With that in mind, I find it difficult to fault the parents who want their children to learn a Christian worldview (or an atheist, agnostic, Jewish, etc.) trying to change the system to meet their needs. Most of these people are rational people who are being forced to act contrary to their own values and judgment. This system has been forced on them through coercion and government force.

There are a few people (I think it’s a small minority of the citizens…probably a majority of the politicians though) that have sinister motives – i.e. forcing a particular religion or value system on ALL children. Unfortunately it is difficult to tell these snakes from the honest folks that just want the best for their children.

A proper government would defend the rights of all these individuals to act in their own self-interest and according to their own judgment and values. It would not result in bickering between “America-hating liberals” and “right wing extremist conservatives” because everybody would get what they want (well, except for the statists that want to use the government to violate our liberty and property rights).

I like vouchers too, but only as a transition to a fully-privatized school system. A voucher system would not be perfect, but would at least allow creative entrepreneurs to come up with better methods of education that the one that we have been suffering with for over 150 years.

I agree, its a lot easier to lump people into two groups and have them bicker back and forth, keeping their mind off their common “enemy”, oppressive government. People realize that what the government does is wrong only when their side isn’t in power, and tend to quickly forget about what the government can and has done once their own side is back in power. This is easy because it allows for laziness, and people like it when they can feel like they’re participating in the system but not actually doing or learning anything. It is all one big scale between complete anarchist libertarian and complete totalitarian statist, and I really don’t believe there are many that fall on either edge, mostly in the middle. People also fail to realize where on this scale they are, they likely don’t even think about it. The biggest problem though is the two parties are very much alike and don’t really hold to most of their principles except the ones that only the more hardcore care about.

I support transitioning to a private school system, it would be better over the long run and we would go back to the way we originally taught our children. It will be hard to do this, but it can be done. Public schools go against the foundation of liberty because there is very little choice in the matter, especially for poorer people. I personally don’t believe we should be holding religious classes at school, even if they are optional classes. As you saw earlier, I’m a firm believer in the separation of church and state, and since the public school is part of the state, I have to decline support for anything being religiously oriented. That’s not to say that religion should be left out of history books, because it has played many roles in the world and this country. It is history, and to deny it a spot in the history books would be wrong. I do have a problem with what these people are proposing to do to the Texas history books though. They are injecting religion into government when it wasn’t actually ever there and want to teach this as fact in history when it simply isn’t true.

I support a school voucher system, I believe its the best way to accomplish the main objectives we would like to achieve. That being increased competition, consumer choice, and a bigger private school sector. A friend of my notes a conflict with my decision though. Some private schools are religious, and he argues that allowing these schools to use the vouchers would be against the separation of church and state. I disagree since parents are getting exactly what they want and no one is being forced to go to a particular school. It would be a basic, non-discriminatory voucher that can be re-deemed at any public or private school.

I’m glad to see that you share my sentiment for Rick Perry. People like him because he portrays himself as a “good ole boy” and talks a big game. He even got some people fired up when he mentioned secession, as if he had the guts to do it anyways. He plays to the crowd, which sounds very familiar considering other politicians we have in office right now. People make many emotional decisions instead of making rational decisions, and politicians like Perry know this, so they play to those weaknesses.

A few thoughts on your post…

First I think the liberal-conservative construct is largely a way for busy (or maybe lazy) people to make political choices without having to think about their principles. It is much easier to assign all politicians, ideas, policies, etc. to one or the other category (or possibly some shade in-between) than to REALLY think about what you believe in. If one must have a scale, the only logical one is a scale with anarchist libertarian on one end, and totalitarian statism on the other. But even that has problems, IMO.

As for government schools, I see them as an affront to our liberty and would like to see state funding withdrawn. I think many Old Right conservatives agree in principle, but the pragmatic side of them sees that battle is not winnable anytime soon. I tend to agree with them that government schools, if we are going to have them, should have the option of teaching religious based classes. I believe this simply because the state is coercively taking my money (property taxes) and forcing me to consume a product which I would not otherwise consume (government indoctrination of my kids). Their real ERROR is not recognizing that property-tax-paying athiests have the same concern. As do property-tax-paying Communists, socialists, agnostsics, libertarians, fascists, etc.

I guess what I’m saying is that the real problem is that anytime the government uses force to compel individuals to act contrary to their own values there is going to be friction, anger, bitterness, etc. Unfortunately that often manifests itself as individuals arguing with one another, when they (we) should instead be directing our anger at the state itself for foisting this immoral system on us in the first place.

Finally, Rick Perry is not a good governor. People have short memories though, and their heuristic-based system of making decisions leads to many good people making emotional decisions. I mean look at Perry…he has nice hair, dresses well, talks with a drawl, and mentioned secession. So he MUST be a good guy…right?

Like your blog…I will be back! Regards…AL

The First Amendment has two religion-related clauses: The Establishment Clause (Freedom from Religion) and the Free Exercise Clause (Freedom of Religion).

Christian revisionists like to make-believe that there is only one religion-related clause, but it doesn’t even take a close reading to see that there are TWO. If there are two clauses, then each must have a purpose. And by legal theory and tradition, you were right on the mark with your arguments to them. Well done. Keep up the work. It takes a lot to protect us from people who would like to take away our liberties.