The private system also has the benefit of screening its applicants and tossing them if they're not up to it.
Should Catholic schools in Ontario continue to be publically funded?
- Thread starter JamesDouglas
- Start date
The Human Rights Committee is a different body than the Human Rights Council. The former is a group of independent experts that monitor civil rights. The later is a political body composed of many tyrants.Needless to say you cite them because you feel it strengthens your position, but honestly why does anyone give a hoot what the U.N. Human Rights Committee states when few of its member states have anything near the civil rights Canadians enjoy?
Regardless of which group it was though, in this case they are correct. We have a publicly funded system that denies most non-Catholics enrollment in K-8, denies employment to most non-Catholics, and denies publicly funded religious education to all other groups.
I've been told by someone inside the YRDSB that they are building the schools together with the YCDBS for that reason.It isn't clear to me that there are economies of that scale in education. The private system certainly hasn't tended towards consolidation.
What a novel idea, sharing facilities, one can learn that man evolved, the other can learn you can be a sob as long as you believe that Jesus died for you. Since there are 4 sides, you could have one of them with the Jews, another with the Muslims.
Wouldn't that be an example of tolerance and understanding to show the rest of the world.
Great example to the rest of the world... Let's give 'em the finger.The Human Rights Committee is a different body than the Human Rights Council. The former is a group of independent experts that monitor civil rights. The later is a political body composed of many tyrants.
Regardless of which group it was though, in this case they are correct. We have a publicly funded system that denies most non-Catholics enrollment in K-8, denies employment to most non-Catholics, and denies publicly funded religious education to all other groups.
Remember religion is based on a belief, no matter which one it is.
I decide where my taxes go. Public or catholic. That is good enough. I have a voice and I am using it the way it is intended.
Unfortunately this isn't entirely true. Operating costs for the two systems are funded from the designated taxes; but, capital costs are funded from general revenues, which means that the majority of Ontarians that are not Catholic (and the majority that support abolition, according to recent polls) still have to help pay for Catholic education.I decide where my taxes go. Public or catholic. That is good enough. I have a voice and I am using it the way it is intended.
So are feudalism and slavery. None of these are a worthwhile foundation for society.Why does it need to be proven? It's well established with great longevity and very popular.
I like catholic schools cause my future kids wont have to deal with being told they're going to be beheaded by the other kids. And how white people are the devil and so on. My nephews deal with this all the time and are the only white kids in their class. No thanks. My brother made the mistake of not baptising his kids, Im not going to make the same mistake. If afro-centric schools are ok, then I like the white (in general) catholic schools to continue as well.
Sharing facilities might be sensible in a small town. In a place like Toronto I think our school board is already much larger than any available economy of scale.I've been told by someone inside the YRDSB that they are building the schools together with the YCDBS for that reason.
What a novel idea, sharing facilities, one can learn that man evolved, the other can learn you can be a sob as long as you believe that Jesus died for you. Since there are 4 sides, you could have one of them with the Jews, another with the Muslims.
Wouldn't that be an example of tolerance and understanding to show the rest of the world.
Slavery and feudalism popular, where?So are feudalism and slavery. None of these are a worthwhile foundation for society.
No. Religion belongs in Social Studies where all major world religions are discussed in a generic fashion.
Unfortunately a generic form of study has given rise to some of the idiotic views that members like C-M. Even history classes are pitiful.No. Religion belongs in Social Studies where all major world religions are discussed in a generic fashion.
What is funny is that if you go to protestant church they all chime in with a ritualistic prayer that they believe in the Catholic Church. .. I believe in the Holy Catholic Church... etc.It seems very outdated and very discriminatory to have Catholic schools publically funded by the government of Ontario. It's either all faith based schools get public funding, or none of them do. In a secular country like Canada in the year 2014, it makes no sense to continue this outdated practice.
About 38% of the country is Catholic, but quickly catching up to the number of Catholics are those with no religious affiliation, who make up 24% of the country. Of course nothing will change anytime soon, but it's sad that our government discriminates against its citizens based on religion.
