The School Funding Thread- Merged

[ex-Sup]

If a religion needs to brain wash you when your young then your parent's should pay for the brain washing not the taxpayer. 

Kinda harsh don't you think? A bit insulting? I've been educated/worked in a Catholic school all my life and I'm not in the least bit brainwashed. I am very well educated, think for myself and feel that I can question things about my religion. A better choice of words perhaps?

 

[DBA]

Some historical background: First there was the Protestant school system. Then Catholics, which were a minority, were granted the right to form their own school system so the could be free of discrimination and teach a Catholic view of the Bible. The Protestant system slowly morphed into the current public system with some remnants only going rather recently, like school prayer being abolished in the 1980's. The Catholic right was in the British North America Act and references to it are also in the current Canadian Constitution. No student in Ontario is currently forced to take part religious programs or classes, either in the public system on in the Catholic system if they must go to such a school due to reasons listed in the Education Act of Ontario.

The status quo certainly does provide a right to Catholics that other religions don't share so isn't look upon favourably internationally and domestically. The chances of taking away the right of Catholics to a Catholic school system are next to Nil. A bit under 1/3 of students in Ontario attend such schools so it's a pretty big minority and it would require a constitutional amendment. The only other option open if the status quo isn't acceptable is extending funding to other religious schools.

 

[rz350]

I was going to vote PC, but this here is a deal breaker for me. So the Libs get my vote. I'm not down for having a Madras on my penny...if someone wants to open one, fine, but it, like after market kit, should be "no cost to the crown"

 

[ixium]

Fact: Catholic schools are funded by taxes and the government.

Fact: Catholic schools can choose not to accept people based solely on their religion.

Fact: Public schools have to take anyone, even if they don't have room, so long as the child is in its district.

Fact: All other religious and private schools DO NOT get funding from taxes and/or government.

Fact: Parents of kids in private schools still pay taxes that go towards public schooling.

The argument here is why do Catholic schools get priority over any other religious group AND be able to discriminate against non-Catholics.

Again, a PUBLICALLY funded school, no matter the religion or method of teaching, should be avaliable to the PUBLIC. No one should be treated any different.

lsn't that what thousands and thousands and thousands of people have given their lives for in the past? To be free of disrimination in the world?

 

[Bane]

        I went to a Catholic then public elementary school, did three years in a public high school and my final two years in a private Anglican high school.  I think funding should be taken away from the RC system, or at a minimum rolled back in all cases of duplication of service or low student levels, and the parents of kids who attend any private school be dealt a negative tax incentive.  You want to send your kid to a private school of any type, you pay 50%(as an example) more education tax.  This covers the cost of shaving off teachers and administrators from the public system and taking away focus on the public system as a social constructor.  If those with the most wealth (power) can avoid the public system, and many do, then they have zero incentive to engage, improve or fix that system. Thus they should suffer an increased cost for stealing away from the social fabric.  Ofcourse, I also would like to see universal conscription too, but that's for a future thread perhaps.


As an aside, instead of funding religious schools why not add a series of religion classes to a total public system?

 

[a_majoor]

Most of these arguments are very similar to the ones "we" lambasted when UVic's student council decided to impose their will on the student body (which is also required to pay levies) and prevent the CF from recruiting at the job fair.

Rather than having the State decide for the parents, the system should be adjusted so parents can choose the school which supports their values. Why should parents who want their children to be taught in a supportive religious environment be denied? Taxpayer funding of all religious schools that follow the curriculum is one means of achieving this end, and since there is no serious discussion of vouchers, charter schools or other alternatives, then this is the 1/2 loaf solution.

As pointed out, the true driving force for opposition to this plan is not separation of Church and State or the other notions brought up by ixium but rather the competition for tax dollars when paid on a "per head" basis.

BTW Bane, I am by no means rich or powerful, but I chose to send my children to private school. Based on comparison with their public school peers when observed in outside settings, I really don't see any "social construction" going on, so please don't try to force your views on others.

 

[McG]

Update

 

[the 48th regulator]

Fact: Catholic schools are funded by taxes and the government.

Fact: Catholic schools can choose not to accept people based solely on their religion.

Fact: Public schools have to take anyone, even if they don't have room, so long as the child is in its district.

Fact: All other religious and private schools DO NOT get funding from taxes and/or government.

Fact: Parents of kids in private schools still pay taxes that go towards public schooling.

The argument here is why do Catholic schools get priority over any other religious group AND be able to discriminate against non-Catholics.

Again, a PUBLICALLY funded school, no matter the religion or method of teaching, should be avaliable to the PUBLIC. No one should be treated any different.

lsn't that what thousands and thousands and thousands of people have given their lives for in the past? To be free of disrimination in the world?

So with this post, your participaction here in this thread, has absolutely nothing to do with John Tory's proposal.  Your's is an anti-Catholic Agenda.

Hmm,

Now we get all the cards on the table.

dileas

tess

 

[Bane]

I don't see how I was forcing my views on you a_majoor? It's a forum debate and I'm just saying what I think. I choose to go to a private school! You also proved my point by saying you prefer the conduct of private school kids over public school kids.  I'd love to live in a 'better off' neighbourhood, but I don't think public housing giant projects and poor ghettos are good. Mixed neighbourhoods are better for contact across the socio-economic spectrum. Again, I'm not trying to push my argument upon anyone, this is what I think. I understand many of the arguments for private school and publicly funded religious schools, and some of those arguments are very good ones. I just don't find them fully persuasive.


Edited for clairity

 

[Fishbone Jones]

I was going to vote PC, but this here is a deal breaker for me. So the Libs get my vote. I'm not down for having a Madras on my penny...if someone wants to open one, fine, but it, like after market kit, should be "no cost to the crown"

You've got it backwards. We have the Madrasses now. We have no control on what they are taught. If they take funding, they'll teach on our terms.

There's also more to system change than a single issue. I wish things were so shallow, that they could be solved so easy, with no real thought, on one thing, but they're not. Voter apathy is one of the main causes of being stuck with useless politicians.

 

[Bruce Monkhouse]

So with this post, your participaction here in this thread, has absolutely nothing to do with John Tory's proposal.  Your's is an anti-Catholic Agenda.

Hmm,

Now we get all the cards on the table.
dileas
tess

..and since your posting as a "normal user" I will post as a Mod and say lighten up with the accusations.

 

[ixium]

So with this post, your participaction here in this thread, has absolutely nothing to do with John Tory's proposal.  Your's is an anti-Catholic Agenda.

Hmm,

Now we get all the cards on the table.

dileas

tess

How did you get that from what l said? They are facts, not made up facts, real ones.

There is only 2 logical ways to solve the problem.

Publically fund every school, but put in rules and regulations that stipulate that any one of any color/nationality/religion can join

Don't fund every school and just fund the public schools. No special religions getting extra benifits.

Allowing public schools to seperate two different people simply because of what they beleive or by what they look like or where their mom works is a step backwards of the 'Canadian way'

Even publically funding every school wouldn't be a smart idea. There's way too much stress on the school system as it is, spreading that same money(lets be honost, no extra money is going to come if this is put into place) over a larger audiance is going to cause problems. As it is right now, when l was in highschool in Ontario(the year before grade13(OAS?) was taken out) there was no extra money for photocopies. Students had to spend whole periods copying notes from an overhead because the teachers barely had enough photocopies to make all the tests.

l'm anti-anything that requests special treatment just because they beleive something that someone doesn't and they try and force the public to bend to their will. So in this matter, yes l'm anti-Catholic.

 

[Bruce Monkhouse]

AND A NOTE TO ALL, I REALIZE THIS IS IN CANADIAN POLITICS BUT SINCE THIS SECTION/THREAD HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE WEBSITES THEME, I WILL FEEL NO REMORSE IN THROWING IT IN THE TRASH SHOULD IT GET OUT OF HAND.

YOU NOW KNOW THE PERIMETERS.
Bruce

 

[the 48th regulator]

How did you get that from what l said? They are facts, not made up facts, real ones.

We shall see, let us just use this post.

There is only 2 logical ways to solve the problem.

Publicly fund every school, but put in rules and regulations that stipulate that any one of any color/nationality/religion can join

Don't fund every school and just fund the public schools. No special religions getting extra benefits.

Exactly, the main two arguments, I am voting for choice one.

Allowing public schools to separate two different people simply because of what they believe or by what they look like or where their mom works is a step backwards of the 'Canadian way'

You have heard of the Bloc Quebecois, the party that was at one time the official opposition.  The party willing to break apart the country.  We allowed them to function, as it was democratic, the Canadian way.
Democracy allows many views, eh.

Even publicly funding every school wouldn't be a smart idea. There's way too much stress on the school system as it is, spreading that same money(lets be honest, no extra money is going to come if this is put into place) over a larger audience is going to cause problems. As it is right now, when l was in high school in Ontario(the year before grade13(OAS?) was taken out) there was no extra money for photocopies. Students had to spend whole periods copying notes from an overhead because the teachers barely had enough photocopies to make all the tests.

I went through the Public school system, from JK, straight through to grad 13 (Graduated from Runnymede Collegiate In 1989/90)  We had rare challenges.  Our school had Two Gyms, a pool, a Tennis court, a full Science program, an IT program with the latest Computers,  Fantastic Theatrical program (Music and Drama).  So we never Cried the blues.

I'm anti-anything that requests special treatment just because they believe something that someone doesn't and they try and force the public to bend to their will. So in this matter, yes I'm anti-Catholic.

That's what get's my ire.  You want to say that I am claiming special treatment, because I advocate a Catholic school system.  Who are you to try to abolish it?  You are finding challenges with your local school system, raise the hand and fix it.  Your only proposal thus far is to abolish the Catholic School board to fix your challenges.  You have as of yet, given me examples where the public system has suffered, due to the Catholic system (which is paid by my taxes btw).

Until you do, sorry Bruce, I find your agenda anti Catholic, and you admit to it!

