Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
Not as long as the money isn't provided to the schools of one religion and not others.Using tax money to fund religious schools IS establishing a religion.
Example
/cloudfront-us-east-1.images.arcpublishing.com/dmn/2RGPSBEI4GYM2IXJ6JLTZGQ3EA.jpg)
Texas plan to put chaplains in public schools is latest move to inject Christianity
What critics see as an assault on the separation of church and state, supporters argue is a step forward for religious liberty after a major Supreme Court...www.dallasnews.com
This is establishing a religion.
... and as long as churches with tax-supported schools are not tax exempt.Not as long as the money isn't provided to the schools of one religion and not others.
Is that what the Constitution says?Not as long as the money isn't provided to the schools of one religion and not others.
The first amendment reads: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances."Is that what the Constitution says?
Or does it say the government can't be used to force religion down anyone's throat?
ANY religious school receiving government funding violates both the intent and word of the First.The first amendment reads: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances."
What that clearly says is that the federal government can't establish a state religion. It can't suppress religion. It doesn't say anything about the government being restricted from supporting ALL religions which it does now my making them tax-exempt. Education vouchers that allow a taxpayer's money to go to any school, religious or secular ISN'T supporting any particular religion. So it isn't violating the 1st Amendment's actual language or intent.
That's clearly NOT what the 1st Amendment says.ANY religious school receiving government funding violates both the intent and word of the First.
I see.That's clearly NOT what the 1st Amendment says.
I can read plain English, it’s unfortunate that you can’t.I see.
Another tiny minded ape boy with word problems
Perhaps then, if you can read actual words, do so and act slightly less stupid.I can read plain English, it’s unfortunate that you can’t.
You did read where they aren't good enough for his own kids, maybe he should put his kids in the public schools as an exampleThe Public Schools would do fine is the Rich MAGAts would not vote to allow the tax dollars to be paid to the Rich Bitch private schools.
You want to send your kids to a private school? Fine
You want the government to pay? Sorry, we don't do Communism.
No I don't you fcking idiot. WE pay for our children to attend private school.
You can't possibly be this fcking stupid.... well maybe
Ok, enough. "Public school" is NOT synonymous with "democrat party."
YOU are entitled to send your kids to public school. Your taxes pay for it.
YOU have the right to choose a private school.
YOU do not have the right to use public tax dollars to pay for it.
... and as long as churches with tax-supported schools are not tax exempt.
You did read where they aren't good enough for his own kids, maybe he should put his kids in the public schools as an example
He doesn’t want to admit that the tax dollars funding public schools don’t belong to the government. They belong to the taxpayers. Parents shouldn’t have to pay twice for their kis’s education, once to a public school that they don’t attend and again to the private school they do attend. The tax funds provided to educate each child should follow the child, not be locked in an underperforming public school.Was that an echo or a stutter?
He's not stupid. He is dishonest.
Yes, it is.
Look, everyone understands: you want quality education limited to the rich and well-connected.
He wants all children indoctrinated by the State. Anything that threatens this he opposes.He doesn’t want to admit that the tax dollars funding public schools don’t belong to the government. They belong to the taxpayers. Parents shouldn’t have to pay twice for their kis’s education, once to a public school that they don’t attend and again to the private school they do attend. The tax funds provided to educate each child should follow the child, not be locked in an underperforming public school.
BWAHAHAHAHAHAWas that an echo or a stutter?
He's not stupid. He is dishonest.
Yes, it is.
Look, everyone understands: you want quality education limited to the rich and well-connected.
You seem to be hallucinating.BWAHAHAHAHAHA
MAGAT talking to the mirror again.
BWAHAHAHAHAHA
I don't do cheap booze.You seem to be hallucinating.
Stop mixing crack and bath salts with cheap booze.
yes it invokes helping kids that get accepted subsided scholarships to those better schoolsDo you not know what school choice is? It usually involves using tax dollars to send children that private schools choose to accept to those private schools at the expense of public school funding and all the children who those private schools don't accept.
You should be in favor of vouchers since a large percentage of black kids are stuck in underperforming public schools and their parents often can’t afford the better education offered by private schools.No.... because studies on places this has been tried recorded very mixed results ranging from worsening grades to slight improvements.
Do school vouchers work? Here’s what research really says.
Complaining about race cards and crt is some white snowflake shit.
Who made you speaker for all black people?
