Originally Posted by keglo (Post 2124402)

Well you won't be getting me to say that because I completely disagree with you. You say it very plainly is the government funding those schools and I say it very clearly is not.

Originally Posted by dok (Post 2124315)

I'm not sure you know how food stamps work in the modern day?

His analogy works just fine. For at least the last decade, anyone that gets benefits through SNAP (which we commonly call food stamps) gets money loaded onto a debit card and they can use those funds at most grocery stores and some other places such as farmers markets and what not. The items they can purchase with those funds are typically limited to food items. Household products, pet foods, alcohol, and tobacco are generally prohibited.

The point being though is if for some reason Beer were allowed, say person X gets 100 dollars a month loaded onto their card. If they go to the store and spend that money that is supposed to be for food and purchases beer there would be no difficulty in seeing it as government money buying this person alcohol.

From what I understand of vouchers, they basically would be government funding of religious schools. I don't actually know the laws that well, but it seems like this is actually legal. But either way as others have pointed out clearly it is government funding of religious schools. I personally feel that shouldn't be legal, but others probably do think it should be and it perhaps may actually be legal. I really don't know nor do I know how to really figure this stuff out. My cursory google searches aren't helping find any good article to actually lay out what I'm looking for.

Originally Posted by keglo (Post 2124410)

No I completely understand how the food stamp system works. I also understand what you and @dok are trying to say. But I stand by my original statement that it is a bad analogy.

Originally Posted by Swamper (Post 2124404)

I don't see how choosing between a private Christian school and a public school with vouchers is not a "true" choice. It's more choice than a lot of people currently have. If I;m poor and can't afford to send my kids to a private school, then I really have no choice. With vouchers, at least I have more choice than I did before.

Originally Posted by Aldin (Post 2124412)

dok,

The public good is satisfied when kids get an education that satisfies government-defined educational standards. That's why it is possible to send a kid to a religious private school instead of sending them to a public school - it satisfies that standard. Public schools are the lowest common denominator. They are the minimum which is necessary to satisfy the public good.

School vouchers would be used to pay to fund that public good. If they are used at a religious private school, then they are being used to fund the public good. If the amount used is what the government has determined is the basic stipend for ensuring the public good, and the school satisfies it, that's all that matters.

Just clarifying that last point, the government determines that the amount of the voucher is the minimum amount required to satisfy the public good (and would presumably be the exact amount all public schools charged). Therefore, from a bureaucratic standpoint, the voucher cannot provide religious instruction as it is paying the exact amount, and not a penny more, as the minimum required to satisfy the public good.

~Aldin, soloing

Originally Posted by Aldin (Post 2124414)

@Hahma The government already has an amount per child which goes to schools. I imagine any voucher would be based on that number in any given area.

~Aldin, guessingly

Originally Posted by dok (Post 2124416)

I don't see how any of this even tangentially counters my argument that this amounts to the government funding the religious school. If you are willing to stipulate that that's true, then I have no further disagreement with you on any of the things you're talking about here.

Yes, they are funding a religious institution in order for it to provide education. That's still funding a religious institution. It's not like a Catholic school says "welp, they funded us at 'the minimum'. Looks like we'll have to take down the crucifixes, no money for them in the budget." It's still a religious education.

Originally Posted by Dysole (Post 2124329)

Huh.

Now I may just be horribly misinformed here, but doesn't that happen on some level in higher education with like school loans for private institutions with a religious background and whatnot? Am I just completely misunderstanding everything or is there a difference in how it works or is there no difference and we should be looking into this?

~Dysole, who has a degree from a school with a religious background