Posted on 09/19/2005 10:36:04 AM PDT by Coleus
The City pays for school nurses and for crossing guards
The state and city gives all property a property tax exemption and sales-tax exemption, the IRS grants non-profit status.
The state and city pay for basic skills and comp. ed. instruction.
Now as far as the larger expenses such as infrastructure, salaries, payroll taxes, utilities and health insurance, the schools are on their own.
The good archbishop is probably like many of the bishops, priests, clergy and about 50% of lay Catholics, they TALK pro life and school vouchers and VOTE democrat. The USCCB had NO voter guide for the 2004 election and neither did most state catholic conferences (the legislative arm of that state's bishops). Did the archbishop provide a voters' guide for his diocese? I bet not. They get what they deserve--many Catholic shcool closings.
Most would rather take up many social justice issuses like fostering illegal immigration, welfare, free housing for the poor while the middle class who pay tuition for catholic schools get property and income tax increases to pay for these social programs.
Is it that they don't understand our form or government or, that they don't care?
I think it's a good thing that they don't fund religious schools here, whether Catholic or not.
It sounds like the Bishop should be campaigning for school vouchers. If vouchers were in effect, most of them would be spent on schools like the ones he is promoting.
In most towns, catholic schools are the best and only alternative to public schools. This is a situation that is changing, and would change more once vouchers are approved. But definitely a good voucher program would benefit catholic schools.
Probably that they don't understand our form of government. I have read elsewhere that the US is one of the only, or at least very few, countries in the world that does not at least partially fund religious schools. And it always puts us in company of the world's worst.
The more the government spends, the more the church has for its own purposes.
The more the government spends, the more the church has for its own purposes.
I think vouchers should be allowed to funnel the money to the schools you want to send your kids to.
In California we spend I hear $7500 on a regular kid and $15,000 on a non-english speaking child.
IMO if we send even half to the school of our choice and send the rest of the money back to the Stae or Federal general budget away from the (Teacher's union), then great for everyone.
The quality of education results will rise if that happened IMO.
My kids go to Catholic school and I want the government as far away as possible from that school, thank you. The moment the government starts funding things, it has found a way to influence those same things.
I'll pay my own way, thanks.
Nope. This dog don't hunt.
While I sent one child to a Christian (not Catholic) school for a year and would have liked to have had a voucher system or some other way to help defray to cost, our gubmint ejucashun system is not set up to fund Catholic or any other private school just because the school is there.
Yeah, I'd rather have my grandkids in a Christian school and support a voucher system, but the program suggested by this guy crosses the constitutional line IMO.
Judging by the tone of the article, sounds like they don't care to me.
Amen!
Just what we need, the likes of the Archbishop of Los Angeles sucking at the public teat.
He's a Vatican bureaucrat who's a Canadian citizen, so it's safe to say his diocese is a titular one somewhere outside the US, and doesn't have a lot of American voters in it. :-)
There ought to be some form of tax relief for those of us who educate our own children on our own nickel. If all the kids in the Catholic and other private school systems were dumped into the public system, there's no way they could handle it.
This makes no sense to me. The church gets the majority of its money from parishioners' tithing. The more money parishioners pay in taxes, the less money they have to support their church.
I hear this often -- what's the proof of this? Just curious. I am inclined to support vouchers and would like an example of where they have led to government "control" of schools and how this occurred.
Without Government support via vouchers, every parent sending their kids to parochial schools is paying *twice*.
Vouchers will *NOT* increase taxes overall because they will break down the Government educrat monopoly. Instead of $8000 per child a $5000 voucher will suffice for most schools.
Presto - lower taxes, better education and less hostility towards religion in the upbrining of children.
Think about it. The US is as hostile to religion as Cuba and China. The current policy was designed by the ACLU, not the American voter and not parents.
Bingo.
The main argument against prayer at graduations, "moments of silence" before the school day, and other religious references in public schools, is that they receive public money. Public funding is their foothold into every institution we have. Should Catholic and other parochial schools receive taxpayer-provided funds, sure enough, the ACLU would be right behind them, telling them what they could and couldn't do.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.