Do you support public funding for faith-based schools?

[fellowtraveller]

Sperate schools follow the provincial guidelines. It is a sensible option for parents who want a little more discipline in school and a little less touchy feely PC nonsense.

No, you cannot have it both ways.

Either no funds go to faith based schools, or all faith based schools are part of a single public system.

To insist that Catholic students or parents have an entitlement because they are Catholic is completely self-serving.

I favour the inclusion of all special interests within a public system, better to have those interested and committed parents on the inside looking out than the reverse.

If any community has sufficient demand to support any special interest, why wouldn't a public board accomodate their needs? Assuming as always that the boards needs are met first and foremost.

[M.Dancer]

No, you cannot have it both ways.

Of course we can. We have had it both ways for decades, therefore, we can.

To insist that Catholic students or parents have an entitlement because they are Catholic is completely self-serving.

I like self serve. What's more, the non catholics who send their children to separate schools like self serve too. And we self servers can't be blamed for a system guaranteed by the constitution happens to work and satisfy the needs of its members.

[jennie]

No, you cannot have it both ways.

Either no funds go to faith based schools, or all faith based schools are part of a single public system.

To insist that Catholic students or parents have an entitlement because they are Catholic is completely self-serving.

I favour the inclusion of all special interests within a public system, better to have those interested and committed parents on the inside looking out than the reverse.

If any community has sufficient demand to support any special interest, why wouldn't a public board accomodate their needs? Assuming as always that the boards needs are met first and foremost.

ft ... who died and made you god of the 'single public system' ?

(just a little joke there folks ... no particular god or religion implied or offended ... I hope )

There are Catholic Boards and Public Boards and French Boards and no doubt there would be other Boards.

Public Boards do not accept responsibility for religious indoctrination.

Edited September 5, 2007 by jennie

[Higgly]

Public Boards do not accept responsibility for religious indoctrination.

Are you saying they should?

[Denny]

I support faith based elementary schools, but only to the extent they do not add to the taxpayer burden. I'd restrict it to elementary schools as provision of faith based secondary schools would entail so many fixed assets to provide a fair level of vocational programs. It as a mistake to extend fundig to Catholic secondary schools, these were not conceived as part of hte schoold systme under the BNA Act of 1867.

This is how it could work, exactly like the original rules that the separate schools worked under at their origin.

1 - The province could fund on a per student basis, the variable cost element of schools. That is the direct teacher, principal books and accomodation costs only, following defined ratios.

2 - A separate faith based school could be established provided it met a minimum attendance threshold, let's say that the norm would be one classrom per grade. That may imply that a K-8 school would need a threshold enrollment of about 300 students.

3 - The true overhead of the school board, and transportation would be the responsibility of the parents who enrlled in the faith based school.

Thus, this approach would allow for faih based school without impairing the public schools. If its just the variable cost per student involve,d then that is the identical money that would be incurred to educate that student in the public or the faith based school. Public school boards would be free to sell off vacated schools to the other school boards.

For instance, in the Bathurst St. area of Toronto, one could easily envision several Hebrew schools qualifying under such an arrangement. Let us say that 5 out of seven public schools in the ara were converted to Hebrew schools. Thus, the public board is relieved of thsoe teachers, principals and buildings, so they would save that money involved, and get proportianally less tax money. Instad, that tax money would flow to th Hebrew schools, but not to covr the "ineffciencies" involved of school board administration or school busing, that would have to be covered by a levey paid by parents. It cold be relatively modest, and perhaps parent volunteers ocld take on schoold su chores or adminstiatrive wrok to ease the cash burden. That happened years ago in Catholic schools, when many board members were not paid and when religious orders did a lot of the teaching work for modest cost. Even the teacher salaries in the Catholic schools years ago were 5% to 10% below public school rates.

[jennie]

Are you saying they should?

No ... I am saying that is the way it is and that is the way it will stay ... in the public schools.

[jennie]

I support faith based elementary schools, but only to the extent they do not add to the taxpayer burden. I'd restrict it to elementary schools as provision of faith based secondary schools would entail so many fixed assets to provide a fair level of vocational programs. It as a mistake to extend fundig to Catholic secondary schools, these were not conceived as part of hte schoold systme under the BNA Act of 1867.

This is how it could work, exactly like the original rules that the separate schools worked under at their origin.

1 - The province could fund on a per student basis, the variable cost element of schools. That is the direct teacher, principal books and accomodation costs only, following defined ratios.

2 - A separate faith based school could be established provided it met a minimum attendance threshold, let's say that the norm would be one classrom per grade. That may imply that a K-8 school would need a threshold enrollment of about 300 students.

3 - The true overhead of the school board, and transportation would be the responsibility of the parents who enrlled in the faith based school.

Thus, this approach would allow for faih based school without impairing the public schools. If its just the variable cost per student involve,d then that is the identical money that would be incurred to educate that student in the public or the faith based school. Public school boards would be free to sell off vacated schools to the other school boards.

For instance, in the Bathurst St. area of Toronto, one could easily envision several Hebrew schools qualifying under such an arrangement. Let us say that 5 out of seven public schools in the ara were converted to Hebrew schools. Thus, the public board is relieved of thsoe teachers, principals and buildings, so they would save that money involved, and get proportianally less tax money. Instad, that tax money would flow to th Hebrew schools, but not to covr the "ineffciencies" involved of school board administration or school busing, that would have to be covered by a levey paid by parents. It cold be relatively modest, and perhaps parent volunteers ocld take on schoold su chores or adminstiatrive wrok to ease the cash burden. That happened years ago in Catholic schools, when many board members were not paid and when religious orders did a lot of the teaching work for modest cost. Even the teacher salaries in the Catholic schools years ago were 5% to 10% below public school rates.

The faith based schools already exist. It is not about 'creating' anything new, just extending funding ... NEW money is required for that.

However, since this was John Tory's platform, and he just blew it totally, we don't have to concern ourselves with this issue anymore.

[fellowtraveller]

Of course we can. We have had it both ways for decades, therefore, we can.

I like self serve. What's more, the non catholics who send their children to separate schools like self serve too. And we self servers can't be blamed for a system guaranteed by the constitution happens to work and satisfy the needs of its members.

Enjoy it while you can, the genie is well and truly out of the bottle now.......

Canadians recognize that the Charter is a tool, it is supposedly all about equity and fairness now, and the free ride - or rather the unique ride you've enjoyed for generations is about to end. The Church will huff and puff and get political in their usual lay-down-the-guilt way, but they are going to lose this one. I noticed this morning in the National Post that the Vaticans Man in Toronto, Father Raymond de Souza, has begun the campaign with a column. It's a nice sidepiece to the barrage of letters to the editor. But, it aint going to help - the status quo cannot survive a serious Charter challenge. And you can bet the farm that a serious challenge is imminent. Given the nature of our system of governance in this country lately, it would not be even mildly surprising if the Suprme Court will offer an opinion unbidden.

So, make your choice: nobody gets funded, or they all get funded. And if they all get funded, I don't see Queens Park funding a public system, Catholic system, Jewish system, Muslim system, Fundamentalist system, True Believers of the New Dawn system, and whatever other twinkies flourish. It will have to be one size fits all within a public system.

I believe Nfld and Quebec already chose the 'nobody gets funded' route and changed the legislation for their jurisdictions.

[jennie]

Enjoy it while you can, the genie is well and truly out of the bottle now.......

Canadians recognize that the Charter is a tool, it is supposedly all about equity and fairness now, and the free ride - or rather the unique ride you've enjoyed for generations is about to end. The Church will huff and puff and get political in their usual lay-down-the-guilt way, but they are going to lose this one. I noticed this morning in the National Post that the Vaticans Man in Toronto, Father Raymond de Souza, has begun the campaign with a column. It's a nice sidepiece to the barrage of letters to the editor. But, it aint going to help - the status quo cannot survive a serious Charter challenge. And you can bet the farm that a serious challenge is imminent. Given the nature of our system of governance in this country lately, it would not be even mildly surprising if the Suprme Court will offer an opinion unbidden.

