Skip to main content

YIPPEE!!!





Court upholds school vouchers



The Supreme Court on Thursday upheld the use of taxpayer-paid school vouchers to send children to private schools, finding that a Cleveland program does not violate the Constitution’s church-state doctrine even though the majority of students use the vouchers to attend parochial schools.
Of course, since this story is on MSNBC.com, it reeks of bias. Gads, it's not even subtle!



"The 5-4 ruling led by the court's conservative majority...." How come nothing else is ever reported as being led by the "liberal majority"? Why does this matter? The implication is that this is purely a conservative vs. liberal matter, and if that's the case the matter isn't being resolved by the law but by political ideology. And if that's the case, which "side" is letting ideology lead the way, because that side isn't doing their job.



"...lowers the figurative wall separating church and state..." How in the hell does it do that? The majority opinion is clear that vouchers are not a violation of the establishment clause because the parents are making the choice, not the school, not the state.



There is also the silly quote from the dissenting opinion, Justice David Souter writing: "There is, in any case, no way to interpret the 96.6 percent of current voucher money going to religious schools as reflecting a free a genuine choice by the families that apply for vouchers."



Nonsense! You want interpretations? 1) That percentage of families are religious and don't mind sending their kids to a religious school, since doing so supports the faith of their choice. 2) People choose these religious schools, knowing that their teachings of faith (or lack thereof) at home are what count, yet also knowing that these schools provide a vastly better education that the existing public school system. 3) Due to the suppression of this concept, the choice are largely limited to existing religious schools. As vouchers become the norm, more alternatives will develop. It's called "free enterprise," bobo.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

John Wick: Chapter 4

No sense in playing coy, this is a great film. I’ve seen it twice and while I don’t quite love it in the way I love the first, original John Wick , it’s my #2. It’s a little overlong, has some wasted space and time, has one absolutely pointless and useless character, and generally ignores the realities of firefights, falling, getting shot, hit, etc. All that notwithstanding, it’s a great action flick, has a genuine emotional core, and is well worth your time if you’re into that sort of thing. Like I am. Summary: John Wick (Keanu Reeves), last seen saying he was fed up with the High Table, goes to war to obtain his freedom. Some of the most incredible action scenes ever filmed ensue, culminating in a very satisfactory finale and a devastating post-credit scene. The first Wick film was a surprise hit. It was a simple, straight-forward tale of vengeance told in a simple, straight-forward manner. Where it stood out was its devotion to human stunt work, on exploiting long camera shots that ...

DVD: The Descent

While waiting for the fourth disk of season 4 of House to arrive, I watched The Descent . This movie has been out on DVD for a while, so why bring it up now? Because I think I might become a fan of its writer-director, Neil Marshall . His latest is Doomsday , recently released on DVD, and while it’s sort of a mess, it’s a mess in that oh-fun-what-the-heck-let’s-shoot-a-Bentley-through-a-bus sort of way. The Descent is a different sort of animal. Prepare for spoilers. Since this film has been out for a while, I’m going to feel free to reveal. The setup is simple: Six friends go spelunking, complications ensue. Basic complications involve Sarah and Juno. Sarah is an emotional wreck following the rather horrible and tragic deaths of her husband and daughter (this trip is seen as therapy , oh my). Juno is a reckless thrill-seeker who leads an unknowing Sarah and friends into a cave no one has – publicly, at least – ever explored. All goes horribly...

Dune Part 2 (2024)

I have come not to praise Dune but to bury it. I am in a distinct minority. So be it. To explain why, there will be some minor spoilers ahead; sorry. The short version is #NotMyDune. Summary: Picking up where Dune Part 1 left off, we find the young Paul Atreides (Timothée Chalamet) hanging out with the Fremen. Plots to overthrow rival houses and empires ensue. Go here to see what I thought about Dune Part 1 (2021) . Overall, I found it to be technically brilliant, but lacking a human heart, an exercise in frenetic slow motion. D2 is more of the same, though with far more action. Acting-wise, everyone is doing a fine, more than adequate job. Absolutely no one or nothing stands out. The way the characters are written (adapted, actually), their back and forths and interactions, are all weak and unengaging. I generally hate when they speak. I've read the novel a ridiculous number of times, and these films are prompting me to read it again. I understand that trying to translate the n...