California

[bills_fan]

Thanks for making my point. Damn right we need to do a better job!

 

Ironic that our public school students, who USED to be at the top in math and sciences, would now be trailing students in countries whose governments subsidize their educations on a per-capita basis that would make your head explode.

 

Ask yourself what's changed in the American public school system that's allowed this to happen? And when that change started to occur? And please spare me the usual propaganda about teachers unions and the education associations.

 

 

Oddly, NYC charter school students (who are drawn from the same population as public school students) score far better than public school students in math and science. Oh, and English, Social Studies etc.

 

The difference...charter schools are locally run, subject only to braod brush-strokes from Albany rather than true mandates and are not unionized.

[bills_fan]

Which is why this law likely will be struck down. There are supposedly 20,000 Gay married couples under previous Cal law, I don't see how this will stand up under the equal protection clause of the Constitution. I don't know what Cal law says on the matter?

 

Hmm, I stand partially corrected...

 

Protecting Liberty is never easy, ask 2nd amendment supporters. Also, the RW ran a helluv a misinformation campaign and Gay Rights supporters were not willing or able to get their message out well enough to debunk this falsehood... It allowed folks to hide behind the issue.

 

Simply the Gay Rights supporters got Swift Boated and didn't respond soon or effectively.

 

 

It does seem so based on JC's research. I was reading a different article about this that said a parent encouraged the school to permit the 1st grade grade to attend the teacher's gay marriage ceremony at city hall about a month before the vote. Many parents did not know their kid was going on this field trip and were outraged, per the article. This got extensive news coverage and probably contributed to the feeling of keeping it out of schools. Any Cali folks want to elaborate?

[GG]

Thanks for making my point. Damn right we need to do a better job!

 

Ironic that our public school students, who USED to be at the top in math and sciences, would now be trailing students in countries whose governments subsidize their educations on a per-capita basis that would make your head explode.

 

Ask yourself what's changed in the American public school system that's allowed this to happen? And when that change started to occur? And please spare me the usual propaganda about teachers unions and the education associations.

 

Wait a minute.

 

You don't hold the school system & the unions at all accountable for the lowering of US educational standards? Did you know that per pupil funding in urban schools is higher than the nationwide average? Care to compare the test scores across those schools? Ever wonder why applications to charter schools in urban areas outnumber open slots by up to 5 to 1?

[John from Riverside]

I appreciate your research. What you posted supports what you say, and it supports what I say. It's a difference in opinion, and I'm personally confident in my position on the issue that matters to me and my family the most. But that's a good post above and I appreciate your diligence.

 

Yeah good job putting all this info up....but you have to understand that most of us going to vote are not lawyers nor do we have time to research things to death before we vote. We go by the information we have......have our own best interests (our kids) at heart and make our decisions based on that information.

[YellowLinesandArmadillos]

Oddly, NYC charter school students (who are drawn from the same population as public school students) score far better than public school students in math and science. Oh, and English, Social Studies etc.

 

The difference...charter schools are locally run, subject only to braod brush-strokes from Albany rather than true mandates and are not unionized.

I don't think you can paint either Charter Schools who are cherry picking very good students to begin with and Public Schools with broad strokes. Some schools are good and some are bad, just as parochial schools are good and bad, Unions don't have a lot to do with it. I believe it is the school administrators that have big hand school success, how they handle teachers, who they hire and how much do they waste on ancillary budget issues.

 

IMO No Child Left Behind Mandates cause more harm then good. Yes, the feds can better track students, but then teachers only teach for the test, it is a collosal(sp) waste of time and funding. Plus, a lot of teachers don't get the resources they need to be effective and smaller classes sizes are proven ways to improve student scores and yes there are bad teachers that can't be gotten rid or easily, but much more easily now. Though teachers tend to teach better in better atmospheres even when funding is low. Have read a lot of stats on the issue and used to cover it on the Hill. P.S. Iowa Schools get great funding and they can all write very well. There are still a lot of freaks and nuts out there, but they can all write in complete sentences. I use to have to respond to constituent mail from the Des Moines area.

 

Finally, adequate teacher salaries relative to the pay scale of the surrounding area makes for better teachers. In NYC that is a tough problem.

[Dante]

Not trying to be a smartass here. But how, exactly, does marriage, of ANY kind, get taught in public elementary school? Is it like math, history, social studies, marriage, lunch, then science? Are there teachers out there with degrees in marriage education? I'm just trying to imagine how "marriage" becomes part of a curriculum. How was that going to be implemented?

My thoughts exactly. At what point was it the educational systems job to do social engineering??

[GG]

I don't think you can paint either Charter Schools who are cherry picking very good students to begin with and Public Schools with broad strokes. Some schools are good and some are bad, just as parochial schools are good and bad, Unions don't have a lot to do with it. I believe it is the school administrators that have big hand school success, how they handle teachers, who they hire and how much do they waste on ancillary budget issues.

 

....

 

Finally, adequate teacher salaries relative to the pay scale of the surrounding area makes for better teachers. In NYC that is a tough problem.

 

Few corrections, afaik

 

NYC charter schools are mostly (if not all) are lottery-based. There's tremendous interest from parents to get the kids out of a public school system.

 

NYC schools pay a higher salary than suburban schools, precisely due to the teacher recruiting problem. Top private schools pay the lowest rates to their teachers. Good teachers don't relish working in NYC schools for higher pay.

[Johnny Coli]

Yeah good job putting all this info up....but you have to understand that most of us going to vote are not lawyers nor do we have time to research things to death before we vote. We go by the information we have......have our own best interests (our kids) at heart and make our decisions based on that information.

Look, what's done is done, but you and others were the ones complaining and making a huge stink about the school getting in the way of your parenting, yet none of you had ever read the California Education Code showing you what rights you have as parents. Like I said, it's on to litigation now, but you actually had all the information you needed to make an informed vote. I'm not a lawyer. I just Googled looking for the CA Ed Code, lo and behold it was online, and a quick scan showed me what rights I would have if I was a parent in CA with a child in the public school system. The Prop 8 people lied to you, and few if any bothered to a) listen to the school superintendent who said it was a lie, or b) look for themselves.

 

I'm not a parent, though, so what the hell would I know?

[YellowLinesandArmadillos]

Few corrections, afaik

 

NYC charter schools are mostly (if not all) are lottery-based. There's tremendous interest from parents to get the kids out of a public school system.

 

NYC schools pay a higher salary than suburban schools, precisely due to the teacher recruiting problem. Top private schools pay the lowest rates to their teachers. Good teachers don't relish working in NYC schools for higher pay.

Pricely, because class sizes are high, facilities are run down and crime is high and in a lot of poorer areas which are bad neighborhoods. Good teachers don't want to work under those conditions. Cherry picking students whose parents actually care enough to enroll them in the lottery shows something. Plus Charter school teachers are given a lot more authority over students and have the threat if they don't behave to send them back to public schools, which is a big! Stick.

 

There is no such leverage in a low income public school where the majority of students don't want to learn. Also, I believe that a lot of students who are not interested or incapable of learning by standard methods should be considered for the BOCE's program and funding for it should be increased. Practicle learning works better for certain types of students, yet we all want to put students in one type of box and claim others who don't fit in that box are problems. The more they learn about brain activity and different strengths and weakenesses of children the better school systems can more effectively teach different learning styles. But often standardized testing and large class rooms prevent this type of teaching and these students inappropriately get lumped in with special ed.

[YellowLinesandArmadillos]

It does seem so based on JC's research. I was reading a different article about this that said a parent encouraged the school to permit the 1st grade grade to attend the teacher's gay marriage ceremony at city hall about a month before the vote. Many parents did not know their kid was going on this field trip and were outraged, per the article. This got extensive news coverage and probably contributed to the feeling of keeping it out of schools. Any Cali folks want to elaborate?

And that is the problem, teachers and parents don't know and aren't following the law if this is even true.

[Chef Jim]

I voted against prop 8 but I think the whole gay marriage thing is just silly. I don't have kids so I don't care what they teach in school. But for me the whole gay marriage thing is just childish. Mommy, mommy we want to married tooooo. If the rule was that marriage would give them more rights than they get now with civil unions that would be different but it doesn't.

