• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Great news the Jerry Falwell empire is on its way out the door.

jbander said:
Tax dollars would be called public money to anyone that doesn't have their underwear on backwards.
Click to expand...

Or...it could be considered a tax incentive or "hey you get to keep more of your own money to use it for what you want to use it for". If I made a gang that stole your money by force and then gave it back to you and acted like I was giving you a gift, what would you call it?
 
Fishking said:
That's for you to determine. People pay taxes to support the local school. If you have kids, and you don't want them to go to the local school, then there should be no problem for that money to be allocated to whoever actually is responsible for educating the child. The money is for education, not the the public school.
Click to expand...

by the same token, since i do not use the public parks, that share of my taxes should be refunded to me to offset the cost of installing a basketball goal in my back yard
 
Risky Thicket said:
Public money for public schools. People who want religion involved in their child's education can pay to send them to a private religious school. Public funds are not for the support of religion or religious schools.
Click to expand...

The money that is taken from citizens is for education, not for public schools.
 
jbander said:
Just as long as it isn't any type of religious school. Because the for fathers totally rejected that Idea for obvious reasons.
Click to expand...

Rofl...no they didn't. People later made that up. Oh...and they didn't even have permanent income taxes during that time. That aside, how parents choose to educate their children is their choice, and if they get more of their own money back to be able to afford it, good.
 
Gina said:
Like x 100. Spot on.

I also have a feeling a ruckus would occur should certain varieties of religions receive public education funds.
Click to expand...

I don't care if a parent sends their kid to a Satanic Temple for school. That would be the parents' choice on how they educate their child. I say "their child" because they are, not wards of the state.
 
Fishking said:
Or...it could be considered a tax incentive or "hey you get to keep more of your own money to use it for what you want to use it for". If I made a gang that stole your money by force and then gave it back to you and acted like I was giving you a gift, what would you call it?
Click to expand...
Like I said Libertarians are Anarchist for the wealthy, they allow themselves to believe idiotic ideas to justify their weak minded ideas that taxes are are stolen from you and since you have to pay them you have lost all your freedom. Try this on for size, the level of civilization is in direct relationship to its level of taxation. Those taxes are my responsibility and my part of contributing to be able to live in this level of civilization.
 
Fishking said:
The money that is taken from citizens is for education, not for public schools.
Click to expand...

Religious based education? Why don't you be honest? That is where you are going with this.

Publicly financed "private" schools is a terrible idea for a number of reasons but the true impetus behind it is public funding of religious based education.
 
Fishking said:
The money that is taken from citizens is for education, not for public schools.
Click to expand...
This is the problem, there is no way in hell that I want my money to support the wacko evangelical brand of indoctrination to educate a person that would be sick enough to vote for a monster like Small Hands . That would be the reason that the Founding father totally separated our Republic from the control of the church, so it wouldn't create hatred in the name of God. And no those taxes are not for education that are educating in a manner that is bad for this country.
 
jbander said:
Like I said Libertarians are Anarchist for the wealthy, they allow themselves to believe idiotic ideas to justify their weak minded ideas that taxes are are stolen from you and since you have to pay them you have lost all your freedom. Try this on for size, the level of civilization is in direct relationship to its level of taxation. Those taxes are my responsibility and my part of contributing to be able to live in this level of civilization.
Click to expand...

Strawman. I've never stated that you lose all your freedoms if you pay taxes. However, taxes do represent a violation of property rights so we should endeavor to implement them and use them in a minimally invasive way. One of those areas is for those who have children to have a choice in how they are educated.
 
Fishking said:
Rofl...no they didn't. People later made that up. Oh...and they didn't even have permanent income taxes during that time. That aside, how parents choose to educate their children is their choice, and if they get more of their own money back to be able to afford it, good.
Click to expand...
You don't have a clue what your talking about. I do though. Our first treaty in our history was written in the earliest history of this country with writers and signers of the Declaration of independents and the constitution in congress to vote for it, it was past by 100% and signed into law by Jon Adams. this treaty was called the Treaty of Tripoli. The 11th article " As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion; as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion, or tranquility, of Mussulmen (Muslims); and as the said States never entered into any war or act of hostility against any Mahometan (Mohammedan) nation, it is declared by the parties that no pretext arising from religious opinions shall ever produce an interruption of the harmony existing between the two countries. You people are bad for this country.
 
