Cultural Separation from Parents

[Ken]

There is a suit right now in which parents are suing for the right of parents to opt their children out of sexuality and gender courses.

https://eppc.org/news/eppc-amicus-brief ... urriculum/

I just read about this. They will most likely win this lawsuit as they should. In my opinion it is criminally stupid for Montgomery County to disallow opting out. Most states allow that routinely as a matter of state law. Out here in both Oregon and Washington as well as "liberal California the right of parents to opt-out is written into state law so not even at the discretion of local districts. I'm frankly surprised that isn't also the case in Virginia.

[Falco Knotwise]

You still haven't answered the question. How do you think LGBT students should be treated in schools? And how should students be taught to treat their fellow students and citizens who are different from them?

If you could teach "diversity and inclusion" in a way that doesn’t also advance gender ideology (teaching gender is optional) then parents might be more accepting, but I don't think that's possible, hence the inevitable clash.

Do you agree that parents should at least be able to opt their children out of sexuality and gender curriculum they think inappropriate for their child?

Also, an optional religious course that teaches gender issues from a Christian perspective but that also teaches to respect and not harass others of different beliefs in school might be another possibility to consider.

Yes I have no problem with parents who want to opt out of specific lessons or classes. Around here school has become more or less "a la carte" anyway. At the HS level I usually have some students who homeschool and then show up for STEM classes like chemistry and for extracurricular stuff like sports, band, theater. There are many students who trade time between the home high school and local tech schools and community colleges. And some who trade time between religious and public schools. You can assemble your degree requirements any way you wish to. So if you want to take your health or language or math requirements through an alternative way like a private online school you are free to do so. Around here the only place LGBT issues specifically come up is in health class and then only within one short unit.

And here in Washington parents have the right to opt out of lessons they object to. That is in state law. If there are some states or districts elsewhere in the country who don't allow that they are just unnecessarily and stupidly asking for trouble in my mind.

After school religion classes are also common in many communities. Around here Mormons have their own religion classes before school every single day. And other groups like Muslims and conservative Jews do much the same in various ways. Nothing is stopping other groups from doing the same.
There are also a wide variety of Christian-oriented after school programs such as Young Life that do the sort of thing you want. So what you are asking already exists: https://younglife.org/

I have long been of the opinion that Catholic parochial schools that still teach traditional Catholic doctrine are the best option and would never allow my children to attend public schools, but I am biased.

[Ken]

If you could teach "diversity and inclusion" in a way that doesn’t also advance gender ideology (teaching gender is optional) then parents might be more accepting, but I don't think that's possible, hence the inevitable clash.

Do you agree that parents should at least be able to opt their children out of sexuality and gender curriculum they think inappropriate for their child?

Also, an optional religious course that teaches gender issues from a Christian perspective but that also teaches to respect and not harass others of different beliefs in school might be another possibility to consider.

Yes I have no problem with parents who want to opt out of specific lessons or classes. Around here school has become more or less "a la carte" anyway. At the HS level I usually have some students who homeschool and then show up for STEM classes like chemistry and for extracurricular stuff like sports, band, theater. There are many students who trade time between the home high school and local tech schools and community colleges. And some who trade time between religious and public schools. You can assemble your degree requirements any way you wish to. So if you want to take your health or language or math requirements through an alternative way like a private online school you are free to do so. Around here the only place LGBT issues specifically come up is in health class and then only within one short unit.

And here in Washington parents have the right to opt out of lessons they object to. That is in state law. If there are some states or districts elsewhere in the country who don't allow that they are just unnecessarily and stupidly asking for trouble in my mind.

After school religion classes are also common in many communities. Around here Mormons have their own religion classes before school every single day. And other groups like Muslims and conservative Jews do much the same in various ways. Nothing is stopping other groups from doing the same.
There are also a wide variety of Christian-oriented after school programs such as Young Life that do the sort of thing you want. So what you are asking already exists: https://younglife.org/

I am in favor of opt-in religious classes on regular school hour basis and opposed to the Supreme Court's decision to disallow them.

Which religion? Mormon? Catholic? Episcopal? Jehovah's Witness? Southern Baptist? Bahai? Shia Islam? Scientologist? Hindu? Buddhist? Hasidic Judaism?