So, make your choice: nobody gets funded, or they all get funded. And if they all get funded, I don't see Queens Park funding a public system, Catholic system, Jewish system, Muslim system, Fundamentalist system, True Believers of the New Dawn system, and whatever other twinkies flourish. It will have to be one size fits all within a public system.

I believe Nfld and Quebec already chose the 'nobody gets funded' route and changed the legislation for their jurisdictions.

Canadians being Canadians ... not liking confrontation and unpleasantness ... if the faith-based schools do make it a Charter challenge, I expect they will get the funding in advance of any challenge.

I certainly agree with that. As for the structure of the resulting "Board" ... I agree this would be a good time to consider more integration at that level. There is collaboration already on some 'economies of scale'. There will, no doubt, be integration of curriculum support services as the new schools will need the support and guidance to implement the provincial curriculum.

New students are new students, however, and all of the funds to support their integration into the public system MUST be NEW money, imo.

I am glad John Tory brought this up. Too bad he didn't really understand the concepts involved so he BLEW IT.

Let's speculate on the effects of that on the vote: The non-Christians with kids in the public system would be HORRIFIED by his suggestion of Christian proselytizing in the public schools. The non-Christian faith-based schools might fear that that is is underlying agenda ... to bring them in to the public 'fold' in order to impose Christianity on them.

Nope, he loses both ways, I think, as far as the non-Christian vote.

The simple difference between respecting and supporting freedom of religion,

and imposing one religion on everyone ... apparently escapes him! How sad.

I don't see him having much future in politics in Canada, if he doesn't grasp that fundamental respect for differences.

Curious ... who nailed him? Was it a reporter who asked that loaded question?

[mikedavid00]

I think he's looking more Liberal myself. Or maybe it's the other way around and McGuinty is looking more Conservative.

Yes I totall agree. That's why i'm supporting McGuinty.

You know.. remember when Martin first got in office? Dalton physically went to Ottawa to demand Ontarios fair share of money they were owed. (edit:) He did this to his OWN party. He actually faught with his own federal party. I don't know if you remember the tough words he had with them. I was very suprised at the time.

When they tried to ban cel phones from cars, he said no and that businee relied on cel phone communication.

Actually remember that time a couple months back when they had some vaccination that prevented cervical cancer? He didn't flip flop and play politics, he immiideiatly ordered that all grade 8 girls get vaccinated. And these are $500 shots to get them done privately. He did this very quickly.

When it came to ethnic schooling (becuase it's really not going to be religious. They are teaching culture and language also. These will be ethnic schools). he said that he didn't want to 'further segregate' ethnic minroities.

I don't feel Dalton plays many politics. He seems to 'manage' the province. He doesn't do a great job. But just think of Mayor Miller, John Tory, and the rest of the far left yahoo's.

Edited September 6, 2007 by mikedavid00

[mikedavid00]

You are taking this too personally.

I do not wish to be addressed by you in the future.

I don't take things personally online. I've said before that this is all for entertainment. Nothing gets accomplished in Canada becuase we can't vote on propositions so all this discussion is moot.

Also, like a Lib your head is in the sand.

[fellowtraveller]

I do not wish to be addressed by you in the future.

Jennie, me too.

You consistently post crap in response to what I say, with no relevance to what I post, while quoting me at length.

[Denny]

The faith based schools already exist. It is not about 'creating' anything new, just extending funding ... NEW money is required for that.

However, since this was John Tory's platform, and he just blew it totally, we don't have to concern ourselves with this issue anymore.

