Should Cities and States Adopt School Voucher Programs?

Should Cities and States Adopt School Voucher Programs?

School vouchers come in many forms, but all of them would provide parents with money to spend on the schools of their choice. We all want to provide our children with the best education possible -- but are voucher programs tools of change or misguided panaceas?

Next question in Politics

You are seeing 6 Comments on this Argument. See all 72 Comments on this Question.
Regarding Argument
The Religious Right’s Support of School Vouchers
- From AUSCS
No Side
By Americans United
Close Argument Open Argument Go to this Argument

Thank You for your Comment

We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.

  • sumwatt
    Stop arguing against the religious right!

    Have you taken a moment to consider that a large base of support for school vouchers comes not from the religious right but from a broad swath of parents and citizens who are not of the religious right?

    I'm a about as hardcore of an atheist as you could imagine, but I support school vouchers. The reality is that any funds distributed through any program can be diverted into religious organizations. People who are on any form of public assistance can tithe their church or religious establishment. Thousands of elderly pool their social security money and tithe to churches and personal interests.

    While my ultimate ideal would be to abolish public schools altogether, the reality is that a school voucher is the next best thing *without* violating the separation clause when the vouchers are given to parents and not to the schools directly.

    - sumwatt July 24, 2008 1:44PM

    Reply to this Recommend (2) Icon flag Side: Yes

    Thank You for your Comment

    We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.

  • F2XL
    I completely disagree

    "Nine out of ten of our nation's children attend public schools, yet some politicians are asking the American people to accept inadequate funding for public schools while they enact new, expensive programs for private religious schools."

    Inadequate funding? Really?

    http://www.cato-at-liberty.org/2008/05/06/i-thought-the-schools-were-starving /

    http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=9485

    "For example, wealthy TV preacher Pat Robertson regularly attacks America's public education system, calls for tax aid for private religious schools and insists that "the Constitution says nothing about the separation of church and state!""

    I will personally jump off a two-story building if you can actually find the words "separation of church and state" in the constitution.

    - F2XLUS September 20, 2008 9:00PM

    Reply to this Recommend (0) Icon flag Side: Yes

    Thank You for your Comment

    We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.

  • crunchymom
    I am a liberal mother and I support vouchers

    We are continuously throwing money at schools, but it gets eaten up by administration. Why are teachers asking children to bring their own supplies and asking for donations of chalk and paper when schools get thousands of dollars each year per student? Public schools have PLENTY of money. It just doesn't get allocated where it is needed.

    If my student isn't in your school, then you shouldn't get the money to educate my student. Period. And I am a registered Democrat.

    - crunchymom September 21, 2008 3:24PM

    Reply to this Recommend (0) Icon flag Side: Yes

    Thank You for your Comment

    We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.

  • crunchymom
    So why did Utah vote 70% against vouchers?

    Utah is one of the most religious and conservative states in the nation, and yet they also voted down couchers, thanks to a campaign run largely by Democrats. How does that make sense if couchers are an agenda of the religious right?

    Because vouchgers have nothing to do with religion. They have to do with control over the money. School administrations, textbook publishers, school supply manufacturers - so many jobs are dependent on the world of education. The case against vouchers is about greed, not children. We pay our teachers more, we allocate more money per student, and yet classes still stay large, teachers still have to buy their own chalk, and test scores still stay low.

    Vouchers are about parents making choices for their children and increasing their opportunities. Anti-voucher programs are about maintaining the status quo.

    - crunchymom September 21, 2008 3:42PM

    Reply to this Recommend (0) Icon flag Side: Yes

    Thank You for your Comment

    We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.

  • jxzac
    responsibility and liberals is like oil and water

    you want to prevent families from sending their kids to private schools . on what grounds? you want press your religion on these people and all people and think it's ok. Where these people just want to escape your grasp. Here's something well written, and it's hard to bring this up with the 'ironclad presuppositions and nonsensical reasoning you hold.'

    "The First Amendment's widely misunderstood Establishment Clause simply means that the state will not set up any official state religion, nor will it prohibit any person from freely exercising the religious dictates of his or her own conscience. However, this restriction on the Government's intrusion into the private religious convictions of its citizenry does NOT mean that all aspects of religion should be kept completely out of the affairs of the State. That secular ideology is entirely foreign to the original intent of the Founding Fathers — who drafted the Constitution, including its Bill of Rights, as a clearly defined limitation on the power of the Government to interfere with the freedoms of the people, but NOT as a limitation on the power of the people to control the Government according to the beliefs of their own hearts."

    A presumpasion you people hold is, 'religion is always bad'. so your argument makes sense to you, but in truth it doesn't make sense because religion isn't always bad. You're a nonsensical people, but worse, you're an untrustworthy people. you're devious, not honest. very dangerous. And your substantial impact is, you wish to establish an official state religion. YOur religion. You're succeeding.

    You're too stupid to understand it, and too evil to care. it's a fact. proud and ignorant. a terrible plague. Let the people have free. stay your hand from them. THey should overrun and kill you. you're a hypocrit.

    - jxzac April 2, 2009 2:45AM

    Reply to this Recommend (0) Icon flag Side: Uncommitted

    Thank You for your Comment

    We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.

Spotlight

 
 
  • AUSCS
    Americans United
    As a non-sectarian, non-partisan organization, Americans United's membership includes Christians, Jews, Buddhists, people with no religious affiliation and... More

Subscribe to Opposing News

Biweekly updates on new debates and experts

Thank you for signing up

Please check your email to confirm your subscription.