• Front page
• Receive letters on your RSS reader

Bill Johnson's Oct. 19 column, "Shortage of money could close doors of
opportunity," profiled a private school (Escuela de Guadalupe) that's struggling
financially but has been successful in combating dropout rates and providing an
excellent educational experience. Two words kept leaping out between every line
Johnson wrote: school vouchers.
I wonder if Johnson saw any of those words jump off the page? For some reason, I
doubt it. Still, Johnson just made a strong case for school vouchers.

Joe Rosberg, Denver

READER COMMENTS

Vouchers bad. Me public education tell me so.

VOUCHERS=COMPETITION=CHOICE

The only way for Americans to escape failed public education and all associated lunacy. Monopolies, including educational monopolies, are always hostile to the consumer. Competition is the only real answer.

If vouchers were not used for private religious instruction, there would be few problems.

Vultures.

Stan raises an excellent point here. If the fundies simply agreed not to attempt to religiously indocrinate children with public funds....I don't think there would be significant opposition to some type of voucher system.

I like the idea of school choice.

Rather than "vouchers," why not provide a line on the tax form for a SCHOOL CODE? Tax payers select which private or public school(s), preschool through college, will receive their share of tax dollars!

Stan, here is a school, with a religious theme that is successful with kids who might otherwise drop out. Because they dare to have religion in their school, you would rather these kids drop out and apply for welfare? If vouchers don't include religious schools, they are worthless. Parents should be able to choose to send their kids to a school that is religious or not. I choose the public school for my kids, but I support the rights of parents to send their kids to Catholic, Jewish, Muslim, etc...schools with the money alloted for their child.

idk,

I staunchly oppose any attempt to fund religious instruction using taxpayer funds. If someone wants their children to be taught and learn their own religious beliefs they are quite allowed to do so. It's called choice. No one should be forced to pay for someone else's religion.

Stan,

If I want my school tax contribution to be sent to my kid's religious school, how are YOU paying for my kid's education?

Stan,
My issue is that the federal/state/local governments are responsible for providing an education for all citizens. If those citizens choose to educate their children in a religious school, they should be able to. Much like my dollars fund welfare but I don't control what the recepients buy. There are regulations, like there would be with vouchers, but the choice is up the person receiving the aid. With section 8 vouchers, people are allowed to choose between many housing options, why should it be different for parents trying to educate their children. Your statement that people have a choice isn't quite correct...many people cannot afford to send their children to the school of their choice, vouchers would give them that choice.

What a lot of fundies don't realize is that our public school system isn't funded SOLELY by individual tax revenues....therefore if you really want tax credits for the portion of your taxes used to educate your children...by all means take it...but don't expect ANY of the other federal dollars that are added to the mix...

Jay, I wouldn't WANT the feds to have any control over what my kids learn. I actually want my kids to get a GOOD education.

Jay, where exactly do federal dollars come from?

The arguement for vouchers is that it levels the playing field. The wealthy can already afford to choose the school their children attend. It is the less fortunate that must put their children in the school that the government deems appropriate. Vouchers are about choice. The federal government is responsible for providing education to all citizens (and now non citizens, but that is another arguement for another day). Since parents are in the best place to determine what is best for their kids, why not allow them to choose a religious education?

"Since parents are in the best place to determine what is best for their kids, why not allow them to choose a religious education?"

The issue isn't really about religion, it's about individual choice. Some people like to delude themselves into the belief that they live the perfect life, and want to limit the choices of others into the narrow spectrum that they define in their arrogant little minds as the proper way to live. They want Alphas to do Alpha work, Betas to do Beta work, etc., and if an Epsilon wants to try and become a rocket scientist instead of shoveling trash, they shouldn't be allowed to abandon their place in the social hierarchy. After all, everyone belongs to everyone. It's sad that some of the great dystopian novels are no longer commonly taught in public schools, but then, why would government schools want to illuminate the prison they are attempting to build?

I do not think tax moneys should be used to promote religion. I don't want my tax dollars spent on indoctrination of children in the beliefs of Islamic, Hindu, Buddhist, Catholic, Lutheran Anglican, Satanic, the Magic Muffin or any other mythical philosophies. You have a right to teach your children that any religions is gospel truth. I don't agree that I should be forced to pay for it,

So Stan, you would like for "your" money to pay for classrooms with 40 children in it. None of the children are learning anything and many don't even speak English. You don't want "your" money to pay for a child to attend a religious school where they are in classrooms of 20 or less students. Just because they happen to have a chapel service every other Wednesday, their school is not up to your standards, eh?

"Vouchers are about choice."

You have all the choice in the world about teaching your children all sorts of things...on your own time...with your own money.

You can teach your kids that there's a big frog that lives behind jupiter that monitors and manipulates the entire universe (after the frog created it of course) and is just waiting their to party with your ghosts for eternity (or torture them forever in a dungeon under the ground if they've been bad).....that's YOUR choice to make....but why would you believe you're entitled to tax dollars with which to carry out such an "education"?

Maybe if those who are so scared of vouchers for religious schools would spend a little time in a religious school, they wouldn't be so afraid. They would see that the children are learning math, reading, science (yikes! even science!!) and being taught be dedicated professionals. Maybe they are wearing uniforms so that children don't have the pressure of wearing the latest expensive trend. They would see that religion, while an underlying theme of the day, is actually a very small part of the teaching process.

My kids go to a public school because that is the choice that we made. But we also happen to live in a superior school district. If my neighborhood school were in bad shape, I would want to send my kids to a "private" school. If I couldn't afford that, I have no choice. Vouchers would allow choice for everyone! (even the frog up in space!)

idk....no one is implying that schools that include religious indocrination in their curriculum are inherently subpar.....they just don't need public funds. Also...no one is implying that all private schools are religious-based. The fact of the matter is that if the far religious right would stop their quest to get public funding for religious indocrination...a lot fewer people would be opposed to some type of voucher program.

Jay,
I think that the far religious right is such a minority that it wouldn't have an impact if vouchers were allowed for parochial schools. Religions all have their problems, but so do public schools. Choice would make them all better. In order to qualify for vouchers, the parochial schools would have to submit to a certain critera for classes. I attended Lutheran schools as a child and my children attended Catholic schools when they were younger. There was no "indoctrination" involved at all. In fact, we learned about all religions and cultures. Yes, we had church services about once a week and a religion class every other day. But in the upper grades, that religion class often included examining other religions and beliefs. Since so much of history and culture is based on religion, denying the teaching of religious history is actual harmful to students. I still believe that vouchers for all schools would level the playing field. I was able to pay for Catholic school when I believed it was appropriate for my kids. When I felt that they would be better served by a public school, I moved them. But many people aren't able to make those choices because of financial limitations. My choice to enroll my kids in public school involved moving into a better district. Many people don't have that choice. Some of the best inner city schools are private and religious. Let's give these families a choice. What do you want to bet that when these families have a choice, the inner city public schools would improve!?

idk...that is certainly your opinion...but it is tough to make the case...particularly considering the egocentric nature of catholic school that "church services about once a week and a religion class every other day" isn't religious indocrination.

No public funds for the establishment of ANY religion.

I just don't see the problem with parents teaching their kids their religious beliefs on their own time with their own money.

The purpose of a school is to educate children in fundamentals. Those include reading, computation, history, writing, science, comprehension and appreciation of literature and art and the social skills necessary to be a good citizen.

Religious schools also teach religious values. Often this is included in daily class activities like prayer and attendance at religious services. It is also evident in the rules of behavior. There is a code of behavior based on moral values which usually are supported in religious beliefs. Most of them are also reflected in our code of law. Students are held accountable for their actions. Teachers are held accountable for their actions and their responsibility to teach their assigned subjects. A teacher has the authority to remove a student from a class. Students (and their parents) have the ability to complain to the school for a teacher they feel is not living up to the agreement without the impediments of a union and tenure.

The inclusion of moral values, based on religious grounds, seems to be the turning point for many here.

Other states offer voucher help to students attending religious schools provided the religious teachings and practices are voluntary and admission is open to all. Works and has passed judicial review.

My plan would be to give every child a voucher equal to half of the per student expenditure in their schools. This means the public schools get a benefit for each child that leaves the system. The parents get to choose the schools for their kids, though many would merely check the "local school" box and drop it in the mail. The kids get a chance for a quality education in both the public and private sector. A common complaint is that too many parents are uninvolved which makes it that much harder for children to learn. Is it right, or even fair to punish those students whose parents are caring and involved by refusing those parents the ability to put their child in the best school because it would leave the teachers with fewer good students? It would not INCREASE the number of academically "abandoned" kids. It would merely make it possible for the kids to learn.

The present system is failing. There are as many theories for this as there are stars in the sky. Kids don't need theories. They don't have time. Every year they don't learn is lost forever. Some might be able to catch up. Most will struggle and, if lucky, end up only slightly behind or will have the chance to catch up while other students are delayed.

This means we fail more children than we help. Children are NOT learning to read. They are not learning to do simple math without a calculator.

Private schools, religious or not, lack the top-heavy administration the public schools bear. Private schools are permitted to hire those who can teach a subject for their ability to teach rather than their ability to pass education courses in college.

Simple, but not short (it is my post), answer is to permit any parent to make the choices for their child or children. Part of that choice involves taking a portion of the money allocated for each student and attaching it to a student. We can eliminate the objections over religion by making the practice and participation in religious activities voluntary.

The voluntary option is completely acceptable in the public schools when it refers to sex education or movies like "An Inconvenient Truth" or "Silent Scream." Why is it not a good practice for anything in a non-public school?

We who are here reading and writing are all above the average high school graduate.

"The inclusion of moral values, based on religious grounds, seems to be the turning point for many here."

Not at all...and further more...why would you imply that without religion, no morals could be taught?

Actually I wrote that the way that I did because i wanted it to delineate the fact that moral values are not at issue so much here as the mistaken belief that they are only present when based on religious views. If we say we want students to be given an education in moral values, few will disagree on that, but will ask which set of values will be used.

If we wish to use general values like obedience to laws, concern for our fellow man, defense of those weaker than ourselves and support for those in need of help, we get agreement on the surface and argument in the definitions.

A school founded to teach atheist values to students (under a voucher plan) would be a great thing as there would then be a place to confront ignorance and prejudice that seem to flourish against any who deny belief in any deity. But, again, I take a great deal of satisfaction and amusement in pointing out that the word ignorance is based on ignore. Many would do just that to convince themselves they are right.

POST A COMMENT

• Pronounce it correctly
• Lakewood’s government
• Children’s Hospital should have donated first
• Put Park Hill playground back
• Price of text books
• Birth control available to kids in Maine
• Mike Rosen on Al Gore & global warming
• Rush Limbaugh and Sen. Reid’s letter