Tax Dollars To Pay For Religious Indoctrination

by Ben Hoffman

Here we go: the privatization of the public school system. Douglas Country, Colorado, recently approved a voucher system that allows people to use public funds to send their children to private schools. In this case, a full 2/3 of those schools are religious schools.

About a quarter of the roughly 105 eligible private schools have applied to participate in the Douglas County School District’s pilot voucher program.

Douglas County School District officials said 27 private schools returned applications by the Friday deadline.

The school district accepted applications from private schools in the county as well as those within roughly 10 miles of the Douglas County border.

Of the 27 applicants, 19 are religious schools, most of which are Christian. One Jewish school applied for the program, which begins in the 2011-12 school year.

Read more…

Douglas county has one of the best public school systems in the country. Why destroy a good thing? And who’s protecting these children from religious indoctrination? Christianity is a dangerous religious cult run by a bunch of perverts.

This is just one more attack on American values and another action contributing to the fall of America as a great country.

Advertisements

26 Comments to “Tax Dollars To Pay For Religious Indoctrination”

  1. Douglas county has one of the best public school systems in the country. Why destroy a good thing?
    Where did you come up with the idea that CHOICE destroys a good thing?
    This is just one more attack on American values
    This country was FOUNDED on religion, and its support of moral VALUES!!! So, you’re telling me that by putting my child through a religious school vs. public school, I am somehow attacking American values??/ Which values would those be; Indoctrination to homosexuality, the removal of the history of this nation being taught in the classroom, learning to be self-sufficient vs. dependency. Please clear this up for me.

    • [This country was FOUNDED on religion, and its support of moral VALUES!!!]

      That’s a lie. The first line of the 1st Amendment reads: “Congress shall make NO law respecting an establishment of religion.” Our founding fathers put in law that religion shall be given absolutely no respect by our government. None. Nada. Zip.

      Thomas Jefferson made an interpretation of the 1st Amendment to his January 1st, 1802 letter to the Committee of the Danbury Baptist Association calling it a “wall of separation between church and State.” Madison had also written that “Strongly guarded. . . is the separation between religion and government in the Constitution of the United States.” There existed little controversy about this interpretation from our Founding Fathers.

      You religious nuts can try to spin the intentions of our Founding Fathers all you want, but you’re lying, plain and simple. And it’s anti-American.

  2. Freedom of religion is a cornerstone of the American project.
    Religious faith was an essential component of the American Founders’ understanding of liberty. They also understood that religious freedom was a fundamental right to be protected in a free society, and recognized that religion plays a vital role in forming the virtues to a free and limited government.
    The church must be reminded that it is not the master or the servant, but rather the conscience of the state. It must be the guide and the critic of the state, and never its tool.
    Martin Luther King Jr. 1963
    Without religion, where would we be? Would you then say that “Thou shalt not kill”, is anti-American?

    • [Without religion, where would we be? Would you then say that “Thou shalt not kill”, is anti-American?]

      No, while that is one of the 10 Commandments from the Torah, it had long been established behavior for social groups. People who didn’t respect the lives of others were ostracized from the group and had less chance for survival. It’s an evolutionary trait that most of us have. The few who don’t are called psychopaths.

      The Buddha taught people not to kill long before Christianity and Judaism. He’d tell his followers, “And what is right action? Abstaining from taking life, from stealing, and from illicit sex. This is called right action.”

  3. So in following the “Torah”, you are NOT being indoctrinated into a religious “cult”?

  4. “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof”

    This means there shall be no state religion, no prohibited religions, and that no one shall be prohibited from exercising religious freedom. It does NOT mean that congress shall not respect religion. Tax dollars are being used to pay for religious indoctrination? Maybe tax dollars are being used to promote religious freedom.

    Ok, given that tax dollars should not be used to pay for religious indoctrination (nor to promote religious freedom), I say that tax dollars should not be used to pay for political indoctrination either, and that’s what public education does. The teachers unions are overwhelmingly democrat, supported by the democratic party, and the resulting political indoctrination is inevitable. No vouchers? Fine – no public education either.

  5. Is that all you got? No reasoned response? No cogent argument? Just name calling? I’m not a right wingnut, but then, just like all black people look alike to a racist, all non-left-wingnuts look like right wingnuts to a left wingnut.