In many cases, new faith based schools would be created, with a cost saving offset of dismantling or swapping public schools. In other cases, existing faith based schools would now be funded, but with no cost saving offset in the public schools. But, that will especially help those families who have been sacrificing to send their kids to faith based schools as things now stand. If we can afford it for several hundred thousand Catholic families we can certainly afford it for the few thousand existing private faith based schools too.

I don't understand why people all think John Tory "blew it". Faith based schools are important to many parents, and perhaps the best kind who want to ensure their children are raised in a loving and God-fearing environment. If Ontario can do this for Catholic kids, why not Jewish and Muslim and Baptist kids too? Personally, I have nothing to gain by this, except the hope that a generation raised in a faith filled environment will be respectful, law abiding and peaceful, a better world to leave to future generations.

Though, I can't say I am overly impressed by many of the Catholic high school kids in our area, many of them seem to smoke and even the girls use a lot of very rough sexual type curse words and tease the others taht way. I have called the school from time to time with some descriptions, but they don't seem interested in doing much. Not like when I was about 7 and got the paddle form my principal for taking a short cut through a neighbour's yard on the way home. I'd be much happier if these girls took a short cut though my yard, and used clean lagnuage. These are future mothers to be. So, the new faith based schools should put an emphasis on behaviour inside and outside the school. So the neighbours are proud and happy to have such a school in their midst.

I would think the majority of Ontarians, being Christian, would appreciate John Tory's ideas. Sure he may lose the odd atheist voter, but they don't amount to much anyway.

Edited September 7, 2007 by Denny

[jennie]

In many cases, new faith based schools would be created, with a cost saving offset of dismantling or swapping public schools. In other cases, existing faith based schools would now be funded, but with no cost saving offset in the public schools. But, that will especially help those families who have been sacrificing to send their kids to faith based schools as things now stand. If we can afford it for several hundred thousand Catholic families we can certainly afford it for the few thousand existing private faith based schools too.

I don't understand why people all think John Tory "blew it". Faith based schools are important to many parents, and perhaps the best kind who want to ensure their children are raised in a loving and God-fearing environment. If Ontario can do this for Catholic kids, why not Jewish and Muslim and Baptist kids too? Personally, I have nothing to gain by this, except the hope that a generation raised in a faith filled environment will be respectful, law abiding and peaceful, a better world to leave to future generations.

It is not the issue of faith-based school funding, which I think has fairly broad support. Rather it is this:

“They teach evolution in the Ontario curriculum, but they also could teach the fact to the children that there are other theories that people have out there that are part of some Christian beliefs,” Mr. Tory said at the Kamin Education Centre.

But Education Minister Kathleen Wynne – who is running against Mr. Tory for her Toronto seat – said teaching creationism alongside evolution would be a violation of the curriculum.

She said Catholic schools are allowed to explore creationism but only in religion – not science – classes.

Ms. Wynne says Mr. Tory's comments show that he has not really thought out his policy and is just distracting from the real need to invest more in the existing public-education system.

Unfortunately, Mr Tory does not grasp the fact that people whose kids attend public schools are specifically NOT interested in having ANY religious proselytizing in the schools. They will see 'teaching' Creationism as an alternative to evolution is not acceptable to public school parents. In fact, it is specifically forbidden by curriculum policy, as was pointed out above.

Tory does not understand the difference, obviously does not respect people's freedom of religion. This makes people think his real agenda is to put Christian doctrine in the schools. People will not, therefore, trust him to implement faith-based schools. Unfortunately, he just lost any vote he might have pulled from the Liberals in this issue. Too bad. It was a worthwhile policy, but I am afraid he has sunk it due to his own lack of understanding of the policy himself.

Edited September 9, 2007 by jennie

[equality]

Eliminate public funding (or switch purely to a voucher based system) and let people setup whatever private schools they wish, faith based or otherwise... following rough guidelines of proper education of course.

Who is going to pay for children who can't afford to pay for private schools? This, I might add, is the majority of Ontarians.

[Drea]

Who is going to pay for children who can't afford to pay for private schools? This, I might add, is the majority of Ontarians.

