Or, as Donald Hall once phrased it in his fine novel The Dixie Association,"I don't mind when they use Jesus as a crutch, but when they use Him as a club, I have to speak up."

Applies equally to other deities and would-be deities.

I never see this point raised, but while this is done in the name of religion, I can't help but feel another motive is roiling resentment of people who have lives better than they do.

I also have an incredible feeling of unease about taking in refugees. It's not like Syrians would take us in if we needed to flee our nation. And if you think this will create some kind of impression on the Syrians, and they be grateful to the West after this, then I'm sorry to inform you, you thought wrong.

Well, some of the older generation maybe feel differently -- more grateful. Here's the father of the possible mastermind of the attack, but from last year:

http://www.aol.com/article/2015/11/16/abaaoud-could-be-commander-of-paris-attacks/21266739/

Interviewed by Belgian newspaper Het Laatste Nieuws earlier this year, their father Omar Abaaoud disowned his older son.

"Abdelhamid has brought shame to our family. Our lives are equally destroyed. Why would he want to kill innocent Belgians? Our family owes everything to this country," he said.

Abdelhamid's 13-year-old brother also left Belgium to become a child-fighter in Syria.

I find it headshakingly ironic that, as I read the blog posts and comments about Islam and the Paris attacks, Amy's site has two sidebar ads exhorting us to "Date Arab Women!"

Grey Ghost: "Amy's site has two sidebar ads exhorting us to 'Date Arab Women!'"

I think everyone sees different ads based on their browsing history ;)

Once I was shopping online for a leather coat. For the next few days almost every website I looked at had ads for leather coats.

Grey Ghost: "Amy's site has two sidebar ads exhorting us to 'Date Arab Women!'"

I think everyone sees different ads based on their browsing history ;)

Once I was shopping online for a leather coat. For the next few days almost every website I looked at had ads for leather coats.

I'm female and I have those same ads. And I've never been to any dating sites.

The DoD has just issued a directive making Paris and a radius around it off-limits for all military, DoD civilian, and contractor personnel.

... or take my tax money to do so.

Is it just Churches you are opposed to Kevin or all tax free charities in general?

I'm neither opposed to churches nor tax-free charities; I'm opposed to tax money being converted to "vouchers" which can be spent on religious schools.

I'm neither opposed to churches nor tax-free charities; I'm opposed to tax money being converted to "vouchers" which can be spent on religious schools. ~ Posted by: Kevin at November 16, 2015 9:07 AM

But you're okay with your tax money going to fund under-performing public schools and to subsidize the teachers unions who coerce public school systems into accepting contract terms that make firing incompetent teachers next to impossible?

You're okay with your tax money going to fund schools that turn out illiterate and innumerate graduates? Social promotion?

NCES data show that private school 4th and 8th grade students score higher in math and reading than their counterparts in public schools.

https://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/pubs/studies/2006461.asp

California spends over $9,000 per student and what does it get for that? According to a recent Education Week survey, California's education system ranked 42nd in key indicators and received a D+ grade. That's what your tax dollars are being spent on today.

It seems, from all this, that if you converted the entire education budget from tax subsidies for the teachers union to vouchers usable in any certified school, you'd be doing the students and the country's future a favor.

It seems, from all this, that if you converted the entire education budget from tax subsidies for the teachers union to vouchers usable in any certified school, you'd be doing the students and the country's future a favor.

Nope. I'd welcome any improvement in public schools, and welcome anyone who wanted to send a child to private school, but not on my dime.

Restaurants serve better food than school cafeterias, too, but I'm not paying for that, either.

Does anyone know how fundamentalist Islam Syria is? Since we're going to be getting some. Don't ask me why we're providing asylum to the mortal enemies of our closest ally.

I'm just so looking forward to this. A vocal but minor contingent who regards women as chattel, and unaccompanied women are suddenly fair targets for rape. And insisting that women dress more modestly. And don't tell me they're not that bad. Just ask our friends across the pond in England how they're liking their Muslim refugees.

"Restaurants serve better food than school cafeterias, too, but I'm not paying for that, either."

If it's the same $10 from you whether they eat at one or the other, why do you CARE where they eat?It's the same tax money out of your pocket whether it goes to a slum school with metal detectors and window bars, or a school in a church basement. I'd prefer my taxes go to the church basement school, personally, they're more likely to churn out a person who doesn't have to be incarcerated at my expense the rest of their life.

It's the same deal with food stamps. I don't care whether they buy filet mignon or rice with that food stamp card, I care that they get it in the first place.

Methinks Kevin is in the education system and more worried about losing a pay check than educating kids.

Methinks Kevin is in the education system and more worried about losing a pay check than educating kids.

Hilarious. If you knew how much I enjoy the company of children ...

If it's the same $10 from you whether they eat at one or the other, why do you CARE where they eat?

Like any taxpayer, I should have a say in the way my taxes are spent. There are fine public schools and shitty ones; there are fine private schools and shitty ones.

