Should Your Tax Dollars Pay For Someone Else’s Faith Training?
Posted by: Michael in Religion and the battle for Common SenseThere is a theory in society today that is largely ignored, and I’m not just talking about big people in small bathing suits.
In Ontario like much of the U.S., our political system pretends to operate on a priority of separation between church and state, but more times than not that line is blurred, with the church (like many priests) usually operating in areas they know they shouldn’t be. A prime example of this is the public funding for the Separate(Catholic) School system.
The Separate School system are elementary and high schools that exist solely for educating children of Catholic parents. They allow the enrollment of non-Catholics, but these kids are at most times alienated from their peers (as jesus would have wanted) and constantly asked, “So you’re NOT catholic? So why are you here?” Which is always a comfortable question for a thirteen year old. Though I applaud the Catholic board for allowing non-Catholics to enroll, it goes no further to foster understanding or acceptance of other religions.
I once had a good friend who teaches grade school in the Catholic system tell me how he doesn’t think its right for non-catholics to be enrolled in a Catholic school. It honestly took me a few moments to figure out he was not joking, and that this supposed teacher of the lord was essentially pro-segregation. I had to explain to him that if he was in fact so confident and proud of his religion would it not be in the church’s best interest to take children of any faith into their schools to “enlighten” (barely kept a straight face while saying that) them and show them a better way. My friend seemed to soften to this logic as I guess it appealed to his catholic sense of self-righteousness.
Now, I admit that I was educated in the Catholic system, so I have a first hand knowledge of what these identity theft factories look like from the inside. In regards to education, I think the public and Catholic system are on par, you have good and bad teachers, just as you have good and bad students. However, I am sure I would have benefited more in the public system as I would have been able to substitute 4 years of mandatory religion classes for something a little more useful. Surprisingly, explaining the holy trinity spirit was not a prerequisite for entrance into University.
My main qualm is that funding for Catholic schools are provided by the Canadian government, while no other religious centric schools (to my knowledge) are granted the same privilege. Another Catholic teacher friend of mine once argued their government funding is justified because Catholics make up half of the people in Canada. Now, that would make a strong point if it were even remotely accurate. In all of Canada, Catholics make up 43.6% of the population, but in Ontario they make up under 35%, and are a minority in comparison to Protestants. So if we were to keep with this logic, in fairness, I think its only right that Catholics quickly make their exodus from their precious schools and let the Protestants take what is apparently rightfully theirs.
Another point brought up in a conversation I had about this topic at the gym today (note: nothing shatters my workout focus like this conversation) revolved tightly around the fact that funding for Catholics in law in Canada. Being written either into our Constitution or the BNA Act. Now I’m not about to sort through these documents to figure out which because frankly it doesn’t matter. Simply because someone over a hundred years ago wrote something on a piece of paper does not automatically make it applicable to 2009. For one minor example, let’s take slavery. Slavery seemed like a good idea to some guy hundreds (some can argue thousands) of years ago, and so we come to our present centuries where African-Americans had owners. OWNERS! Needless to say, stating something is logically passable because it was once written into law holds no water with me.
The government funding of religion specific schools is no better an idea than a racial centric school. These ideas merely perpetuate the idea that one group of citizens are “better” than another; or at the very least suggest that Catholic humans are different from Jewish humans or Muslims humans. This message, though subtle, takes significant steps towards removing Jesus’ teachings of “love thy neighbor as thyself” (even though in biblical times ‘neighbor’ simply meant Jew). It should not be left up to a child or teenager to reconcile the pride he has with his school and the pride he has of his religion. You can draw a straight line from the “my school is better than your school” chant, to “my religion is better than your religion.”
The way I see it, if Catholics think their schools are so superior and so crucial to the proper development of their children then they should have to put their wallets where their faith is. For example, if the Canadian government began taxing Catholic church revenues, and began taxing their land I am sure that would provide a whopping starting subsidy to fund their education system. Imagine the surplus of taxpayer money that could then be put into more productive ventures to help all Canadians.
If Catholic parents feel so strongly about their children needing an education in Catholicism, they should look away from taxpayers and the government and perhaps even take a page from Jesus himself… and lead by example.
Entries (RSS)
michael, michael, michael…..how you continue to surprise me. Please keep your opinions to yourself…oh wait, this is a blog, so i guess thats what youre supposed to do…lol well then allow me:
First off, let me say to all that i teach in a Catholic high school. That being said, i agree to some extent with Mike; it doesnt seem fair that one religion gets full taxpayer support while the others do not. However, this is the system that exists. FYI Mike and those of you who may not know, catholic schools only became fully funded in the late 1980s mainly because the Premier at the time wanted “the catholic vote” (or so i hear). Before that time, citizens directed a portion of their tax dollars by marking each year on their property taxes whether they wanted their money going to the public or seperate board. That money then was distributed accordingly. As Im sure Mike could attest, the schools that existed in Hamilton for catholics were not top notch. It wasnt until after the catholic board started getting equal funding do we now see beautiful new schools (the ones that are “stealing” public kids away)
Anyway, the issue as to whether there should still be two systems reared its ugly head this past provincial election. I think our friend John Tory would now agree that most Ontarians prefer the status quo. But Mike you also bring up the BNA Act (which by the way was our constitution until it was “fixed” with the Constitution Act of 82) In that document, minority religious rights were guaranteed along with minority language rights. The country was born of two languages AND two religions. The document simply protects the rights of these minorities to continue their traditions ( and a major tradition of the catholic church was education)
To compare the argument for catholic schools with slavery is beneath even you mike. Yes, society has evolved, but no that does not mean everything does. In a land of tolerance, it does not mean you give up everything. Canadian society has gone from being accepting to being downright bentover. We dont have a distinct culture because we have promoted multiculturalism. We allow everything from racalmutese parades to same sex marriage…heck we might even allow sharia law soon.