[jjamie12]

Look, what's done is done, but you and others were the ones complaining and making a huge stink about the school getting in the way of your parenting, yet none of you had ever read the California Education Code showing you what rights you have as parents. Like I said, it's on to litigation now, but you actually had all the information you needed to make an informed vote. I'm not a lawyer. I just Googled looking for the CA Ed Code, lo and behold it was online, and a quick scan showed me what rights I would have if I was a parent in CA with a child in the public school system. The Prop 8 people lied to you, and few if any bothered to a) listen to the school superintendent who said it was a lie, or b) look for themselves.

 

I'm not a parent, though, so what the hell would I know?

Ouch.

 

I just read through this whole enitre thread, and there are a few people who look really damned foolish right about now. (Unless there is more to the CA Ed Code that JC is intentionally leaving out)

 

That doesn't even consider the whole "You can do whatever you want to do, just as long as my kids don't know about it!" meme. Doesn't this line of thinking, by definition, mean that you have some sort of 'problem' with it? And, if you have a 'problem' with it, doesn't that, by definition, make you, in some small way at least, prejudiced? Doesn't it? Think about it. People voted to ban two loving adults from getting married. Those same people are 'all for gay people getting married'. Really?

 

Edit: Changed to 'prejudiced'.

[Ramius]

I voted against prop 8 but I think the whole gay marriage thing is just silly. I don't have kids so I don't care what they teach in school. But for me the whole gay marriage thing is just childish. Mommy, mommy we want to married tooooo. If the rule was that marriage would give them more rights than they get now with civil unions that would be different but it doesn't.

 

I completely hear you on the whole civil union = marriage in the way of rights/benefits would make things much easier, but when you have separate names for the same thing, by definition they are not equal.

[Chef Jim]

I completely hear you on the whole civil union = marriage in the way of rights/benefits would make things much easier, but when you have separate names for the same thing, by definition they are not equal.

 

But in this case they are. The whole point was the name only. Where gay marriage misses out is for tax step ups and estate planning issues. They are federal issues and have nothing to do with the state. They already virtually the same benefits, once again it was for the work only and that's just immature.

 

I just reread your post and I get what you're saying too. Yes they are different. Marriage is between a man and a women. Civil unions are between same sex. They are different. What the problem?

Edited November 6, 2008 by Chef Jim

[erynthered]

I'm not a parent, though, so what the hell would I know?

 

 

Damn. You're right again.

[Ramius]

I just reread your post and I get what you're saying too. Yes they are different. Marriage is between a man and a women. Civil unions are between same sex. They are different. What the problem?

 

Marriage is only defined as man-woman by the church. Unless i am mistaken, nowhere does the government specifically state that marriage is limited to man-woman.

[The Dean]

But in this case they are. The whole point was the name only. Where gay marriage misses out is for tax step ups and estate planning issues. They are federal issues and have nothing to do with the state. They already virtually the same benefits, once again it was for the work only and that's just immature.

 

I just reread your post and I get what you're saying too. Yes they are different. Marriage is between a man and a women. Civil unions are between same sex. They are different. What the problem?

 

 

They are BOTH civil unions, as they are sanctioned by the state. Individual religious organizations can decide for themselves how to handle the situations.

 

If you really think civil union = marriage, then let's just call them all the same thing. Your argument "Marriage is between a man and a women. Civil unions are between same sex. They are different." could be taken to the following extremes "Marriage between two White people is different than between a White woman and a Black man. So, let's call them different things." "Inter-religious marriages are different than those between two people who share the same religion. Why not call them something different.?" "Marriages sanctioned by a church are different than those simply sanctioned by the state. Let's call the first one 'Civil Union' and the other 'Marriage'".

 

If they really are equal, the same term to describe them hurts no one, and we don't have to go through the tortured logic you describe.

 

As you aren't gay (I'm guessing here ), and are not in a committed civil union (or marriage) with another man, I understand why it doesn't seem to make a difference to you...it certainly doesn't make a difference to me. But, it seems to make a difference to them, and they are the ones in that situation. Why deny them equality in the label, when it hurts (or even impacts) NOBODY else?

[The Dean]

Marriage is only defined as man-woman by the church. Unless i am mistaken, nowhere does the government specifically state that marriage is limited to man-woman.

 

 

 

Some churches now recognize same-sex marriage.