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.
It is ridiculous because I am the religious right and do not feel that way.
Well, you're being represented by folks who violently disagree with your viewpoint on science and want nothing more than a return to an age of faith rather than reason. And when you more mainstream Christians sit silent as the loudmouth bigots publicly proclaim their intolerance and willful ignorance, then you're by default allowing them to be your spokesmen.
Well, you're being represented by folks who violently disagree with your viewpoint on science and want nothing more than a return to an age of faith rather than reason. And when you more mainstream Christians sit silent as the loudmouth bigots publicly proclaim their intolerance and willful ignorance, then you're by default allowing them to be your spokesmen.
No I am not represented by right wing Christian nut jobs. Are there some out there yes but they do not represent me. Just because they scream the loudest does not make them a representative it makes them loud nothing more. should I assume that the left wing nuts in Hollywood represent you because they get the air time? That is just ridiculous.
You guys didn't pay the whole cost of your university education.
No, my parents did. But I'm sure they would love to know the break they got and who paid for it. The college I went to has and continues to receive huge endowments from alumni that has provided the money to build new dorms, new academic buildings, etc.
Could you please elaborate as I have never heard of this or delved into it?
When it comes to the debate going on if public education is truly free or not, you seem to be stuck on semantics.
I've been in the room with creationists and intelligent designer folks...trust me...they DON'T agree at all. To suggest that promoting intelligent design is a back door to creationism indicates you don't understand either one.
Well, you're being represented by folks who violently disagree with your viewpoint on science and want nothing more than a return to an age of faith rather than reason. And when you more mainstream Christians sit silent as the loudmouth bigots publicly proclaim their intolerance and willful ignorance, then you're by default allowing them to be your spokesmen.
It is always the vocal minority that embarrasses the majority of any group.
I think the problem started with an attack of Christianity from all fronts years ago with things such as the allowing of a star of David on public property, but not a manger scene, or let's get rid of the Pledge of Allegiance because it mentions the word "God" (who cares about the history of it) and lets get the word "God" off of money and let's get rid of the "whatever remotely symbolizing" anything Christian-like everywhere. No Christmas trees in schools, but we'll teach Ramadan and Kwanzaa and Channukah. Let's have "Holiday parties" at work so no one is offended by the horror of the holiday which is the only reason there are "Holiday parties" to begin with.
Instead of making adjustments here and there it seemed as if a full on attack was started.
OK, I'm back! I seem to have made a lot of people uncomfortable. And that was perhaps my point. I have studied education issues on the local, state and national level for 20 years for a political organization. I know, I might say, better than many people on this board know, that taxes paid by parents do not totally fund public education. In my district, as I pointed out, 80% of taxpayers do not have kids in school. Some had kids in school at one time, some will in the future, and some never have/never will. 100% of the taxpayers are supporting the 20% of the taxpayers' kids. I am certain the figures are the same within a few percentage points in almost every district in the country. Those who argue that they are "paying" for the schools because they pay taxes are incorrect. A child can attend school even if his/her parents pay no taxes. This happens, as some have pointed out, when a kid from a homelss shelter, which is probably tax exempt, attends school in his/her attendance area. Forget this arguing over whether a kid from a homeless shelter can attend a school not in his/her attendance area (although that would be possible in Colorado). A kid from a homelss shelter can attend a public school. A kid from a public housing project can attend a public school. A kid in married student housing at a tax-exempt university can attend a public school. A kid living in a one bedroom hovel that has a low tax bill can attend public school and get the same type of education as a kid living in a McMansion, that has a high tax bill. Kids from 10 kid families get the same kind of education as kids from only-child families, even if their parents are paying the same amount in taxes. Paying taxes is not a method of paying tuition. Even in my state, which is on the low end of the per-pupil expenditure, it costs almost $7K/year to educate one child (on average). That is about 1/4 of what I pay in property taxes, and maybe 1/2 of the total I pay in taxes to support the schools. Yet my two kids got a public education for the 13 years they were both in school together, and for 16 years total. Kids are not "charged" for public education, except for incidentals (consumable materials fees for middle/high school classes such as photography, home ec, lab science, etc).
I am not an idiot, like some seem to think. I know you can't wave a magic wand and fund the schools. But the state constitution of all 50 states guarantees a free public education. All one needs to do is google "free public education (insert name of state) constitution.
To sum up, anyone who thinks because they pay taxes that they are paying for their kids' educations, and that if they didn't pay them their kids would not get educated, is mistaken, and possibly kidding themselves.