It's not always a case of Terrible Public School v. Outstanding Private School, though I do think private schools will produce better results simply because people care about something more if they pay for it directly.

"Like any taxpayer, I should have a say in the way my taxes are spent. "

You get your vote like anyone else.

but since the teachers unions have largely captured state and local governments, I think you need to slap your self silly out of the delusion, that you personally have any kind of meaningful *say* about how your tax dollars are spent.

I'd welcome any improvement in public schools, and welcome anyone who wanted to send a child to private school, but not on my dime. ~ Posted by: Kevin at November 16, 2015 11:33 AM

So, you prefer using your tax dollars to trap students in a school system that is failing them and propping up a bureaucratic cartel that resists any and all attempts to improve the lot of those children?

What a guy.

You mistakenly think that a bureaucratic cartel will do a better job than private enterprise - despite centuries of evidence to the contrary.

Yes, there are pitfalls in creating a voucher-only system of publicly financed education. The student loan program is a perfect object lesson in that regard. Fraudulent schools popping up overnight to take advantage of taxpayer financing with no regulatory oversight is a huge part of why we have a student loan crisis today.

However, the government failed in that program by not imposing standards for continued eligibility for the loan money. With proper standards, the government does not have to be the provider of education services, merely the financier and program supervisor who requires that all schools meet minimum standards. With choice, parents will determine where their children go, directing voucher monies to schools which provide a reasonably solid education while withholding it from those who do not by sending their children elsewhere.

With the bloated various DOE bureaucracies mostly off the books, the taxpayers could potentially see considerable savings and perhaps a more efficient use of "your" money.

Like any taxpayer, I should have a say in the way my taxes are spent. ~ Posted by: Kevin at November 16, 2015 1:27 PM

By dictating where some other taxpayer's children are forced to go to school? What a guy.

How much "say" do you really have in how taxpayer money is spent today? Did you and the other taxpayers vote that Common Core should be the educational standard? 'cause I didn't get that ballot form.

Just because it's called the "public" education system doesn't mean the public has a voice in it. Union money has pretty much edged the public's voice out of it.

but since the teachers unions have largely captured state and local governments

I must have missed that coup.

I think you need to slap your self silly out of the delusion, that you personally have any kind of meaningful *say* about how your tax dollars are spent.

I'm certainly not going to slap myself. But on this point, we are in agreement. Government fritters away tax money on ludicrous things. It's just that I would include spending public funds on private schools as ludicrous as well.

It's just that I would include spending public funds on private schools as ludicrous as well. ~ Posted by: Kevin at November 16, 2015 2:01 PM

But it's not as ludicrous as you would like it to be. It's simply privatizing a public service to a more efficient provider.

If we accept that the government has an obligation to provide a primary and secondary education for all, we are not by definition accepting that the government has to be the provider.

I must have missed that coup. ~ Posted by: Kevin at November 16, 2015 2:01 PM

Willfully ignored is more like it.

There have been numerous articles in various media about how difficult it is for a public school district to discipline a unionized teacher. The NYC school district's "rubber rooms" - used for housing pedophile and incompetent teachers caught in the union-mandated labyrinthine discipline system - have become famous as examples of how the unions have forced state and local education departments to waste time and money on union red tape instead of running an efficient school system.

It's simply privatizing a public service to a more efficient provider.

Nope. It's not like outsourcing garbage collection. It's like taking tax money for public parks and putting it into private parks that aren't open to everyone.

There have been numerous articles in various media about how difficult it is for a public school district to discipline a unionized teacher.

True. That ain't a "coup," though. And the solution isn't using public funds for private schools that benefit only a few.

Just skipping over all the comments about school vouchers . . . going back to Patrick and Amy's comments at the top:

Patrick, I've actually seen some things written that it is about resentment. While this is something of a brief stereotype, there is still some truth to it (sorry, I read this years ago and don't know the link):

Judaism has rules so that one should become a better person.

Christianity has rules so that one will receive a reward after death.

Islam has rules that should make a "perfect" society here and now. And clearly that is failing as most Islamic countries are hell holes to live in - and not just for those who aren't Muslim. So, the Islamic assholes must punish others for living a better life as God didn't will them a better life.

All that sounds like resentment to me.

Amy, some of the older generation MAYBE feel differently -- more grateful. I emphasized the maybe because I'll believe such stuff when parents/relatives/friends turn the terrorists in before they start their killings. When I hear such stuff from terrorist's family member afterwards I can only think that they are just trying to save their own hides. And besides, aren't Muslims, under their own rules, allowed to lie to infidels?

As for the off-topic discussion. Yes, if someone is forced to pay taxes for school and they want their children to receive religious instruction in school it is only fair that they should get some sort of voucher to help offset the cost of private religious school since they won't be using the public schools for their kids. Of course, this is another topic that we can all debate until the cows come home and still no one will be "right."

