I have a couple of friends running and it is nowhere near the figure you mentioned (at least in my area). They both have professional husbands and they work also so they have money. I think that expense is defrayed by having friends (maybe from church) knocking on doors on their behalf. And once again they do have to follow the law.
I think that they are pretty good at following the law. Making accomadations for disabled students can cost way more than you think but they do it. Now if you want to see a big stink watch a school district that refuses to spend the money to help disabled students. In AZ the big stink is over educating nonEnglish speaking students. The state of AZ is currently being fined 100K PER DAY by a federal judge because we do not spend enough on nonEnglish speaking students. The creation isuue simply does not exist in Arizona it is all about teaching English.
Different problems for different places... And that Federal Judge is a complete moron, who should be impeached. The state of Arizona should simply refuse to pay that bogus fine. Any student that cannot speak English is probably illegal, and shouldn't be going to school until he has learned english IF he is legal, otherwise, boot him out or throw him in jail.
This may be grist for another thread but the saving grace of the fine is that the money goes to schools.
I can tell that most of the participants in this thread, not all, know absolutely nothing about the public school system in this country and the federal government's role. You either don't have kids or you are basing your opinions on the schools in your area which may or may not be indicative of all public schools.
The question, I think, is this: What is a religion? Is it an organized belief system? Well, then what happens if you're an atheist whose organized those thoughts? Does that make your atheism a religion? Or if your beliefs center around secular humanism, which is largely what the schools teach? Then the schools are teaching your religion at the expense of Islam, or Christianity, or Judaism, or Buddhism, or whatever. And the First Amendment does say the government can't inhibit religion either. Or is religion like pornography - "I'll know it when I see it." The problem there is that the community gets to describe what they see. And we all know some communities will say religion in schools is OK, while other will fight even the slightest mention of it. Again, I ask you, "what is religion?"
In your opinion, and Moen's. In my opinion it is still a valid debate. :smile And if you think some people are ruining the thread, why don't you post your opinion on the subject? Maybe that could "save the debate", at least in your opinion.
Let us allow our friends at Wikipedia to define "Religion" for us: Religion is commonly defined as a group of beliefs concerning the supernatural, sacred, or divine, and the moral codes, practices, values, institutions, and rituals associated with such belief. It is sometimes used interchangeably with "faith" or "belief system"[1] In the course of the development of religion, it has taken many forms in various cultures and individuals. Occasionally, the word "religion" is used in the more restrictive sense of "organized religion" — that is, an organization of people supporting the exercise of some religion, often taking the form of a legal entity. KLM, you again try to argue your point by advocating the converse. Atheism and Secular Humanism don't exist as the antithesis of Christianity or any other belief system. They can not be used as polar opposites in order to justify your particular beliefs. They stand along side other belief systems as alternatives equally as valid as any religious belief out there. Simply because Atheists or Human Secularists don't believe in the supernatural, sacred, or the divine doesn't mean that they don't have moral codes, practices, values, or even rituals that are equally as valid as your religious based traditions. You might be thinking that if Atheism and Human Secularism are on a par with any religious belief then why may they be taught in schools and not religion. Simply put, it is because the absence of religious teaching in public schools does not constitute the teaching of Atheism or Human Secularism as a consequence. By your logic, any organization not teaching religion is teaching Atheism or Human Secularism. That is an example of a converse argument that is as illogical and invalid. Religious teachings belong in the institutions they have existed in for centuries and not public institutions with mandatory attendance. If our religious organizations aren’t attracting enough followers these days, they might want to reconsider their messages rather than trying to branch out into society in an attempt to invade deliberately non-religious venues. I’m sure that there are people that would love to have religion in every aspect of their lives from government to the grocery store, but I’m equally sure that there are just as many people that want nothing to do with anyone’s version of a divine creator in their face. The only real way to balance out both of those groups needs fairly is to advocate neither religious teachings nor any other belief system in the public schools. Do your praying on Sunday and try to spend the rest of your week here on Earth.
Moen you may be underestimating the importance of religion to our society. It is appropraite to have instruction on the role of religion in society but schools must not advocate any (or no) religion over another. As for the arguement that you make that schools are not humanist you are simply wrong, they are obviously human centered (and that is not bad).
I was speaking more specifically Secular Humanist not as broadly as Humanist. Secular humanism is a humanist philosophy that upholds reason, ethics, and justice and specifically rejects rituals and ceremonies as a means to affirm their life stance. The term was coined in the 20th century to make a clear distinction from "religious humanism". A perhaps less confrontational synonym is scientific humanism, which the biologist Edward O. Wilson termed "the only worldview compatible with science's growing knowledge of the real world and the laws of nature". [1] Humanism is a broad category of active ethical philosophies that affirm the dignity and worth of all people, based on our ability to determine what is right using the qualities innate to humanity, particularly rationality. Humanism is a component of a variety of more specific philosophical systems, and is also incorporated into some religious schools of thought. Humanism entails a commitment to the search for truth and morality through human means in support of human interests. In focusing on our capacity for self-determination, humanism rejects transcendental justifications, such as a dependence on faith, the supernatural, or divinely revealed texts. Humanists endorse universal morality based on the commonality of human nature, suggesting that solutions to our social and cultural problems cannot be parochial.
It's supposed to be a debate about religion, not humanism. Humanism is just another political system akin to communism and fascism.