Risky Thicket said:
Religious based education? Why don't you be honest? That is where you are going with this.
Click to expand...

If the parents so choose, that is their choice. You can send your kids to wherever you prefer as well.

Publicly financed "private" schools is a terrible idea for a number of reasons but the true impetus behind it is public funding of religious based education.
Click to expand...

The true impetus is that our public school system is a giant pile of steaming crap. There are also religious schools but if you don't like them, then don't use them. There are plenty of parents who prefer religious schools for many reasons.
 
jbander said:
You don't have a clue what your talking about. I do though. Our first treaty in our history was written in the earliest history of this country with writers and signers of the Declaration of independents and the constitution in congress to vote for it, it was past by 100% and signed into law by Jon Adams. this treaty was called the Treaty of Tripoli. The 11th article " As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion; as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion, or tranquility, of Mussulmen (Muslims); and as the said States never entered into any war or act of hostility against any Mahometan (Mohammedan) nation, it is declared by the parties that no pretext arising from religious opinions shall ever produce an interruption of the harmony existing between the two countries. You people are bad for this country.
Click to expand...

Yep...that has nothing to do with anything. Thanks for posting, though.
 
jbander said:
Like I said Libertarians are Anarchist for the wealthy, they allow themselves to believe idiotic ideas to justify their weak minded ideas that taxes are are stolen from you and since you have to pay them you have lost all your freedom. Try this on for size, the level of civilization is in direct relationship to its level of taxation. Those taxes are my responsibility and my part of contributing to be able to live in this level of civilization.
Click to expand...

Can't tell what is worse.

The ridiculous hyperbole?
The blatant broad brushing?
The strawman arguments?

Tis a toss up.
 
jbander said:
This is the problem, there is no way in hell that I want my money to support the wacko evangelical brand of indoctrination to educate a person that would be sick enough to vote for a monster like Small Hands . That would be the reason that the Founding father totally separated our Republic from the control of the church, so it wouldn't create hatred in the name of God. And no those taxes are not for education that are educating in a manner that is bad for this country.
Click to expand...

Yeah...you prefer kids to be enslaved to the state and be subjected to only your brand of indoctrination. How statist of you.
 
Fishking said:
Strawman. I've never stated that you lose all your freedoms if you pay taxes. However, taxes do represent a violation of property rights so we should endeavor to implement them and use them in a minimally invasive way. One of those areas is for those who have children to have a choice in how they are educated.
Click to expand...
and were did I say you did, My remark was for Anarchists for the wealthy (libertarian)in total. The you part was a generic you, as in Anarchist for the wealthy in total. As in you= they. You don't define the definition of Taxes, the constitution and the government does. You don't get to say where your tax dollar is used other then through you representative and that representative is bound by the dictates of the constitution. . you have no clue.
 
You want to see blind controlled thinking Look at this sequence. MY COMMENT-Just as long as it isn't any type of religious school. Because the for fathers totally rejected that Idea for obvious reasons. FISHKINGS RESPONSE ---Rofl...no they didn't. People later made that up. Oh...and they didn't even have permanent income taxes during that time. That aside, how parents choose to educate their children is their choice, and if they get more of their own money back to be able to afford it, good. I BURIED HIM WITH MY RESPONSE -------------You don't have a clue what your talking about. I do though. Our first treaty in our history was written in the earliest history of this country with writers and signers of the Declaration of independents and the constitution in congress to vote for it, it was past by 100% and signed into law by Jon Adams. this treaty was called the Treaty of Tripoli. The 11th article " As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion; as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion, or tranquility, of Mussulmen (Muslims); and as the said States never entered into any war or act of hostility against any Mahometan (Mohammedan) nation, it is declared by the parties that no pretext arising from religious opinions shall ever produce an interruption of the harmony existing between the two countries. You people are bad for this country. AND THE BLIND FISHKING COMES BACK WITH THIS ----Yep...that has nothing to do with anything. Thanks for posting, though----------------------------This explains concisely how the right wing brain works or doesn't work. you can't make this stuff up. fishhking you have me and everyone else rolling on the floor.
 
Ramos your dealing with the brain dead.
 
Fishking said:
I prefer a system that works as well. However, that doesn't have much to do with allowing parents freedom of choice.
Click to expand...

There can be a balance. The voucher system , as implimented does not actually allow parents freedom of choice. It allows those people who have more money more freedom of choice, but it ruins the freedom of choice for everyone else.
 
jbander said:
and were did I say you did, My remark was for Anarchists for the wealthy (libertarian)in total. The you part was a generic you, as in Anarchist for the wealthy in total. As in you= they. You don't define the definition of Taxes, the constitution and the government does. You don't get to say where your tax dollar is used other then through you representative and that representative is bound by the dictates of the constitution. . you have no clue.
Click to expand...

You responded to me an it was related to my post. I placed your comment in bold. Now you act like you don't see it. Amazing.

Oh...and guess what? I do get a say, as does everyone else. And you said something about "no clue".
 
RAMOSS said:
There can be a balance. The voucher system , as implimented does not actually allow parents freedom of choice. It allows those people who have more money more freedom of choice, but it ruins the freedom of choice for everyone else.
Click to expand...

How? Most people are stuck with their public school, with no other options. That's the definition of no choice.
 
Fishking said:
If the parents so choose, that is their choice. You can send your kids to wherever you prefer as well.



The true impetus is that our public school system is a giant pile of steaming crap. There are also religious schools but if you don't like them, then don't use them. There are plenty of parents who prefer religious schools for many reasons.
Click to expand...

You seem to be confusing the right to attend religious schools and the public funding of religious based schools.

I have no problem whatsoever with private religious schools. Whether I like them or don't like them is not the issue. Public funding of private religious schools is a separate issue and is the issue to which I refer. Public money is not for funding religion, any religion, or private religious schools. If you like a private religious school you have the freedom to pay send your children there. No public funding for private religious schools.
 
jbander said:
You want to see blind controlled thinking Look at this sequence. MY COMMENT-Just as long as it isn't any type of religious school. Because the for fathers totally rejected that Idea for obvious reasons. FISHKINGS RESPONSE ---Rofl...no they didn't. People later made that up. Oh...and they didn't even have permanent income taxes during that time. That aside, how parents choose to educate their children is their choice, and if they get more of their own money back to be able to afford it, good. I BURIED HIM WITH MY RESPONSE -------------You don't have a clue what your talking about. I do though. Our first treaty in our history was written in the earliest history of this country with writers and signers of the Declaration of independents and the constitution in congress to vote for it, it was past by 100% and signed into law by Jon Adams. this treaty was called the Treaty of Tripoli. The 11th article " As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion; as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion, or tranquility, of Mussulmen (Muslims); and as the said States never entered into any war or act of hostility against any Mahometan (Mohammedan) nation, it is declared by the parties that no pretext arising from religious opinions shall ever produce an interruption of the harmony existing between the two countries. You people are bad for this country. AND THE BLIND FISHKING COMES BACK WITH THIS ----Yep...that has nothing to do with anything. Thanks for posting, though----------------------------This explains concisely how the right wing brain works or doesn't work. you can't make this stuff up. fishhking you have me and everyone else rolling on the floor.
Click to expand...

Wow...where to begin with this manifesto. Let's see...I stated parents have a choice, and that includes using religious schools for their children, if they want. You spouted off something about John Adams that has nothing to do with what I posted.

News flash, our school systems are more secular today than they have ever been in the history of the nation. To say that there was some kind of prohibition against parents having their kids go to a religious school represents some kind of violation to anything the founders set up is ridiculous beyond belief.

Finally, there is no establishment of anything, there is choice. A parent could use the program to send their kid to a private secular school. A parent could do it to send them to a Muslim oriented school, a Santanist school, a Christian school, home school, or even leave them in the public school. There is no preferential treatment for any organization, no exclusion, no establishment, no nothing. It's pretty damn simple.
 
Risky Thicket said:
You seem to be confusing the right to attend religious schools and the public funding of religious based schools.

I have no problem whatsoever with private religious schools. Whether I like them or don't like them is not the issue. Public funding of private religious schools is a separate issue and is the issue to which I refer. Public money is not for funding religion, any religion, or private religious schools. If you like a private religious school you have the freedom to pay send your children there. No public funding for private religious schools.
Click to expand...

See post #74 an then further, what people choose for their children is their choice. Make your own for your own.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom