Re: Vouchers lost in court, deserve no new chance

Pubkeybreaker <pubkeybreaker@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>On May 6, 3:15 pm, Bob LeChevalier <loj...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>> Pubkeybreaker <pubkeybrea...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>> >> That is, private schools truly are Lake Woebegon, where all children
are
>> >> above average. Vouchers will do one of two things. Either it will
accelerate
>> >> this affect, because if private schools are allowed to keep their
admissions
>> >> criteria, they'll  then be able to just take the top, say, 20%
instead of
>> >> the top 40%, or they'll lose many of the reasons parents want to
send them
>> >> there.
>>
>> >Yep!!!!!  And as for "allowed to keep",  I don't see how they can be
>> >prohibited from having such criteria.
>>
>> Ever heard of the 14th amendment "equal protection under the law"?
>
>Your sarcasm aside, it is not applicable. The 14th amendment only
>applies to the government.  It places no restriction on private
organizations
>to set admission criteria. Attending a private school does not place a
>student "under the law".

Government largesse is subject to the provision.  Vouchers are
government largesse.

>Any private business, club, or other enterprise is free to set
>standards for member****p.  To have otherwise would be chaos.

They are also free to not receive government handouts if their
standards violate the federal civil rights laws.

>Imagine a pro-s****ts team.  What would it be like if it could not be
>selective? A criterion such as "lineman must be big" is no different from
"our
>students must be smart and motivated".

S****ts teams aren't sup****ted by government vouchers.

>Imagine Intel as a company.  What would it be like if it had to hire
>some schlub off the street to help design its chips?

Intel is not sup****ted by government vouchers.

>Private organizations must be allowed to set competency criteria.

Of course.  They may in doing so be effectively choosing to not
receive public moneys.

The Boy Scouts have been running into this problem in recent years.
They won the right to legally discriminate against gays and atheists,
but several states therefore will not allow them to use any government
facilities, nor any government aid, because their laws forbid the use
of public moneys or facilities by a discriminating organization.

>> All they have to do is say that a school must meet certain conditions
>> to be eligible for vouchers.  One of those conditions could be
>> non-restrictive admissions.
>
>And this, of course, would destroy the very objective that those who
>want vouchers are trying to achieve.

Tough.

>Why?

Because equal protection under the law is a fundamental right.

>Because the private schools would
>not accept vouchers. Many parents send their kids to private schools
>precisely because they are restrictive and have at least some admission
>standards.

Then they can do so without government assistance.

>Imagine if some private Catholic schools had to accept (gasp!)
>Jews or Atheists!!!  The RR certainly don't want their kids exposed to
>people who think for themselves.   [actually, I think this would be a
good thing].

Then they can do so without government assistance.

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