[Falco Knotwise]

Yes I have no problem with parents who want to opt out of specific lessons or classes. Around here school has become more or less "a la carte" anyway. At the HS level I usually have some students who homeschool and then show up for STEM classes like chemistry and for extracurricular stuff like sports, band, theater. There are many students who trade time between the home high school and local tech schools and community colleges. And some who trade time between religious and public schools. You can assemble your degree requirements any way you wish to. So if you want to take your health or language or math requirements through an alternative way like a private online school you are free to do so. Around here the only place LGBT issues specifically come up is in health class and then only within one short unit.

And here in Washington parents have the right to opt out of lessons they object to. That is in state law. If there are some states or districts elsewhere in the country who don't allow that they are just unnecessarily and stupidly asking for trouble in my mind.

After school religion classes are also common in many communities. Around here Mormons have their own religion classes before school every single day. And other groups like Muslims and conservative Jews do much the same in various ways. Nothing is stopping other groups from doing the same.
There are also a wide variety of Christian-oriented after school programs such as Young Life that do the sort of thing you want. So what you are asking already exists: https://younglife.org/

I am in favor of opt-in religious classes on regular school hour basis and opposed to the Supreme Court's decision to disallow them.

Which religion? Mormon? Catholic? Episcopal? Jehovah's Witness? Southern Baptist? Bahai? Shia Islam? Scientologist? Hindu? Buddhist? Hasidic Judaism?

You're responding to a post I deleted because I knew that would be your response.

My answer is to drop the entire public school system. My opinion is people's taxes should go to whatever school system they wish to support, public, if they so choose. Mine would go to the Catholic parochial school of my own choice and so would my children.

[Ken]

I am in favor of opt-in religious classes on regular school hour basis and opposed to the Supreme Court's decision to disallow them.

Which religion? Mormon? Catholic? Episcopal? Jehovah's Witness? Southern Baptist? Bahai? Shia Islam? Scientologist? Hindu? Buddhist? Hasidic Judaism?

You're responding to a post I deleted because I knew that would be your response.

My answer is to drop the entire public school system. My opinion is people's taxes should go to whatever school system they wish to support, public, if they so choose. Mine would go to the Catholic parochial school of my own choice and so would my children.

Luckily you have thousands of Catholic schools to choose from in this country. Who will happily accept as much money as you want to send them.

Of course if such schools choose to receive public tax dollars they should also follow public laws such as non-discrimination in hiring and admissions, accommodating special education and disabled students with expensive, personalized, and complicated needs, accepting EVERY SINGLE STUDENT regardless of background and history, and so forth.

Unfortunately we don't have an "al la carte" system of taxation in this country. Otherwise there are hundreds of government programs that I would choose not to fund and direct my tax dollars differently. Subsidized flood insurance for coastal vacation homes? Agricultural price supports to corporate farms? A lot of military spending? Highway expansions in the suburbs? There are endless ways that I'd chose to direct my tax dollars differently if given a choice.

[Falco Knotwise]

Which religion? Mormon? Catholic? Episcopal? Jehovah's Witness? Southern Baptist? Bahai? Shia Islam? Scientologist? Hindu? Buddhist? Hasidic Judaism?

You're responding to a post I deleted because I knew that would be your response.

My answer is to drop the entire public school system. My opinion is people's taxes should go to whatever school system they wish to support, public, if they so choose. Mine would go to the Catholic parochial school of my own choice and so would my children.

Luckily you have thousands of Catholic schools to choose from in this country. Who will happily accept as much money as you want to send them.

Of course if such schools choose to receive public tax dollars they should also follow public laws such as non-discrimination in hiring and admissions, accommodating special education and disabled students with expensive, personalized, and complicated needs, accepting EVERY SINGLE STUDENT regardless of background and history, and so forth.

I disagree with respect to non-discrimination in hiring practices. A Catholic school should be free to hire only qualified Catholic nuns if they want who've been carefully vetted to ensure they heartily support Catholic teaching and a genuine desire to share in the school's mission statement.

Nor should they be required to allow transgenders into any bathroom of their choice, or go along with transgender pronouns, etc.

[Ken]

You're responding to a post I deleted because I knew that would be your response.

My answer is to drop the entire public school system. My opinion is people's taxes should go to whatever school system they wish to support, public, if they so choose. Mine would go to the Catholic parochial school of my own choice and so would my children.