Quote:
Originally Posted by shorebaby
Can you go to a public school in a municipalitiy where you do not pay taxes (either directly or through rent (rent which is subsidized by government or paid directly)? No
See a pattern?
Actually, you can go to public school even if you are in a living situation that pays no taxes, b/c the constitution of every state guarantees a "free public education".
Quote:
Originally Posted by Valley Native
Once and for all, please learn the difference between a right and a privilege. Education is not a right, nor is health care. Utilizing such free services on the backs of taxpayers is not a right ... however, it IS socialism.
.
The constitution of every state guarnatees a free public education. I told you how to google this in the body of my post.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dcadca
WOW talk about being obtuse. Taxes ARE in a sense tuition because if I don't pay them I don't get to send my kids to the school.
This is not true. Your kids are guaranteed a free public education whether you personally pay taxes or not.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Valley Native
OK, but if you want to talk about Constitutions, please locate where it says in the United States Constitution about education being free ... or better yet, where does it say that education is a right??? While we're on the subject of free schools and rights vs. privileges, point to where it states in the U.S. Constitution about procreation being a right. Good luck!
The federal constitution left anything they did not enumerate up to the states. Every state guarantees a free public education. I am not talking about procreation; maybe you've mixed me up with someone else.
For all you conservatives who are screaming about Socialism, do your children attend public schools?
What's your point? That if a conservative person is paying property taxes to support public schools, that they are a sell out if they send their children there?
Location: The Chatterdome in La La Land, CaliFUNia
39,031 posts, read 23,020,628 times
Reputation: 36027
Quote:
Originally Posted by Katiana
OK, I'm back! I seem to have made a lot of people uncomfortable. And that was perhaps my point. I have studied education issues on the local, state and national level for 20 years for a political organization. I know, I might say, better than many people on this board know, that taxes paid by parents do not totally fund public education. In my district, as I pointed out, 80% of taxpayers do not have kids in school. Some had kids in school at one time, some will in the future, and some never have/never will. 100% of the taxpayers are supporting the 20% of the taxpayers' kids. I am certain the figures are the same within a few percentage points in almost every district in the country. Those who argue that they are "paying" for the schools because they pay taxes are incorrect. A child can attend school even if his/her parents pay no taxes. This happens, as some have pointed out, when a kid from a homelss shelter, which is probably tax exempt, attends school in his/her attendance area. Forget this arguing over whether a kid from a homeless shelter can attend a school not in his/her attendance area (although that would be possible in Colorado). A kid from a homelss shelter can attend a public school. A kid from a public housing project can attend a public school. A kid in married student housing at a tax-exempt university can attend a public school. A kid living in a one bedroom hovel that has a low tax bill can attend public school and get the same type of education as a kid living in a McMansion, that has a high tax bill. Kids from 10 kid families get the same kind of education as kids from only-child families, even if their parents are paying the same amount in taxes. Paying taxes is not a method of paying tuition. Even in my state, which is on the low end of the per-pupil expenditure, it costs almost $7K/year to educate one child (on average). That is about 1/4 of what I pay in property taxes, and maybe 1/2 of the total I pay in taxes to support the schools. Yet my two kids got a public education for the 13 years they were both in school together, and for 16 years total. Kids are not "charged" for public education, except for incidentals (consumable materials fees for middle/high school classes such as photography, home ec, lab science, etc).
I am not an idiot, like some seem to think. I know you can't wave a magic wand and fund the schools. But the state constitution of all 50 states guarantees a free public education. All one needs to do is google "free public education (insert name of state) constitution.
To sum up, anyone who thinks because they pay taxes that they are paying for their kids' educations, and that if they didn't pay them their kids would not get educated, is mistaken, and possibly kidding themselves.
Actually, you can go to public school even if you are in a living situation that pays no taxes, b/c the constitution of every state guarantees a "free public education".
The constitution of every state guarnatees a free public education. I told you how to google this in the body of my post.
This is not true. Your kids are guaranteed a free public education whether you personally pay taxes or not.
What if every tax payer in the US stops paying taxes, would we still receive this "free education"?
Location: The Chatterdome in La La Land, CaliFUNia
39,031 posts, read 23,020,628 times
Reputation: 36027
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wapasha
What's your point? That if a conservative person is paying property taxes to support public schools, that they are a sell out if they send their children there?
Seems to be implied that if a conservative uses the public school system, they are being hypocrits about socialism. In order for conservatives to NOT be hypocrits, they should just pay their taxes like good little conservatives to educate the children of the liberals. This is what I'm getting from the OP and from Katiana.
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.
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.
