View Single Post
  #125  
Old 04-03-2006, 06:31 PM
jseal jseal is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Maryland
Posts: 541,353
Admiral,

I wouldn’t get too worked up about non-public education in the U.S. if I were you. The overwhelming majority, 85% or so, of primary and secondary schoolchildren attend publicly funded schools. Of the 13% (approx.) who attend non-public schools, only three quarters of that are “faith based”. They may make a lot of noise and grab many headlines, but there just aren’t that many to get excited about.

One of the best things about non-public schools is that they offer a choice. Depending upon your child’s strengths and weaknesses, you can select a school which seems most suitable. The public schools are getting in on that act with “anchor” schools, but they are limited in what they can offer. Non-public schools also offer an alternative to shockingly poor public schools. Here in Baltimore City, the public school system is abysmal – unbelievably bad. Rather than cripple my children, my wife and I sent them to parochial schools.

I’m sure that everyone agrees with you about how silly it would be to put a child in a school that teaches only religion. I just don’t know of any. Both of my children went to Archbishop Borders School for their primary education. My son went to Archbishop Curley High School, my daughter to the Institute of Notre Dame – both pretty standard Catholic high schools. They all offered unexceptional curricula: English, Phys Ed, Mathematics, Foreign Language, Chem, Bio & Physics, etc.

Religious studies at both high schools introduced religions other than Christianity. Granted, the primary focus was on the Christian message, but at least they were exposed to something other than the norm. As you pointed out, it is quite difficult to get an even playing field when dealing with religious matters.
__________________
Eudaimonia
Reply With Quote