Who cares?

Those with money are the only ones who deserve an education!

/sarcasm

Welcome to MLW equality!

[jennie]

Who cares?

Those with money are the only ones who deserve an education!

/sarcasm

Welcome to MLW equality!

[equality]

John Tory has done a poor job in explaining his plan for faith based schools. How in the heck are ordinary Ontarians expected to understand the mechanics of funding and operating schools in what amounts to a complete overhaul of our education system.

If I am right in my assessment, what we would be looking at is this. A number of children would withdraw from the public system and transfer to schools which are in line with their religion. So, no new places would be created. In other words, taxpayers are already paying for these "seats" but the "seats" would be re-distributed across various schools.

One question is where would these schools come from, I mean the buildings. Apparently, many schools close for various reasons, the main one being declining enrollment. Presumably, these vacant schools could be converted to faith-based schools.

Then, these schools would be subject to provincial regulations re teacher accreditation, testing, uniform curriculum, safety standards and other provincial requirements.

The Catholic School Board is put forward as an example in that it operates within budget with excellent scholastic results. It has also been said that having a separate school board for Catholics has not prevented its students from blending with members of other ethnic communities outside the school environment. Indeed, our Premier, his family and many MPPs are products of that system and seem well adjusted regarding their interaction with ethnic groups of all stripes. Actually, our experience with Catholic schools tell us that such a system does indeed work.

IMO, the cost to taxpayers to implement faith based schools would be insignificant. Having looked at all sides of the debate, I now support the concept of faith based schools. I have a feeling that for many Ontarians, objection to faith based schools is rooted in a fear of the unknown. This is something I can definitely understand.

If we are to be a truly diverse society, why would we insist on lumping all students into one school system? Another question. What is wrong with giving parents more choice in selecting the type of environment in which their children are to be educated?

Just so you know, there are unaccredited teachers in the Catholic board teaching. I'm not really sure how segregated schools promote diversity. Please explain. "The Jim Crow laws" in the states promoted seperate but egual laws among blacks and whites. In otehr words blacks were given substandard rights while the whites ran the show.

[equality]

In many cases, new faith based schools would be created, with a cost saving offset of dismantling or swapping public schools. In other cases, existing faith based schools would now be funded, but with no cost saving offset in the public schools. But, that will especially help those families who have been sacrificing to send their kids to faith based schools as things now stand. If we can afford it for several hundred thousand Catholic families we can certainly afford it for the few thousand existing private faith based schools too.

I don't understand why people all think John Tory "blew it". Faith based schools are important to many parents, and perhaps the best kind who want to ensure their children are raised in a loving and God-fearing environment. If Ontario can do this for Catholic kids, why not Jewish and Muslim and Baptist kids too? Personally, I have nothing to gain by this, except the hope that a generation raised in a faith filled environment will be respectful, law abiding and peaceful, a better world to leave to future generations.

Though, I can't say I am overly impressed by many of the Catholic high school kids in our area, many of them seem to smoke and even the girls use a lot of very rough sexual type curse words and tease the others taht way. I have called the school from time to time with some descriptions, but they don't seem interested in doing much. Not like when I was about 7 and got the paddle form my principal for taking a short cut through a neighbour's yard on the way home. I'd be much happier if these girls took a short cut though my yard, and used clean lagnuage. These are future mothers to be. So, the new faith based schools should put an emphasis on behaviour inside and outside the school. So the neighbours are proud and happy to have such a school in their midst.

I would think the majority of Ontarians, being Christian, would appreciate John Tory's ideas. Sure he may lose the odd atheist voter, but they don't amount to much anyway.

