly does that not violate the constitutional separation of church and state? Granted, parents can opt out their kids from prayer time. But, by that same definition, concerned families can opt out of using their vouchers for religious schools by … not using their vouchers for religious schools. Ruling that public money can be used for private religious schools does not mean that anyone who doesn’t want to attend a religious institution would be forced to attend one. All it means is that those who do will have the option of using their voucher for a religious school, the same way as other parents will have the option of using it for a non-religious school that matches whatever they’re looking for, for their child, which their local public school is failing to provide.
https://www.the74million.org/article...nyc-for-years/
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-07-2023, 02:34 PM
 
Location: Sun City West, Arizona
49,943 posts, read 23,679,247 times
Reputation: 32431
Quote:
Originally Posted by Goodnight View Post
Those are private religious schools regardless of who they allow, students regardless of religion are taught the Catholic faith. The question is why should taxpayers fund religious schools.

No idea why you claim public schools are atheist.
I agree.

In the schools where I taught or was an administrator, the vast majority of teachers would have self-described as christians.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-07-2023, 02:49 PM
 
9,952 posts, read 6,540,265 times
Reputation: 19649
Quote:
Originally Posted by jtab4994 View Post
The Government sez:
...faith-based organizations may not use direct government support to support "inherently religious" activities.

Most people would agree that educating children is not an "inherently religious" activity. Another example is feeding the poor and homeless. I volunteer at my church's soup kitchen, and there is no proselytizing or requirements of any kind. We do say an informal grace before the meal, but that's about as close as we get to religion.

https://www.hhs.gov/answers/grants-a...ney/index.html
I’m not sure I would agree, particularly considering all the drama going on over what is being taught in schools right now. One can say it is not “inherently religious” but the arguments about why X or Y should or should not be taught often have a religious basis.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-07-2023, 02:50 PM
 
19,393 posts, read 17,604,254 times
Reputation: 16956
Quote:
Originally Posted by phetaroi View Post
Why should I be taxed to pave the street in front of your house?

Why should I be taxed to provide you with drinking water?

Why should I be taxed to help fight WWII if I don't believe in WWII?

And on and on.

It's being part of a society, even when you don't like things the general society likes.

I think we tend to agree. People are forced to pay for things they don't directly benefit from and in some cases things they find abhorrent.

Stipulation I am enthusiastically for paying more for better public school educational outcomes. Three meals a day, intense math, English etc. rehab efforts, paying great teachers more whatever proves to actually work.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-07-2023, 03:31 PM
 
Location: Shawnee-on-Delaware, PA
7,900 posts, read 7,240,557 times
Reputation: 15994
Quote:
Originally Posted by RamenAddict View Post
I’m not sure I would agree, particularly considering all the drama going on over what is being taught in schools right now. One can say it is not “inherently religious” but the arguments about why X or Y should or should not be taught often have a religious basis.
Maybe you're right. I was operating under the assumption that there's a legal precedent as to whether "running a K-12 school" is inherently religious. I know that the Catholics (being one) believe in evolution, the Big Bang, and all that standard science-y stuff. But have they caught up with "Flexible Gender Theory" that has just recently slouched out of Bethlehem, and will they teach it as gospel?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-07-2023, 05:42 PM
 
9,952 posts, read 6,540,265 times
Reputation: 19649
Quote:
Originally Posted by jtab4994 View Post
Maybe you're right. I was operating under the assumption that there's a legal precedent as to whether "running a K-12 school" is inherently religious. I know that the Catholics (being one) believe in evolution, the Big Bang, and all that standard science-y stuff. But have they caught up with "Flexible Gender Theory" that has just recently slouched out of Bethlehem, and will they teach it as gospel?
I think that Catholic schools a test case is perhaps not as representative. I don’t really think many teachers are teaching flexible gender theory, but on the other hand some religious schools/programs barely even do the basics justice. There are certainly large religions with more interesting beliefs on science. I just finished the Shiny Happy People documentary and the IBLP curriculum seems really out there. People locally have discussed it with horror on the local NextDoor as Bill Gothard lives in the area and there were IBLP facilities all over. I just don’t think anything like that would fly here in IL- it’s just too fringe even for someplace like Wheaton, but who knows about elsewhere.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-07-2023, 06:02 PM
 
4,343 posts, read 4,178,141 times
Reputation: 5771
Quote:
Originally Posted by gemstone1 View Post
"Why should private school families be taxed to support public schools?"

It's boils down to personal choice and the way that current laws are structured. Carrying your thought further, why should childless couples be taxed to support schools, why should pacifists be forced to see their tax money go to the war machine ? Because laws are written to support that activity.

To my knowledge, there are no laws that support public tax funding of religious entities....perhaps someone can enlighten me.

This atheist has a huge problem with my tax money supporting religious entities.

Another side of the tax issue....should religious entities lose their tax exempt status once they take government money ?
How long before a suit is filed?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Education

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top