Luckily you have thousands of Catholic schools to choose from in this country. Who will happily accept as much money as you want to send them.

Of course if such schools choose to receive public tax dollars they should also follow public laws such as non-discrimination in hiring and admissions, accommodating special education and disabled students with expensive, personalized, and complicated needs, accepting EVERY SINGLE STUDENT regardless of background and history, and so forth.

I disagree. A Catholic school should be able to hire only qualified Catholic nuns if they want.

Yes of course, if they choose to be a private school that is their right.

On the other hand, if they wish to be a public school supported by tax dollars then they should follow the rules that apply to public schools. Being supported by public tax dollars is what defines a public school. And it means that the entire public (Catholic and non-Catholic) have an interest and right to have a say about how their tax dollars are spent.

[Falco Knotwise]

Luckily you have thousands of Catholic schools to choose from in this country. Who will happily accept as much money as you want to send them.

Of course if such schools choose to receive public tax dollars they should also follow public laws such as non-discrimination in hiring and admissions, accommodating special education and disabled students with expensive, personalized, and complicated needs, accepting EVERY SINGLE STUDENT regardless of background and history, and so forth.

I disagree. A Catholic school should be able to hire only qualified Catholic nuns if they want.

Yes of course, if they choose to be a private school that is their right.

On the other hand, if they wish to be a public school supported by tax dollars then they should follow the rules that apply to public schools. Being supported by public tax dollars is what defines a public school.

If you're suggesting nuns should be forced to use preferred pronouns and allow transgenders into any bathroom of their choice, then I disagree. Part of a Catholic education is learning to be Catholic. If my funds are allocated to that school and I'm okay with those rules then the government should have no further say in it.

[Josh]

Yes of course, if they choose to be a private school that is their right.

On the other hand, if they wish to be a public school supported by tax dollars then they should follow the rules that apply to public schools. Being supported by public tax dollars is what defines a public school.

That's not how other govenrment benefits, like food stamps, work. Let's say a family gets $900 of food stamps a month (a typical amount for a family of 4).

They are free to use these benefits at any place that sells food. They can to go a grocery store, a corner store, a farmers' market, a bulk food store, Costco, etc. - there are no government regulations beyond what there is for any private business, on how these grocery stores are conducted. They can buy more expensive food items or they can shop for a bargain and find cheaper ones.

School vouchers should be no different. Ohio now is going to "open choice" plans where parents can decide to use a specified amount of money (about $7,000 a year) for a charter school, or a private non-charter school. They can choose between state-regulated private schools, or a non-regulated religious school. Or they can even choose some kind of homeschooling program and spend the $7,000 or so on curriculum and online courses and so on. The choice is entirely up to the parents.

Of course, they can still choose to use a public school. And public school funding is much, much more than $7,000 per year per student. So the public schools are actually the most expensive option.

The point is, government benefits (like free education) work best when many choices are left in the hand of the person receiving the benefit.

And it means that the entire public (Catholic and non-Catholic) have an interest and right to have a say about how their tax dollars are spent.

No, they don't. All that matters is that the parents spent it on education. There is no difficulty defining what a "school" is or "homeschooling". That is already well regulated, and in a number of areas (ranging from nonprofit tax laws, property taxes, sales taxes, etc.) and already-existing homeschool regulation.

But special-interest groups don't need to be interfering and telling a religious school how to run things. If parents don't like how the school is run - guess what - they can go choose the public school, or a different private school.

[temporal1]

U.S. courts are deciding about gov funds going to faith-based schools.
i’m unsettled, knowing too well how the initial temptation to accept funds could lead to loss of freedom of choice (as Ken spells out above). To non-believers, this is a non-issue. The value of faith-based education escapes them.

This is at least one reason lesterb and his fellowship in west Canada was cautious to NOT accept gov funds, as time passed, the language gov used in attempt to force unwanted policies, became more+more demanding of compliance.

Canada’s gov system+history is significant gov funding of churches/schools. The U.S. should be better informed.

THOMAS SOWELL is an enthusiastic proponent of U.S. charter schools. i hesitate, knowing gov defines “the slippery slope.”

2020
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/suprem ... c-n1231389

2017
https://www.npr.org/2017/06/26/53408401 ... playground