  6. LOL – yup, thats all you got.

    • Sorry, I don’t waste my time trying to reason with the irrational. You can believe in the little man in the sky all you want, but our children shouldn’t be indoctrinated into those cult beliefs.

  7. How do you know I am irrational? What irrational statement have I made, and in what sense were they irrational? I don’t believe in the little man in the sky, why do you say I do? I don’t think our children should be indoctrinated into cult beliefs on the taxpayers dime either, but I also don’t believe they should be indoctrinated into the political beliefs of any party on the taxpayers dime. Do you? Again, just because I disagree with you does not mean that I hold every lunatic opinion of anyone who has ever disagreed with you.

    • You are irrational, Francis. The fact that most school teachers are Democrats doesn’t mean they’re teaching liberalism to students. They teach what’s in the textbooks — most of which is defined by the radical conservatives on the Texas School Board.

  8. So, if we were to get rid of the “cults of religion”, and given that the comandments are not in any textbooks, wouldn’t the schools produce, in your line of logic, nothing but psychopaths? Given enough time, the parents of these kids would lose the ability to clearly define right from wrong. The simple fact is, there are a lot of them who already have. Crawl out from under your rock and look around, they seem to be everywhere these days.

    • [So, if we were to get rid of the “cults of religion”, and given that the comandments are not in any textbooks, wouldn’t the schools produce, in your line of logic, nothing but psychopaths?]

      No, a psychopath is a person who is born without a conscience.

  9. [The fact that most school teachers are Democrats doesn’t mean they’re teaching liberalism to students. They teach what’s in the textbooks — most of which is defined by the radical conservatives on the Texas School Board]

    If that’s true, what do you think we should do about public schools teaching our children this crap?

  10. Ben,
    If you truly believe what you write about religion being nothing more than cult beliefs, then why would you then post an article titled, “Breaking News! Marilyn Davenport Going To Hell!”? And from that article, “That does it…,” God spoke. “You’re going to hell, Davenport. You and the rest of your hate-filled lying ass right-wing lard-ass friends….”. So which is it? Is she going to hell, as you say in that article, or is religion nothing but cult beliefs revolving around “the little man in the sky”. Hypocrisy at its finest.

  11. Using your logic, the email sent by Marilyn Davenport should also be considered parody. I know, I know, you’d call it racist or bigoted or stupid. And I would agree with you 100%. But doesn’t evolution teach us that humans evolved from apes, closely related to gorillas and chimpanzees? So in that sense, again using your logic, that tasteless email has to be considered parody as well. Not being religious I personally found both Marilyn Davenport’s actions and your article to be of the same cloth…uncouth and insulting. But that’s what makes this country great…the ability to express our opinions, regardless if anyone agrees.

    • Marilyn Davenport holds a high position in the Republican party and therefore represents the party. Her “parody” insults a large group of people simply because of their ethnic origins, not because of anything they’ve done but simply how they were born.

      I was attacking one person because of a specific, stupid, racist thing she had done. I believe there is a difference.

      • Marilyn Davenport is an official in the Orange County Republican party, hardly a high position. And she was attacking a single person, as well, President Obama, not an entire race of people. However, in an earlier post you said what you did was parody. Now you claim to be attacking a person. So was it a parody, or an attack? Marilyn Davenport is a moron, of which there is no doubt. But your “attack” was no different, whether you believe it or not.

  12. I missed a very important fact in my reply. You said you were only attacking a single person but yet from the article in question, “You’re going to hell, Davenport. You and the rest of your hate-filled lying ass right-wing lard-ass friends….”. Anyone with an ounce of intelligence would realize that you are attacking MANY more people than just Marilyn Davenport.

    • True, I’m attacking all right-wingers for destroying our country. Davenport is attacking black people. That photo is blatantly racist in case you hadn’t noticed. She’s attacking Obama for something that he is, not anything he did.

  13. Or is she attacking him because, like everyone else, he evolved from apes? Or do you also dispute the Theory of Evolution? I didn’t see anyone other Obama in that email so how do you reason that is automatically an attack on all black people. After all, Obama’s mother is white so why say it was attacking white people? And even if you believe she is attacking a large group, you say there is a difference in what you did, even though you now say you are attacking a large group. I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again…hypocrisy at it’s finest. ’nuff said on this subject.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: