From: J056600@LMSC5.IS.LMSC.LOCKHEED.COM
Subject: Re: Public Education (Was: Re: Family Leave)
Organization: Lockheed Missiles & Space Company, Inc.
Date: Fri, 9 Oct 92 18:59:07 GMT

In <TcuDsB2w165w@monsoon.com>, Sunil Gupta writes:

>john@msus1.msus.edu writes:

>> If I understand the voucher system correctly, people with children in the
>> public school system would be given a voucher which they would give to the
>> public school they decide to send their child to. That school, in turn, woul
>> receive funding in proportion to the number of vouchers it collects. It seem

>One of the major aspects of the proposed voucher system is that it
>would apply also to private and parochial schools. Thus, tax money
>would be used to support church-sponsored institutions (which are
>tax-exempt in the first place). This, to me, is the ulterior motive
>of the proposal, given Georgie's and Dano's new-found belief that
>the separation of state and Christian church is a constitutional
>aberration.

Religious institutions are not uniquely tax-exempt.  *Non-profit* groups are.
If a parochial school were run for profit, it would NOT be tax-exempt.  In
addition, school *choice* also allows you to enter your child into a school
teaching atheism or Satanism.  That's what *choice* means.  If school choice
was restricted to Christian institutions, you'd clearly have a violation of
the 1st Amendment and a valid argument.

Besides, it's not government money, it's the people's tax money.  Shouldn't
people have some say-so in how *their money* is being spent?  Of course, if I
wanted to stump entirely on the Libertarian Party line, I could say that the
government shouldn't fund the schools at all.  But as my .sig says, I consider
myself a realist.

And for the umpteen millionth time, THERE IS NO DAMNED SEPARATION OF CHURCH AND
STATE IN THE CONSTITUTION OR ANY OF THE FOUNDING DOCUMENTS!!!!  That remark
was made in a letter by Thomas Jefferson in (I think) the 1820s, over 30 years
after the Bill of Rights became law.  If Jefferson could see how this statement
would be used and misused, he'd curse himself for ever saying it.  There is
NOTHING in the Constitution that says that the government can not engage in
any religious endeavors; just that Congress (and the states by the 14th Amend-
ment) can not "establish" (or favor, or promote, etc.) a particular religious
point of view.  So when Christians are *uniquely* favored by the government,
that's wrong.

And there is no special treatment for *Christian* institutions as you so
snidely claim.  A Buddhist church is just as tax exempt as a Christian church
which is just as tax-exempt as a Muslim church.  If you were a Muslim, wouldn't
you want Muslim beliefs taught to your child?  And as long as you don't force
non-Muslims to receive the same indoctrination, I see no Constitutional
conflict.  I don't think Jefferson would have either.


Tim Irvin   j056600@lmsc5.is.lmsc.lockheed.com
***************************************************************************
FLASH!  Card-carrying Libertarian attempts to solve problems realistically.
        Film at 11.
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.activism.d,alt.politics.elections,alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.clinton,talk.politics.misc,talk.abortion