It's unfortunate...

[A Black Falcon]

By saying that most kids won't get vouchers and will be left behind? No. That has nothing to do with the question I asked.

If everyone got full vouchers then private schools would be different from public in one way only: no national standards. And that wouldn't be a good change...

How will extra funding eliminate, or even help to abate the largest problem in poor, urban schools: The violence and drugs? The lack of discipline? What could money buy that will change this?

I'm all for better curriculums and better teachers, but funding never seems to go this route...

Think about it: Why is it that back in the 50's, even when public school had funding issues (or in the 30s when there were REAL funding issues), why were public schools not even remotely half as bad as they are now? Why were grades so much higher, and behavior so much better then?

The answer: Higher standards and more discipline. Less attention to teaching sex and more attention to teaching the three Rs. It's not about the money and never has been.

Sure, money isn't the whole answer. But it goes a LONG way to helping with the problem. I can't see how you can deny that students in a school with all the things I mentioned wouldn't be more motivated and would do better than ones in schools without them... it makes no sense... yet its your position. Huh?

As for behavior I wouldn't say its a big problem in most places.

No. School is for learning about skills that will help you make a living. It should NOT be a new-age cultural enlightenment center or a sexual therapy studio. We don't have the time to waste on this garbage when increasing numbers of high-school seniors can barely read.

Classes for Native-American studies or Tribal African history. Revision of American and European history to include more references to other cultures, and to demonize Anglo-Saxony. Preaching diversity instead of assimilation. Worthless, and ultimately harmful. When people like Stalin and Malcolm X are considered heroes in history is when we have a problem.

Okay.

*School should be boring and dull and only cover things directly useful to the real world. Check.

So we should get rid of history, philosophy, Latin, non-local foreign languages, etc, etc? Great idea! None of them are that useful in careers either, after all! Just like sex ed and multicultural programs!

And we should use the old, inaccurate history of the world so that we can protect our Western European biases into the indefinite future. That sounds like such a great idea too... I mean who cares about accurate history? Its far better to do history as America-firsters see it!

And actually wanting other racial groups to stay as a unique group withing the societal whole? Silly late 20th century idea... we should go back to the good old days of Ellis Island and forced name changes because they are hard to pronounce, and ... discouraging ... the speaking of native languages and doing rituals?

Yippee!

Or how about NOT?

History is, and always has been, my favorite subject in school. The thought of changing history to suit your Western European tastes is an awful one...

You admit it's not very helpful, yet you consder it important... VERY important. How important can it be if, as you admit, it doesn't help much?

You're right. It doesn't help much, and you're wrong, it's not important at all. It's not up to the government to teach this sort of thing to children.

I mean that the kids don't think they learned anything from it. But they did... and it WILL help them, whether they admit it or not.

This in lieu of an actual intelligent response. Let's give the boy a hand!

There is no way to respond to such an idiotic statement in any other way.

DEMOCRATS DO WHAT THEY CAN TO GET MONEY FOR EDUCATION.

REPUBLICANS DO WHAT THEY CAN TO CUT IT.

And you try to imply that Republicans are BETTER on education because the Democrats cut education to give to other programs?

You really ARE insane...

Again, you're obviously not reading what I'm typing. You don't think public school is free, do you? Everyone pays for it, even if they never have children to use it.

Taxes and direct payments are very different things.

Do you know the relationship between supply and demand? Obviously not.

How does that relate, exactly to, say, DLN's statements on this issue?

Didn't think so.

So then it becomes the government's responsibility? Bullshit. People are more sexually irresponsible now than in the times when government did not teach sex ed, so how on earth can you say it's REQUIRED? Are you stupid? This was never a problem when it was up to parents to teach their children about sexuality. I mean, you just come out with the most asanine things sometimes.

If they'd had a media like we have they would have a far worse problem than us because of their lack of official teaching on the issue.

I'm not talking about adding moral instrution to curriculum. I mean basic morals that you practice in social interaction: Respecting authority, respecting those around you, being polite, work hard... basic tenets of human interaction that are slowly being deleted from society as it has become more liberal.

Ah, so we can all learn to say "sir" and "ma'am" like all you nice polite Southerners?

That's such a funny thing... I know a few people from the south and its like they do it by instict, but there's no reason for it I can see...

Oh, and its not like schools don't try to do some of those things...

History says otherwise. Explain why teenage pregnancy is eponentially higher now than in the days when sexual education was exclusively the parents' duty. Explain how sexual education in school has in the slightest bit done anything to stop it. If having sex-ed taught in schools is "many, many times better" than having parents teach it, why is it that since the implementation of school-taught sexual education have minors become so much more irresponsible sexually?

That its not taught especialy well (a big part of that blame are all the schools that can't talk about contraception because of rightwingers who would sue them) and that students have far more influences on them now.