Some of the beliefs don’t make any sense-like denouncing solar fusion-what does that have to do with evolution? 
But some of the stuff manage to sound very PCish:
Here’s another article from NY Daily News:
http://m.nydailynews.com/1.1102340
From the article:
Yep, moonshine and the bible-- Well, they DID have a flood.
It seems to me that the entire controversy in scientific education centers upon biology, geology, and less so it seems in astronomy, whereas physics, chemistry, and computer science are much less controversial.
I can’t see a literal creationist teaching physics, chemistry, and computer science any differently from a radical atheist, or a mainstream American teacher who might be personally religious but doesn’t want to teach religious views in school.
I think it would be fair to require people in voucher schools to take a standardized test on biology and geology as our current scientific knowledge says is correct, and require that in order to graduate from those institutions, in exchange for their liberty to teach these subjects the way they wish to.
One thing that you’ll never see Evil Captor or other voucher opponents do is link to actual information about test scores in public schools. The reason for this is simple. The results are embarrassingly bad.
If Evil Captor or others like him actually care about teaching our kids science, why don’t they ever complain about the lousy results in public schools? inquiring minds want to know!
You. Are. Kidding. Right?
Yeah, the PC brigade have always been all about “separate but equal”.
In Bizarro World.
At least in my opinion, the whole creationism thing is just a bit of a sideline to the real issue of vouchers: that the way to solve problems in pubic schools is to invest in the schools themselves and cutting funding while siphoning off the best and brightest (and also those with the most religious parents) to private schools is only going to make things much, much worse.
I think he’s using P.C. to mean that they are covering up their raw bigotry with superficially acceptable rationales.
Solar fusion is the only way for the sun to be very old. It’s a young-universe argument.
I bet he isn’t.
Is that seriously the thrust of their position on apartheid? No mention of riots, oppression and attack dogs? This make it sound lovely. It’s similar to how mouth-breathers in the '50s and '60s justified segregation. Of course, it should be of no surprise given the states involved.
**
ENOUGH!
The purported topic of this “debate” involved limits or directions on education supported by vouchers. All the other byplay is a mixture of BBQ Pit or MPSIMS fodder.
If the extraneous stuff continues, the thread will be moved from GD.
Evil Captor, if you would like to debate a topic, don’t post a Pit rant as the OP.
[ /Moderating ]
What the . . .
Oh! I get it! The ignorant fools think the Loch Ness Monster is from this planet! :rolleyes:
May I direct your attention to post #6?
[quote=“ITR_champion, post:20, topic:626390”]
Actually, it does. The lead paragraph sets up the general way in which vouchers will be used and points out that some schools use this textbook. In a subsequent paragraph, a specific school that uses the ACE curriculum and expects to recieve many voucher students, is named: Eternity Christian Academy in Westlake, La. I imagine now that the pointing and laughing has begun, the academy may quietly shift to another, less controversial curriculum. But we shall see.
Are you saying that the curriculum does not exist?
Points to OP.
Sure, it’s voucher advocates. The rails are greased for taxpayer dollars to be used for this kind of stupid shit, thanks to vouchers.
Evil Captor: Do you intend to come back and defend your thesis? I cited the SCOTUS case, above, and we can argue about whether it was decided properly, but can you at least admit that you were wrong in thinking that this program is someone unconstitutional, per current jurisprudence?
I’m wondering why you aren’t making the same argument many made about contraception. That the money was compensation to employees who bought insurance on their own-- ie, the Church wasn’t buying the insurance directly. Here, too, the money goes to parents who then choose how to spend it. I’m not sure this is any different from someone who receives an Earned Income Tax Credit, and who then donates some of that money to the Westboro Baptists Church.
You’re right, the OP was not well phrased. I would say the topic is that vouchers are going to allow taxpayer monies to be spent on schools that use curriculums that have not been vetted by knowledgeable people. Or in the case of the ACE curriculum, by grown-ups. And that this is a bad thing.
My thesis is more along the line that the lack of oversight of private schools means that taxpayer monies can and will be used to fund some very whackadoodle excuses for education, the ACE curriculum being a case in point. Is it your contention that taxpayer money should be used to fund just any garbage that calls itself a curriculum, as a matter of Constitutional rights?
Personally, yes. I think local taxes going to local schools should be managed by the parents in such a way that their children are getting the education they think is best for them. If the fine people of Louisiana want this, great. That’s one reason I don’t live there.
As a matter of current policy, given everything else we do, I wouldn’t have a problem with the state (not the federal government, but the state) requiring minimum curriculum standards to be met for the schools to participate in such a system. This, however, is a matter of legislative action, not a matter for the courts, which have already spoken.