Well, actually he said this..
>>The service is not for children. It is for children that are students in public schools<<
And is agreeing that this should be so.
So while you are correct, HE is not defining it, he is defending it.
That didn’t seem like “defending” to me, more like an effort at “describing,” although the situation seems to be more complex than that brief description.
I’m more annoyed that my son can’t be on a track team in a Catholic school!
>>So while you are correct, HE is not defining it, he is defending it.<<
No, I am not.
I would like to see all “non-educational” services attached to public schools eliminated - and taxes adjusted accordingly.
I would then like to see public schools eliminated - and taxes adjusted accordingly. Public education is an obsolete paradigm. It had its day and it’s function. It is no longer necessary.