Talk About Network

Google





Education > Education Miscellaneous > Re: Vouchers lo...
Latest [ Topics | Posts ] Archive Post A New Topic Post a Reply
<< Topic < Post Post 9 of 21 Topic 6912 of 7567
Post > Topic >>

Re: Vouchers lost in court, deserve no new chance

by Bob LeChevalier <lojbab@[EMAIL PROTECTED] > May 5, 2008 at 01:51 PM

Peter Franks <none@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>buckeye wrote:
>> Peter Franks <none@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>>> :|
>>> :|Yes, but they still have the obligation to pay for public education,
right?
>>> :|
>>> :|Rather than vouchers, perhaps the option should be given to parents
that 
>>> :|choose to send their children to alternate schools should be given
the 
>>> :|option to deduct the full amount of the tuition from their agi, as
well 
>>> :|as be exempt from taxes relating to public education.
>>> :|
>>> :|Problem solved.
>> 
>> 
>> A New Look At Vouchers.
>> ...
>> [**] Whether people should be forced to contribute money for
collectivist
>> social institutions or not is a separate issue altogether. As long as
>> the system exists, for better or worse, everyone has to be treated
equally.
>
>No, it is not a separate issue altogether.  It is actually THE source of 
>the issue -- does the purpose(s) of legitimate government include social 
>program creation and management?

Yes, at least in this country, since long before it was a country.

Such has been the case since:
<Text of the Massachusetts School Law of 1642
<Forasmuch as the good education of children is of singular behoof and
< benefit to any Common-wealth; and whereas many parents & masters are
< too indulgent and negligent of their duty in that kinde. It is
< therfore ordered that the Select men of everie town, in the severall
< precincts and quarters where they dwell, shall have a vigilant eye
< over their brethren & neighbours, to see, first that none of them
< shall suffer so much barbarism in any of their families as not to
< indeavour to teach by themselves or others, their children &
< apprentices so much learning as may inable them perfectly to read the
< English tongue, & knowledge of the Capital Lawes: upon penaltie of
< twentie ****llings for each neglect therin. Also that all masters of
< families doe once a week (at the least) catechize their children and
< servants in the grounds & principles of Religion, & if any be unable
< to doe so much: that then at the least they procure such children or
< apprentices to learn some short orthodox catechism without book, that
< they may be able to answer unto the questions that shall be
< propounded to them out of such catechism by their parents or masters
< or any of the Select men when they shall call them to a tryall of
< what they have learned of this kinde. And further that all parents
< and masters do breed & bring up their children & apprentices in some
< honest lawful calling, labour or imployment, either in husbandry, or
< some other trade profitable for themselves, and the Common-wealth if
< they will not or cannot train them up in learning to fit them for
< higher imployments. And if any of the Select men after admonition by
< them given to such masters of families shal finde them still
< negligent of their dutie in the particulars aforementioned, wherby
< children and servants become rude, stubborn & unruly; the said Select
< men with the help of two Magistrates, or the next County court for
< that ****re, shall take such children or apprentices from them & place
< them with some masters for years (boyes till they come to twenty one,
< and girls eighteen years of age compleat) which will more strictly
< look unto, and force them to submit unto government according to the
< rules of this order, if by fair means and former instructions they
< will not be drawn into it.
<
<[edit] Text of the Massachusetts General School Law of 1647
<It being one chief e project of ye old deluder, Satan, to keep men
< from the knowledge of ye Scriptures, as in former times by keeping
< him in an unknown tongue, so in these latter times by persuading from
< ye use of tongues, yt so at least ye true since & meaning of ye
< original might be clouded by false glosses of saint seeming
< deceivers, yet learning may not be buried in ye grave of or fathers
< in ye church and commonwealth, the Lord assisting or endeavors,- It
< is therefore ordered, yet every town****p in this jurisdiction, after
< ye Lord hath increased your number to 50 householders, shall then
< forthwith appoint one with in their town to teach all such children
< as shall resort to him to write & read, whose wages shall be paid
< either by ye parents or masters of such children, or by ye
< inhabitants in general, by way of supply, as ye major part of those
< yet orderly prudentials ye twone shall appoint; provided, those yet
< send their children be not oppressed by paying much more ym they can
< have ym taught for in other towns; & it is further ordered, yet where
< any town shall increase to ye number of 100 families or householders,
< they shall set up a grammer school, ye mr thereof being able to
< instruct youth so far as they shall be fitted for ye university,
< provided, yet if any town neglect ye performance hereof above one
< year, yet every such town shall pay 5 pounds to ye next school till
< they shall perform this order.

lojbab
Bob LeChevalier - artificial linguist; genealogist
lojbab@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
   Lojban language www.lojban.org
 




 21 Posts in Topic:
Vouchers lost in court, deserve no new chance
buckeye <buckeyeelo@[E  2008-04-02 12:02:13 
Re: Vouchers lost in court, deserve no new chance
malcolmkirkpatrick@[EMAIL  2008-05-04 12:57:08 
Re: Vouchers lost in court, deserve no new chance
Middle Class Warrior <  2008-05-04 20:37:29 
Re: Vouchers lost in court, deserve no new chance
malcolmkirkpatrick@[EMAIL  2008-05-04 18:01:51 
Re: Vouchers lost in court, deserve no new chance
buckeye <buckeyeelo@[E  2008-05-05 07:41:06 
Re: Vouchers lost in court, deserve no new chance
buckeye <buckeyeelo@[E  2008-05-08 04:13:12 
Re: Vouchers lost in court, deserve no new chance
buckeye <buckeyeelo@[E  2008-05-05 07:41:13 
Re: Vouchers lost in court, deserve no new chance
Peter Franks <none@[EM  2008-05-05 08:39:28 
Re: Vouchers lost in court, deserve no new chance
Bob LeChevalier <lojba  2008-05-05 13:51:37 
Re: Vouchers lost in court, deserve no new chance
Pubkeybreaker <pubkeyb  2008-05-07 06:36:43 
Re: Vouchers lost in court, deserve no new chance
Bob LeChevalier <lojba  2008-05-07 14:14:08 
Re: Vouchers lost in court, deserve no new chance
Werner <whetzner@[EMAI  2008-05-07 08:48:07 
Re: Vouchers lost in court, deserve no new chance
malcolmkirkpatrick@[EMAIL  2008-05-07 22:24:13 
Re: Vouchers lost in court, deserve no new chance
Bob LeChevalier <lojba  2008-05-08 05:11:24 
Re: Vouchers lost in court, deserve no new chance
malcolmkirkpatrick@[EMAIL  2008-05-05 10:19:26 
Re: Vouchers lost in court, deserve no new chance
Werner <whetzner@[EMAI  2008-05-05 13:23:23 
Re: Vouchers lost in court, deserve no new chance
Bob LeChevalier <lojba  2008-05-05 23:49:56 
Re: Vouchers lost in court, deserve no new chance
Nicklas@[EMAIL PROTECTED]  2008-05-06 07:40:27 
Re: Vouchers lost in court, deserve no new chance
malcolmkirkpatrick@[EMAIL  2008-05-08 11:17:24 
Re: Vouchers lost in court, deserve no new chance
Bob LeChevalier <lojba  2008-05-08 17:45:41 
Re: Vouchers lost in court, deserve no new chance
malcolmkirkpatrick@[EMAIL  2008-05-08 10:48:35 

Post A Reply:
  Go here to Signup

AddThis Feed Button


About - Advertising - Contact - Frequently Asked Questions - Privacy Policy - Terms of Use - Signup

Contact
localhost-V2008-12-19 Wed Jan 7 22:39:40 PST 2009.