Can anyone explain the impacts on us that pay extra for our kids to attend a private Christian school?

It's always annoyed me that my taxes get used for the useless education system in Oregon, but I can't write off the $7,000 in expenses that I have to send my son to a private Christian school.

GOD forbid my son is not questioned about his sexuality or brainwashed into thinking he's got white privilege. It's worth every penny to me that he's got a better education and is growing up normal here in bizzaro-world, but it's not fair that I'm forced to fund the public socialist indoctrination system disguised as public education.

Tony.

I think it's a big deal. It won't help you, at least not yet. But it opens the door for your State to allow some type of scholarship program which could not exclude religious schools.


Tuesday's ruling is a victory for school choice proponents and some conservative religious groups who had challenged the provision in court. Montana's program was similar to many across the U.S., and other states have proposed tax-credit scholarship programs but not passed them due to confusion about their legality.

In the 5-4 ruling, the court essentially backed a Montana tax-credit scholarship program that gave residents up to a $150 credit for donating to private scholarship organizations, helping students pay for their choice of private schools. The state's revenue department made a rule banning those tax-credit scholarships from going to religious schools before the state's supreme court later struck down the entire program.

“A State need not subsidize private education. But once a State decides to do so, it cannot disqualify some private schools solely because they are religious," Chief Justice John Roberts wrote in the court's opinion.

Under the program, a family receiving a scholarship originally could use it at any “qualified education provider,” which the court’s opinion noted means “any private school that meets certain accreditation, testing, and safety requirements." The Montana Department of Revenue, citing the state constitution, then changed the definition of "qualified education provider" to exclude those "owned or controlled in whole or in part by any church, religious sect, or denomination."

That decision, which the state attorney general disagreed with, was based on a "no-aid" clause in the state's constitution, which bars the state from giving aid to schools “controlled in whole or in part by any church, sect, or denomination."

TRUMP CALLS SCHOOL CHOICE THE CIVIL RIGHTS ISSUE 'OF ALL TIME IN THIS COUNTRY'

https://www.foxnews.com/politi...ic-win-school-choice

I commend you for taking charge of your children’s education. In my view this nation needs more parents like you. Our grand kids will be home schooled.

The one silver lining out of this “pandemic panic” is the possibility that some parents will discover that home schooling is doable.

Silent

An appalling ruling by any objective standard.

Then again, maybe some will finally stfu about their taxes being used to fund abortions.

We all have to pay for things we are vehemently opposed to. Now there's another. Great.

46and2,

I'd appreciate if you could explain your logic, because what you typed makes absolutely no sense based on my reading of the opinions. How in the world does this issue apply to taxpayer funded abortions? The issue is whether religiously sponsored institutions should be excluded from state-sponsored programs. The First Amendment seems clear that they cannot. Hence this ruling.

quote:

Originally posted by 46and2:
An appalling ruling by any objective standard.

Then again, maybe some will finally stfu about their taxes being used to fund abortions.

We all have to pay for things we are vehemently opposed to. Now there's another. Great.

You can bet I won't shut up about my money being used to take human life. To me there's kind of a big gulf between these two issues, but for what it's worth, I think if government can pay for my neighbor's kid's education with taxes he paid, they can help pay for my kid's as well with the taxes I've paid. Not that difficult.

School choice needs to be implemented as a fundamental civil right applicable to all Americans.

The monopoly of government/union schools is a disaster and the only way to improve it is competition. The desegregation of southern schools by force using the military was the first kind of school choice - black students could go to the formerly white-only schools instead of the schools they were previous assigned. Busing also was another form of school choice, again sending kids to schools in areas they did not live.

Simply moving to a different public school in another area is not the answer, because it still maintains the government (and union) monopolies. And last I checked, I don't see many non-religious private schools near where I live.

Years ago I would have been against public funds for religious schools. More recently I was not really in favor of school choice because I paid more to live in a suburb with good schools and pay the property taxes and I am not exactly in favor of our better schools being overrun by kids from the inner city district 10 miles away.

But you know, the monopoly and the leftist indoctrination crap needs to END. That American schools could produce the America hating communists "mostly peacefully" protesting in all the major cities is all the evidence we need.

I’m a school resource officer. There are problems with public schools, but the biggest problem is parents.

Schools are no longer seen as educational, they are day care for kids. Parents don’t put any effort in to supporting the teachers, into supporting the education of the kids... sending your kid to a private school won’t help if you don’t support the school at home. The main reason for the success of private and charter schools isn’t the school itself, it’s that the parents who take the trouble to send their kids to such a school put in the effort to support the school and the child’s education at home.

Teachers see the kids now more than parents do, yet parents refuse to believe their kids could be liars, cheaters or underachievers. Any problem must be the teachers fault or the schools fault. I have literally found things in children’s pockets stolen out of a teacher’s desk... and had parents tell me their kid would never steal and the teacher must be lying.

Public schools have their problems, but it’s largely because teachers and principals are being forced into roles that parents should be filling and aren’t... or roles they shouldn’t have to fill ever.

I spent the afternoon going over the high school’s nascent critical incident plan (new school, only been open 1 year) with the new principal. She visibly recoiled at the mention of “casualty collection points”, “primary and alternate command posts” and is still wrestling with the concept that she will have to send a staff member, or me, to check on possible problems and report back rather than going herself... because we’re expendable and can complete that mission, but only she can make decisions about what the students and staff will do. I can find out what went BANG in the chemistry lab, I can’t decide to evacuate the school.

I also had to point out that during a potential critical or hazardous incident she, her vice-principal and her dean of students should never all 3 be in the same place... and that each should have a support staff with them to talk to the district, 911 and their staff in case one of the other two has to assume command.

The fact that someone who has dedicated their life to educating children now has to start making decisions about the expendability, or not, of themselves snd their staff is... heartbreaking, to be honest.

The look on her face when she began to realize some of the responsibility she had assumed by becoming a principal and the decisions she might have to make...

...and then she had to go to a meeting with parents who are certain their child was discriminated against last year and want to make sure that racist teacher is fired, because they didn’t get any traction with the previous principal and think the new one might go for it.

These people have dedicated their lives to children, and while far from perfect are on the whole much more concerned with a given child's welfare and upbringing than many children’s parents.

quote:

Schools are no longer seen as educational, they are day care for kids. Parents don’t put any effort in to supporting the teachers, into supporting the education of the kids... sending your kid to a private school won’t help if you don’t support the school at home. The main reason for the success of private and charter schools isn’t the school itself, it’s that the parents who take the trouble to send their kids to such a school put in the effort to support the school and the child’s education at home.

This is true. Writing a tuition check tends to give parents additional incentive and motivation to further invest the time and effort into the education and parenting of children.

There are good and bad parents, and good and bad teachers in both private and public schools.

But that's not the only problem. Government schools will inevitably teach socialism, because the whole idea of public education IS socialist.
Lefty Sig is right:

quote:

Years ago I would have been against public funds for religious schools. More recently I was not really in favor of school choice because I paid more to live in a suburb with good schools and pay the property taxes and I am not exactly in favor of our better schools being overrun by kids from the inner city district 10 miles away.

But you know, the monopoly and the leftist indoctrination crap needs to END. That American schools could produce the America hating communists "mostly peacefully" protesting in all the major cities is all the evidence we need.

Tank,

I 100% agree with your assessment. My ex wife was a teacher. We could look at her students, see the parental involvement (or lack of), and predict exactly how well the student would do.

One of the better schools she teached in was a charter school. Part of the school-parent agreement was involvement, and students overall in the school did markedly better.

The one thing I do think you minimized or overlooked is curriculum (i.e., indoctrination). What we are teaching our kids in public schools is decidedly one-sided.

quote:

Originally posted by 46and2:
An appalling ruling by any objective standard.

Then again, maybe some will finally stfu about their taxes being used to fund abortions.

We all have to pay for things we are vehemently opposed to. Now there's another. Great.

You sound like a bitter atheist who has no value on anyone's life but his own.

I do support taxpayer funded after-birth abortion, but only abortions on babies that live past 18 years of birth and commits heinous crimes and prove to be a burden on the community. Any time before that, life should be given a chance.

But back to the original thread at hand, thanks to all those who commented. Anyone who cares enough to send their kids to private school is most likely a more involved parent.

Tony.

quote:

Originally posted by 46and2:
An appalling ruling by any objective standard.

Then again, maybe some will finally stfu about their taxes being used to fund abortions.

We all have to pay for things we are vehemently opposed to. Now there's another. Great.

How about the objective standard of "the government doesn't get to pick winners and losers when it comes to private schools"?

I happen to think it's a good thing that if a state chooses to fund private schools, they have to fund any and all private schools, not just the ones that they want to. I don't know if Oregon does such a thing.

quote:

Originally posted by IntrepidTraveler:
The one thing I do think you minimized or overlooked is curriculum (i.e., indoctrination). What we are teaching our kids in public schools is decidedly one-sided.

...that’s part of parental involvement, or lack thereof.

How many have sat down and read your kids history book? If you don’t KNOW what your school is teaching your kids, you’re part of the problem.

If you know but don't like what the school is teaching, why are your kids going there? You’re also part of the problem.

If you think the curriculum is one sided, why aren’t you providing the other side? You’re also part of the problem.

Schools of any kind are supposed to HELP provide your kids a proper education. They aren’t supposed to do it for you, with no input or effort from you. That’s The whole point I’ve been making.

...and yes, public education is at its root a socialist concept. Why then are you utilizing it if you find that offensive, or surprised that those who work within that system promote that viewpoint?

You expect a Catholic school to teach Hinduism as the primary lens with which to view the world? Is the catholic schools teaching also “one sided”? Of course it is.

Parents whine and complain about schools, curriculum, teachers,grades, discrimination... those who pay enough attention to care... and still toss their spawn on the bus every morning anyway.

Trust me. Schools are doing the best they can given their limited resources, given their limited authority to control or discipline your little darlings... and your apathy.

quote:

Originally posted by tanksoldier:
How many have sat down and read your kids history book? If you don’t KNOW what your school is teaching your kids, you’re part of the problem.

If you think the curriculum is one sided, why aren’t you providing the other side?

I read my son's history books while studying with him. In 9th grade when the teacher got to the "FDR saved the US from the Great Depression", I went in and spoke with the teacher about the inaccuracy of what was being taught. I asked if I could present an accurate historical account of the Great Depression and how the US emerged from it to the class. His comment...The book is right and you are wrong, and you're not a teacher, so no you can not address my class (most of whom I knew anyway). I spoke with the principal who couldn't wait to help me out of her office. The curriculum sucks on numerous levels, and the school administration I've personally dealt with don't give a damn.

quote:

If you know but don't like what the school is teaching, why are your kids going there?

This comment always cracks me up. Here, you're districted into a particular elementary, middle, and high school. If you can't afford private school you have absolutely zero choice.

quote:

Schools of any kind are supposed to HELP provide your kids a proper education. They aren’t supposed to do it for you, with no input or effort from you. That’s The whole point I’ve been making.

I agree with you on this point, but the teachers and school administrators I've dealt with didn't give a damn about me doing anything beyond what 'they' thought I should have done with him.

quote:

You expect a Catholic school to teach Hinduism as the primary lens with which to view the world?

And therein lies the biggest failure of public education. I don't want schools teaching children anything regarding a lens through which to view the world. I want them, for a change, to actually teach children reading, writing, math, history, and a little science. The hell with all the sex ed, social justice, equality, inclusion and all other manner of divil that render ignorant, ill adjusted, children who end up have nothing of value to offer to society, and end up filling up jails and juvenile centers.

Here's a radical idea. We all agree we want children educated. How about we say each child is entitled to a $x,xxx educational voucher per year that parents may use at any accredited educational center they wish. No more districting BS, no more stuck in one school, no more BS curriculum. And if these educational centers don't maintain established educational goals, they lose their accreditation. As always, the best teachers and administrators would have no issue finding a good, well paid, home in those new educational centers, with the rest needing to shop for a new vocation.

Public education on the whole is BS. When many public schools graduate high school seniors who can't read, write, or do math at grade level, its time to scrap the system and start over.

quote:

Schools are doing the best they can given their limited resources

My non-rich county will spend $326,000,000 to educated 15,900 students for 2019. That's $20,503 per student. That number was $15,000 per student back in 2005 and has steadily risen.

quote:

If you know but don't like what the school is teaching, why are your kids going there?

It took us 2 months of public school kindergarten to make the switch with our oldest. If we had to pay what the public school costs, $61,509 a year for our 3 children, we couldn't afford it. Fortunately, the school they go to makes do with less than 1/3 of what the public school costs at almost $20,000 a year for our three children.

Public school spending $20,503 per student per year in a poor county.

Just let that sink in a bit. At 15 students per class, that's $307,545 per class per year. At 20, it's $410,060. It's roughly 3 times the in state tuition at the University of Florida. Even the expensive private school in our county is only $11,000 a year.

I went to one of the best prep schools in the country and its tuition then (1985-89) was about what the local public high school spent per pupil. On days off I would go to school with my GF to the public high school to see my old friends from junior high and see what all I was missing. Unreal stuff.

The fundamental problem is that large scale mandatory public education was not designed to educate in the first place.

Small towns and old one-room school houses were designed to educate - and the single teacher guided the instruction while the older kids helped teach the younger kids.

The progressivists (who were also eugenicists) who created the mandatory public schooling system designed it after the Bismarck model - elite schools for the children of wealthy and political classes and factory warehouse schools for the masses.

And the US has the elite boarding schools in the east that feed directly into ivy league universities and were intended to teach independent thought, entrepreneurship, leadership, etc. And also to keep political power in the hands of the coastal elites who were largely descended from the British.

Public schools were intended to socialize immigrant children into obedient citizens with enough education to be good worker bees but not be leaders or job creators. These were for everyone else - mostly the immigrants coming to the cities in the early 1900's.

It took a awhile for the system to reach its true goal though. Diligent teachers in both the small towns and large cities continued doing good work for a long time. The small town independent schools were then consolidated into much larger schools with much larger administrative bureaucracies, essentially the same structure as big city schools, but more geographically spread out. And now you might say the system has overcorrected itself, producing bees that can't even work, and not very good citizens. That is due to the communist takeover of higher education that trains the teachers and sets the curricula.

This is not a conspiracy theory, it is what the progressives wrote and spoke out about their intentions.

Oh, and I do ask what my son learns in history and other subjects and supplement his education with lots of talks about reality. We live in a very Republican suburb so it's not as bad as some Democrat ruled places. However even as an Engineer who completed 2 years of calculus and differential equations at the college level, the way they tried to math at the elementary and middle school level was non-sensical. Never in my life had a heard the term "number sentence" but there it was "write a number sentence to describe..." You would think after hundreds of years we would know the best way to teach math and would stop changing it every generation. In my line of work, we don't reinvent everything we already figured out in the past.

We have a societal interest in an educated citizenry - they are the ones we are hoping to keep the economy going and vote intelligently. I have no more concern about the use of my taxes in religious schools than about its use for public schools.

Religious schools of whatever flavor, as long as they do a good job on the other stuff (3Rs, etc.), are fine in my book. Most of the parochial schools I've known people from have done a very good job at the 3Rs and if on top of the basics they add some religion into the mix where the public schools might have added other coursework, that's a fact the parents/kids knew about and accepted going in.

Injecting competition on the otherwise-closed market for primary/secondary education is all to the good IMO. Public schools can use being challenged and poor schools of whatever type (public, parochial, for-profit, whatever) ought to wind up closed, one way or another.

quote:

That number was $15,000 per student back in 2005 and has steadily risen.

Given inflation, that’s effectively a decrease of $500/ student per year.

quote:

060. It's roughly 3 times the in state tuition at the University of Florida.

Apples/ oranges. No state university charges students the actual cost of education... they are subsidized by tax revenue.

It’s great that you pay this much attention, but I don’t see what it has to do with the problem at hand... most parents NOT paying attention.

quote:

Public school spending $20,503 per student per year in a poor county.

Spent on what? Until you know what public school has to provide and pay for that private school doesn’t... often certified teachers, for example... you can’t compare.

quote:

Originally posted by tanksoldier:

quote:

That number was $15,000 per student back in 2005 and has steadily risen.

Given inflation, that’s effectively a decrease of $500/ student per year.

Coupled with the drop in overall educational performance, that drop in cost isn't nearly enough. Face it, the ROI on public education would make the worst investment on Wall Street seem like a great option.