the point im trying to make is that some things dont have to “change with the times.” Would you no protest if Italy changed its official language to Arabic simply because immigrants are now making up a growing percentage of the population? Well acording to your argument, then italy should change with the times.” Sometimes, the way it was, and the way it is may not make sense to some…but there is a reason for its existence.
Ciao….salah al lekum…..bye!
MAC…
I knew you`d be good to go on this.
I didn`t know this law was passed only in the 80s, thanks for that. Seems a little silly that even in the 1980s such a law would pass, but guess a lot of Italians made it off the bocce courts and into the voting booths. ha!
The comparison with slavery was (at least I thought) a slightly hyperbolic comparison, simply to illustrate that from small ideas to larger paradigms(slavery), there is no such notion that should ever exist within a vacuum. We should continue testing theories and laws, and when they prove no longer relevant, its time to change, plain and simple. But unfortunately the world is far from this type of common sense and I really don`t believe its right for a rule of law to hold its tenure purely on the basis of its existence.
You said that this law within the Constitution/BNA Act `simply protects the rights of these minorities to continue their traditions`. Now to return to extremes for a moment (indulge me please) this is , at its basic levels, essentially how slavery has lasted as long as it has. Even today there are reported numbers that vary anywhere from 27-200 million people are enslaved in some fashion or another worldwide today. Because somewhere someone is protecting their `right`to enslave people, or perhaps its just because ‘that`s just how its always been`. I am obviously not comparing these two subjects on equal footing but the basic logic of letting the status quo prevail is very visible. Simply because the majority believes something to be correct, doesn`t necessary make it so. (see: Bush 2004, derivatives trading, and Dane Cook`s fame).
I also never said Catholics should not continue their traditions, I think they should be more than welcomed to do so, but it should be at their own expense, or at the least, the church`s. The public was only happy with the status quo in the last election because the two choices came between John Tory`s idiotic proposal of funding for all religious schools and the way things are today. That`s a no brainer, and yes, I`m also sure Tory heard us loud and clear. But this returns me to the point of sheer numbers of belief does not magically make an idea sound.
I do agree with you, only to a point, regarding multiculturalism in Canada. We do give too many freedoms and essentially rollover to any organized group that can successfully gather for a parade or Facebook group. But in that same breath, I do think you are part of the problem. You are fighting for Catholics to have their carved out section of Canada preserved just as the Muslims are -in regards to Sharia Law – trying to carve one for themselves. The only difference is that Catholics claim righteousness over other religions because some politician needed the Catholic Vote 20+ years ago (no need to clarify who this politician was), and now it is law.
All I am saying, is that all Canadian children should be educated like Canadian children, not separated based on religion. But if Catholics feel their schools are truly that important, they should pay for it themselves (though I`m sure most don`t even go to church) All the power to them. And your apparent disdain for same sex marriage is more of an equal rights issue than it is tolerance, but I`m sure that`s not taught in a catholic school.
The situation you pose about Italy was absurd at best, even for you, (hehe) mainly because a growing population is not the majority, and Catholics make up much less than the majority of Ontarians.
But I will change your question and answer it anyways. If the MAJORITY of the population of Italy was speaking Arabic (which would mean many businesses, schools, etc. would already be operating in Arabic) then yes, it would make sense to begin to change their laws to reflect their citizens if necessary. Remember, Latin was once the language of Rome. Its only a matter of time (not in our lifetime thankfully) until Italian is another dead language, just ask the Chinese Pizza Parlors in Milan.
People in general always seem to ascribe such importance to what they are accustomed to simply because it exists, and then give it further importance because it continues to exist. Your final sentence is a perfect example of that. There is a reason for the existence of everything, in this case Catholic voters, however, existence alone does not make it correct.
Perhaps one day, a politician will be looking for the non-Catholic vote and things will change. Until then, well, it just exists.
these discussions surely taste better over a Heineken in a Dutch alleyway.
Amen.
It is funny that you mention a Chinese Pizza Parlour. The population of China makes up 19.84% of the world population followed by India which makes up 17.15% and in US is in 3rd with 4.52% (this does not taking into consideration of the Asian population that occupies the rest of the world). So in theory, should we all just head out to the nearest Honda dealership and pick up a civic and invest in the curried chicken market? I don’t know if my ass could handle it.
signed
Stuck on the Toilet
PS – I love Fonzie
not sure what made less sense, your signature or your actual argument.
but it is funny that you mentioned foreign cars and asian cuisine, because if you look around, that’s exactly what’s already happening (london england for instance is packed with curry houses).