Western civilization enthusiastically featured both of these for a lot longer than we've been without them... and if you're going to seriously use "it's well established with great longevity and very popular" as justification for continuing something, then the logical conclusion is that you'd be fine with having retained slavery and feudalism -- both institutions had longstanding tradition and ardent (though by no means unanimous) support on their side. Hell, you can still find prominent Canadian conservative thinkers (prominent in the context of Canadian conservative thinkers, anyway) who will tell you that feudalism was great and slavery "wasn't really that bad."Slavery and feudalism popular, where?
In the modern day, feudalism is still pretty popular in the Middle East and you can find pockets of slavery there and in Africa that have persisted for thousands of years.
Maybe, just maybe, something being old and popular doesn't automatically confer on it the status of "worthwhile idea." Something to think about.
The Nicene Creed predates both the Great Schism and the Protestant Reformation, and not everyone defines "Catholic" as meaning the Church of Rome.What is funny is that if you go to protestant church they all chime in with a ritualistic prayer that they believe in the Catholic Church. .. I believe in the Holy Catholic Church... etc.
FFS, would it kill you people to read a book once in a while?
You might want to walk through the doors of one of Toronto's Catholic schools.... then I like the white (in general) catholic schools...
The difference is that you said the only diffference was for French Protestants. They secularized the entire public school system, so it's different for everybody... except in some schools where administrators and teachers are refusing to implement some of the changes. A plain English reading of your post suggests that you think the Catholic system was untouched, and that simply isn't true.The difference between what I wrote and this is what?
Actually, I'm not sure what's confusing you about what I wrote. Are you sure you read it?
If we're being intellectually honest, it's not the constitution that's the stumbling block -- it's the intransigence, mendacity and political cowardice of legislators who claim they have "no choice" when the truth is clearly the opposite.True I didn't spell it out in excruciating detail. But given what I posted prior to this it should be clear that given the realities on the ground there is going to be nothing legislative, hence those who object are going to have to attempt something on their own and are going to run into significant constitutional problems. See #6.
In my experience, the people who say "we have no choice, the constitution prohibits any change" are people who have a vested interest in maintaining the status quo but lack the honesty to say so openly.
Wow, we also did without capital punishment and caning, so what? Why just limit it western civilization, convenience? Justification base on 'it's old' is worse. Some our most precious concepts in Canada can be traced back to before the Magna Carta, but we aren't planning anytime soon to dump them because they're old.Western civilization enthusiastically featured both of these for a lot longer than we've been without them... and if you're going to seriously use "it's well established with great longevity and very popular" as justification for continuing something, then the logical conclusion is that you'd be fine with having retained slavery and feudalism -- both institutions had longstanding tradition and ardent (though by no means unanimous) support on their side. Hell, you can still find prominent Canadian conservative thinkers (prominent in the context of Canadian conservative thinkers, anyway) who will tell you that feudalism was great and slavery "wasn't really that bad."
In the modern day, feudalism is still pretty popular in the Middle East and you can find pockets of slavery there and in Africa that have persisted for thousands of years.
Maybe, just maybe, something being old and popular doesn't automatically confer on it the status of "worthwhile idea." Something to think about.
Name two conservative thinkers of our time who think that.
Pockets of feudalism and slavery? So we're going to dump our tradition of the church in this country based on pocket of slavery and feudalism in Africa? Pockets of the population in Eastern Europe believe in vendetta, do we give them credence?
John Tory got burned on the issue because Dalton McGuinty was patently dishonest about it. When he said "Ontarians don't support a publicly funded school system segregated by faith" he conveniently neglected to mention that his wife was paid (and paid well) to teach in a publicly funded school system segregated by faith and his four kids were educated in a publicly funded school system segregated by faith. But of course, all kinds of people heard John Tory say other Ontarians should have access to the same privileges as Roman Catholics, and their first thought was "OMG MUSLIMS HERP DERP" so there you go.John Tory tried to address this issue, but paid for it big time. I'd say most Ontarians are for the status quo regardless of how right or wrong it is.
The economies of scale are to be found in rationalizing boards (which are expensive), not rationalizing schools.It isn't clear to me that there are economies of that scale in education. The private system certainly hasn't tended towards consolidation.