Indeed "several hundred thousand Catholics" have their own schools. Just so you're aware, they in fact pay for those schools with their tax dollars going to that system over the public system. At the same time, people with children in the public system have their taxes go to the public schools and not the separate school board. Catholic and public schools receive funding based on numbers. If all schools were standardized under one board, the same amount of money would be needed to run the schools. We still have the same number of kids needing an education. Furthermore, one of the earliest examples of a school system was that of orphanages ran by Catholic nuns and priests, so there is a lengthy history backing up the Catholic school system. There is a separate school board in Ontario, but the seperate board must follow the same curriculum as the public school board. What is being proposed under the direction of the Cons is "Chartered schooling". (In other words, faith based schools with no checks and balances in respect to what faith based view points are being promoted inside the schools). Currently some privately ran faith schools exist. These schools are not paid for with public dollars, and what is taught at these schools may challenge what is taught under the Ontario curriculum. 12 years ago the Conservatives pushed radical curriculum changes. That curriculum, including some revisions, is still in place today. Will the very curriculum they promoted be reinforced in faith base schools especially if that curriculum challenges religious views (Creationism vs. Evolution)? Chartered schools will not exist as the current separate school system exists. These will be schools that are considered private receiving actual tax subsidies or tax credits for parents. Parents with children in the separate and public system do not receive tax credits. Currently, all of our tax dollars go to both systems; in exchange, a standardized, equal and fair education for every student across Ontario has been put in place. Why should more money come out of an education system that is already suffering financially to pay for a private system of education of any kind?

At Catholic and Public schools, there is a strict code of human rights in place. No faith based viewpoints trump human rights. (Contrary to what you believe) In publicly funded schools, there is no singular faith embraced ; this is done to promote equality among the students. There is a world religions course offered, but students are not forced to take it.

Some faiths maintain misogynist view points and zero tolerance for other religious viewpoints. Not all Christians believe the same things. Some Christians believe in having multiple wives. Some Christians do not believe in giving or receiving blood transplants. Some Christians believe that homosexuality is evil. Not all Christians believe the same things. Muslims and Jews have their own faith that is not Christian based.

You mentioned the girls at your neighboring Catholic school as being foul mouthed, etc. First of all, what are the boys doing? You neglected to mention their behaviour. Second of all, I don’t see how this helps the argument for Chartered schools. I too have a Catholic high-school close to my house. There are about 1000 students who attend. I do see some troubled characters (girls and boys alike) Maybe 20 kids total. Further down the street, there is a public high school. 1800 students. Maybe 40 troubled characters running about. As for paddling students, that is a form of corporal punishment that is not permitted in school due to the fact that it infringes on human rights. There's that human rights issue popping up again. If parents want to discipline their children with spankings, they have some freedom under the law to do so, but I do not want someone else deciding my child should get a spanking for "taking a short cut through someone's yard." Convicted criminals are not treated this way. Again, I don’t see how this supports an argument for Chartered schools. Are these schools planning to discipline their students with spankings?

I am tired of seeing the education system get hammered by the Cons every time they come to power. There has been peace in the system in the last four years, and this has lead to teaching and the students being the priority. I do not support breaching anyone's human rights. In the current education system, human rights matter. I have seen students suffer at the hands of theocratic teaching in their homes, and in the current system things can be done to protect and help them. A Chartered school may not have the same accountability with respect to human rights. Good ole “Accountability” that was a former Tory term with respect to teachers in the classroom. Perhaps, which is what I suspect, the Tory’s are not actually interested in schools at all; they just want votes. In southern Ontario, there exist a huge immigration population, and many immigrants might feel more comfortable sending their children to schools that support their theocratic beliefs, etc. Unfortunately, this also creates segregation among Ontarians. This could have terrible consequences for everyone in the years to come.

I do not want to see any more faith based schools. The very idea of it promotes segregation and adds to problems that Ontarians and the rest of Canada have been working hard to abolish such as racism, discrimination and prejudice. I was hoping that in time, the system could move in the direction of no faith based schools and have students take a world religious course that could help enlighten everyone to the unique and wonderful difference among people regarding their beliefs.

[equality]

Sperate schools follow the provincial guidelines. It is a sensible option for parents who want a little more discipline in school and a little less touchy feely PC nonsense.

