Should religious schools be funded by the government?

Question

If so, why? And if not, why not? This was a big topic in the recent Ontario provincial election, and I'm opposing it in my high school debate, so I'd appreciate your opinion.

Answer 1

Well if the government is going to be in the business of universal education, I feel that parents should get to choose which school to send their kids to.

Like it or not, government-run schools are going to teach the world from a certain state-centric perspective, just like you would expect a religious school to give a skewed perspective.

Private schools tend to operate with less funding per student than public schools, yet they produce higher test scores, typically have less violence and crime, and are less crowded.

So, why does the government use our tax money and limit our choices so that the failing, expensive schools are "free," and the cost-effective schools with high educational standards are only available for the rich?

Answer 2

Why shouldn't people get a voucher to use at whatever accredited school they choose. Or the state could provide for free books, supplies, partial teachers salaries etc, because just think what would happen if the schools closed down -- the school districts would probably go into bankruptcy having to absorb all the private students, and then all of us would have to pay increased taxes. As long as the school is accredited by the state, which means certain books and curriculum must be used, I think it would be a good solution. A Catholic high school in my city costs $6000 - $10,000 for tuition and elementary is around $4000. If the economy doesn't improve, these schools will eventually close with no subsidies from the state. My kids went to private Christian schools and it was a struggle to pay for 3 kids at the same time. Plus we had to pay taxes for the public schools. Actually the only religion being taught in these schools, is in religion class. And the state could simply pay for all the other classes, and let people pay for the religious instruction, which is a very small part of the day. In our city, the Catholic schools are rated much higher than the public schools in academic scores.

Answer 3

For a society to function all members of that society need a common reference. More to the point there are minimum skills and facts needed for minimal competence to operate in the society.

To deny these, or make some members of the society incompetent in that knowledge is to injure the entire society. This is why good schools are necessary for good Democracies.

The subcultures within the society, whether religious or secular are free to acculturate their members to their subculture, but are not free to impose it on everyone else.

Which is which is of issue but not a big deal to work out if everyone is honest. Unfortunately there are some folk who oppose a good democracy, and abhor freedom as selfish individualism. Those who favor such ideas are the only real threat to freedom and democracy, and the only thinking that must be vigorously outed and opposed.

Because they know how abhorrent their thinking is, they are usually secretive about their true agenda, and that is all the more reason to be vigilant. Not all religions are any such threat, but those who insist on a very closed view and fear of contrary information, are a giant waving red flag as to their true intentions.

To read more of these folk and their intentions see the links below.

Answer 4

Schools are funded by the taxpayers. The taxpayers should have the freedom to choose what kind of school their children and grandchildren attend especially since the present public school system does not measure up to specific standards our children need in order to compete in a global economy. As a taxpayer, I would want parents to have educational choices for their children and be able to use my tax dollars to do it. Presently, our children are in educational bondage.

Answer 5

Its OUR tax money involved, each student should be provided vouchers to be used as we, the parents see fit.

Whether it goes to a religious school or anti-religious one, we should have the right to direct our children's education, not some self serving, corrupt politician.

Answer 6

If government is going to be at all involved in education that involvement should be limited to providing tax dollars to parents and giving them the choice of where those dollars are spent. They could either use those funds to send their children to public (government) or private schools. The marketplace should decide which schools remain open.

Answer 7

No they should not. Churches should not be placed in a position of influencing government and education of government.

Governments should not be in a position of educating people on religion.

Both can lead to abuse of power.

Answer 8

To me, "freedom of religion" means (among other things) that I cannot be forced to support or endorse religions that I don't believe in. Since our government speaks and acts for all of us, government support of any religious enterprise is forcing all of us to support that religion and its activities. IMO, this is clearly unConstitutional; all governments, including state and local, should be required to maintain strict neutrality in all matters of religion and faith.

Answer 9

My view is that parents are responsible for religious education, and if they want to include that in the student's everyday life, then they should pay for it.

Answer 10

I don't think government has a place educating our children. When government funds the schools, schools teach a curriculum based on what the government wants you to know.