I'll take a whack at both topics. As far as Islam vs. other organized religions, the thing about Islam is that the believer's one and only job is to submit to the will of Allah. Once that's done, there are no more decisions to make. Therefore, promulgating a moral code is actually counter-productive, if it leads people to question what Allah tells them to do (or, more to the point, what the imans tell them to do). All of the other world's major religions (at least the ones that hold with the concept of a supernatural deity) teach that the individual can have a personal relationship with the deity. Islam is the only one that does not.

As far as the schools: I'm in favor of what works. Where I live, the city has six public high schools. Three of them are considered undesirable, judging from the city demographics of what school district parents with children choose to live in. One of the undesirable ones has about 40% of the number of students that the facility was designed for, and parts of it are boarded off. I look at vouchers this way. Think of a system where every child gets a voucher, but public school has to be paid for. The public school, as it happens, costs exactly the amount of the voucher. So essentially the parents can send the child to a public school for free. Or they can take the voucher to a private school, where they may or may not have to throw in additional money. When you think about it, this isn't really different from how the existing voucher systems work -- the connection between the money and the public school being paid for is hidden, but it's basically the same thing.

Is the objection the religious aspect of some private schools? As I said, I'm in favor of what works, and a lot of religious schools do a fine job of teaching their students. That said, some of them don't. Would I object to a school that explicitly teaches a philosophy of atheism? Not from a legal standpoint. (I might or might not object to it from a moral standpoint, but that's another matter.) If it's the religious teaching that is objected to, that part can be separate such that the voucher does not pay for it; if the school offers it and parents want it, that's a separate bill.

Nope. It's not like outsourcing garbage collection. It's like taking tax money for public parks and putting it into private parks that aren't open to everyone. ~ Posted by: Kevin at November 16, 2015 4:58 PM

You're looking at the situation statically. You're assuming no new parks will open. Or that existing parks will not expand the meet the expected increase in demand for parks.

When the government outsources garbage collection, it does not allow the contractor to ignore or skip some neighborhoods. It's written into the contract that all neighborhoods will be serviced in accordance with the SLA. Same with awarding vouchers for education services - simply include entrance requirements and admission standards in the voucher eligibility program. Exclusive private schools (e.g., Philips Andover et al) may opt out of a general admission program, but they were getting by without vouchers anyway.

Thus the government provides an education without being the physical provider - and voids the bureaucracy that is strangling our education system today.

That ain't a "coup," though. ~ Posted by: Kevin at November 16, 2015 4:58 PM

When a person or group takes control of a government operation for their own enrichment, that is, for all intents and purposes, a coup; or enough of one to be called that.

"I must have missed that coup."

Yeah, you did. For instance, New Jersey's arrangement has been cited right here on this blog: if you teach in NJ, you pay the union, even if you're not a member. That means tax dollars go directly to the union.

it's the same $10 from you whether they eat at one or the other, why do you CARE where they eat?It's the same tax money out of your pocket whether it goes to a slum school with metal detectors and window bars, or a school in a church basement.

Like someone already mentioned those who pay taxes should have a say in how they are spent

Someone else mention private schools being like privates clubs, but I think that is a false analogy as even in public schools you have to go to a school near you, not one miles away.

I'd liken to more to food stamps. We had to open food stamps up to being used in gas stations, fast food joints, and sit down restaurants because it wasnt "fair" to those using them to shop in grocery stores.

As gas stations, fast food joints, and sit down restaurants are more expensive the money got used up faster and they were out of money sooner and didnt have enough to buy grocery at all and that wasnt fair to the kids, so we gave people even more food stamp money

Even that is a false comparison Lujlp. Public schools are very expensive. We spend a US average of $12,401/student/year. But there is a whole lot of variation between locations. Washington DC spends $29,349/student/year for public schools and 83% of the students can barely read at graduation. At that price you could put them in college.

This is more like SNAP only working in fast food joints and gas stations so now we are looking to allow grocery stores as an option.

As for the older generation of Muslims feeling different, does it matter? If they raise children for jihad you've only delayed the problem. If they don't stand up and repudiate and work to stop jihad how are they different from the 80% of 'moderate' muslims? No nation can survive with 100% of their populace in the military. North Korea has ~50% of their people in the military and you can see how well that works. If Islam can radicalize 20% of it's members that is quite an army. The US has only 0.4% of it's population in the military. Are not those of us not in the military still responsible when our forces blow something up?

@lujlp: "We had to open food stamps up to being used in ... fast food joints, and sit down restaurants"

Where is this? In Michigan restaurants and other prepared meals such as the fried chicken at the Walmart deli cannot be bought with food stamps, and are also subject to sales tax. "Groceries" are exempt from tax and of course can be bought with foodstamps. Sometimes there's a very fine line - most cookies are classified with bread and nontaxable/foodstamp eligible, but I never know whether a particular box of cookies will be taxed until checkout. And there's the Papa Murphy's pizza chain - they put together a pizza to order, but you take it home to bake it. That makes it nontaxable and foodstamp-eligible, while it would be taxed and not eligible for foodstamps if baked there.

I know it's not just Michigan, because my sister in Seattle buys Papa Murphy's with food stamps.