I don't really understand this comment. Perhaps more consequences or discipline for negative behaviour should occur at home. To my knowledge students have the same consequences in a public school and a Catholic school for negative behaviour. For instance, if a student is found with drugs, he or she takes a 21 day holiday if you know what I mean. This is the case in both systems.

[bush_cheney2004]

Just so you know, there are unaccredited teachers in the Catholic board teaching. I'm not really sure how segregated schools promote diversity. Please explain. "The Jim Crow laws" in the states promoted seperate but egual laws among blacks and whites. In otehr words blacks were given substandard rights while the whites ran the show.

Yea....kinda like Quebec! No shortage of Jim Crow examples in Canada, but we know the drill.

[equality]

No, you cannot have it both ways.

Either no funds go to faith based schools, or all faith based schools are part of a single public system.

To insist that Catholic students or parents have an entitlement because they are Catholic is completely self-serving.

I favour the inclusion of all special interests within a public system, better to have those interested and committed parents on the inside looking out than the reverse.

If any community has sufficient demand to support any special interest, why wouldn't a public board accomodate their needs? Assuming as always that the boards needs are met first and foremost.

I'm under the impression Chartered schools are private schools. Faith based or not, these schools are not under the same scrutiny that the public and Catholic schools face. The public and Catholic schools face this scrutiny because we the tax payers pay for them. If people want Chartered schools, go for it. Just don't touch one red cent of my tax dollar to pay for it. By the way, I have a choice: I can sign a piece of paper that allows my tax dollars to go to the public school board or the Catholic school board. I'm not special; all Ontarians have this option. I don't believe this option is what is planned for the Chartered schools. If I know the " good ole" Cons, there will be a tax credit for parents. The "good ole" tax breaks for those who really need them. I'm middle class, but I can't afford to send my children to private schools, but that might be due to the students loans that I still pay after 8 years.

[capricorn]

Just so you know, there are unaccredited teachers in the Catholic board teaching. I'm not really sure how segregated schools promote diversity. Please explain. "The Jim Crow laws" in the states promoted seperate but egual laws among blacks and whites. In otehr words blacks were given substandard rights while the whites ran the show.

Segregation is a term McGuinty has thrown around to cast a dark shadow over Tory's proposal. Actually, school segregation as is properly understood in the US meant that blacks were prevented from attending white schools. When de-segregation came about the barrier was lifted. So that term is not applicable in the context of faith based schools as contemplated here. Catholics do not prevent non-catholics from attending their schools so where is the segregation?

Speaking of diversity. Compare it to the restaurant sector. Don't we have Chinese, Greek, French, Italian, Vietnamese, Indian, etc. restaurants? That is diversity. How dull it would be if we only allowed "Canadian food" restaurants.

The more I read opinions on this issue, the more I think the innermost objection is that Muslims schools could spring up...maybe. IMO that speaks volumes.

[mikedavid00]

I do not want to see any more faith based schools. The very idea of it promotes segregation and adds to problems that Ontarians and the rest of Canada have been working hard to abolish such as racism, discrimination and prejudice

I agree.

I think the long term consequences are far more serious then you envision them.

[mikedavid00]

Speaking of diversity. Compare it to the restaurant sector. Don't we have Chinese, Greek, French, Italian, Vietnamese, Indian, etc. restaurants? That is diversity. How dull it would be if we only allowed "Canadian food" restaurants.

Yes and all Canadian people who are not of those ethnicitis are encouraged to go to those returuants.

I love these 'food' analagies that the left always bring up when describing different ethnicities.

'It's Ok, The Jamaican's 1st, and 2nd gen immigrants causing all the murders in Toronto is just a plain ol' plate of jerk chicken! yummy!'

Lol..

Women in Muslim schools will be told to wear a head scarf. The schools will be designed to keep non mulsims out of the school. The same also goes for Sikh's.

The Catholic school board allowes everyone in and you can opt out of religion class. (I know, i went to a cathlic school. Uniform and all).