I came across this piece via Claudia Swisher, who shared it as a link in a recent post about school vouchers. I found it both enlightening and provocative, and hoped by sharing it here as a blog post rather than an attachment, it might receive even wider readership than it has deservedly earned already.
I think it’s a shame the way so many voucher proponents are so staunchly against parent choice. Oh, I know they fling these two words about a great deal, but they contradict themselves repeatedly in their proposals. And I, for one, think it’s time we call them out on it.
I’m working my way through Supreme Court cases related to “separation of church and state” as it impacts public education. Most of these involved prayer or religious instruction, although I’d hoped to get into some of the more interesting stuff like the Amish pulling their kids out of school after 8th grade or “After School Satan Clubs.”
Yes, really. It’s fascinating stuff.
We’ve been looking at Zelman v. Simmons-Harris (2002), the case most often cited when I’m researching vouchers and their constitutionality...
The first section of most Supreme Court decisions is the “syllabus” of the case. It lays out the basic facts and the Court’s decision before presenting the more detailed and sometimes disparate written opinions.
The Oklahoma GOP has for some time now held unchecked control of both the State Legislature and the Governor’s chair. Voters have handed them the keys, a 12-pack of Keystone, and encouraged them to have their way with the state. You’ve no doubt noticed the resulting prosperity trickling down all around you.
It’s not something we like to talk about.
Still, painful truth is something of a specialty of mine, so let’s just put it on the table and let the full light of public scrutiny shine.
Our community basketball teams aren’t getting any better. Many of them are actually getting worse.
I think it’s a shame the way so many voucher proponents are so staunchly against parent choice.
Oh, I know they fling these two words about a great deal, but they contradict themselves repeatedly in their proposals. And I, for one, think it’s time we call them out on it.
Beginning in the 1980s, the “wall of separation” between church and state stopped getting higher. The Court’s application of the First Amendment to public schooling became somewhat more sympathetic to people of faith.
It wasn’t an outright change of direction so much as an evolution in subtleties. The devil, as they say, is in the details.