Dileas

Tess

 

[ixium]

You're comparing school from 90 to schools of today? There's 17 years missing. Most of the kids today wouldn't have even been born.

The Bloc weren't paid by limited Provincial taxes. They also didn't exclude people that wanted to support their cause.

You might be voting for choice one, but you've adding your own rules in that you find it okay for a religion to exclude people that want to attend that school.

Again, l'm not against religious schools. l'm not against publically funded religious schools.
l'm against schools that will seperate two different students(most of the time under the age of 13) over something as simple as their parents religions.

My mom is a Catholic but l've never beleived in it. Should l get preference over another kid that is wanting to goto a Catholic school?

 

[Blindspot]

What about one completely public system that has voluntary religious classes outside of normal school hours? This would serve all parties in the following ways:

1. No more talk of segregation - catholic goes to school with muslim who goes to school with atheist who goes to school with shinto
2. Public students have access to their religious theology taught by accredited teachers of their own faith
3. All public money goes into one school system
4. Teachers unions can stop worrying about losing funding based on per head
5. No new schools need be built
6. Utopia is achieved!

 

[warrickdll]

...As pointed out, the true driving force for opposition to this plan is not separation of Church and State or the other notions brought up by ixium but rather the competition for tax dollars when paid on a "per head" basis. ...

...There's also more to system change than a single issue. I wish things were so shallow, that they could be solved so easy, with no real thought, on one thing, but they're not. Voter apathy is one of the main causes of being stuck with useless politicians. ...

I believe that the main issue for Canadians is the separation of Church and State, and the proposal to increase the subsidization of religion is what most people are worried about.

Funding loud and needy special interest groups, and segregating our children, will cause other issues to seem insignificant. Having a couple of smaller bad policies is tolerable, but one huge misstep like this isn’t.

...Rather than having the State decide for the parents, the system should be adjusted so parents can choose the school which supports their values. Why should parents who want their children to be taught in a supportive religious environment be denied? ...

There is no religious content required for schools. Many things can be described as education, but religious beliefs are not part of what the government is required to (or should ever) provide anyone with.

A public school system without religious content is not denying anyone a religious education, just like it isn’t denying anyone a hunting education, or a firefighter education, or a fishing education.

There are plenty of hours in the day to provide your children with many other forms of education that have nothing to do with the government or with the tax money collected for education.

The catholic school system is from a time long gone, when the public school system was a protestant school system.  Now that the public system is no longer a religious system there is no justification for a catholic school system.

The subsidies for religion must end. Government involvement in religion must end.

...Taxpayer funding of all religious schools that follow the curriculum is one means of achieving this end, and since there is no serious discussion of vouchers, charter schools or other alternatives, then this is the 1/2 loaf solution....

Many here have already testified to how little religious education is in the catholic school system – all this religious stuff can be passed along at the respective religious facilities on everyone’s own time and with their own funds. If someone wants to use a private system then that must be completely funded by private money, and meet government standards (at the private system’s expense).

...As an aside, instead of funding religious schools why not add a series of religion classes to a total public system?

What about one completely public system that has voluntary religious classes outside of normal school hours? ...

There is just no need to have the government, or the public school system, get involved in religion in any way – there is plenty to learn already.

 

[glock17]

Well said Iterator, and I would hazard a guess that this is the way it would be if that were the question on the referendum attached to this years provincial ballot.

If Quebec and Newfoundland sought and received constitutional change for this purpose, why not us?

The Tories have grabbed a tiger by the tail on this issue, it has already cost them points. I wonder if we'll see some serious back peddling before the election date ?

 

[a_majoor]

The Tories have grabbed a tiger by the tail on this issue, it has already cost them points. I wonder if we'll see some serious back peddling before the election date ?

Alas, I suspect that is exactly what we'll see. The Tories *could* diffuse this by simply pointing out Ontario is joining six other provinces which do this already, or they could take the moral high ground and campaign on a platform of parental choice (since one of the tenants of true conservatism [or classical liberalism if you prefer] is that people have the right and responsibility to make their own choices and must abide by the consequences of these choices); which would actually mean going wide open and advocating charter schools under parental control and educational vouchers as well.

As pointed out several times already, the people and groups which have the most to lose if State payment "per head" is dismantled will violently oppose such a move, but if some leader has the intellectual and moral strength to advocate it and the practical political machinery to present this choice and implement it (sorry Paul McKeever) then the voters could examine this (and related ideas like healthcare vouchers and medical saving plans) and perhaps we could begin to move in a different direction.

 

[DBA]

The Tories have grabbed a tiger by the tail on this issue, it has already cost them points. I wonder if we'll see some serious back peddling before the election date ?

The issue has changed into "how do we deal with Catholics currently having special treatment" and suggesting Catholics should lose funding is not going to go over well with most parents of the 600,000 kids currently enrolled in Catholic schools. The anti religious undercurrent of some of the debate taking place will also end up hurting the Liberals more as it doesn't exactly make religious parents feel their kids would be made welcome in the public system.