This feudal revisionist would-be King could be your president

@redredred[quote] Putting up a Christmas display or menorah on public land is clearly constitutional since no one is being asked or forced to join a religion.[/quote]

I agree with you that outlawing minimal expressions of support for community celebrations of cultural events -- particularly when they are done for multiple religious groups -- in a non-proselytizing manner is a bit of a stretch. Then again, you see the "War on Christmas" reaction from the more ardent Evangelical Christians when the Menorahs, Kwanzaa, Festival of Lights, Eids go up or people start amalgamating them into a "Season's Greetings" or "Happy Holidays" message. I think you overlook the optic power of having In God We Trust emblazoned across our currency and courtroom walls; Ten Commandment statues on the Courthouse green. What the citizenry FEELS, the reality they see, can be far more important than the specific legalities.

I say this not only as an agnostic but as the descendant of a Primitive Baptist who fought in the Revolutionary War, including wintering at Valley Forge, and returned to Virginia confident he would be able to return to his work as a Primitive Baptist Messenger. Particularly since Jefferson already had gotten his first version of the Freedom of Religion doctrine approved in the Commonwealth of Virginia. But the reality was, despite the assurance of religious freedom, you needed a license to preach and licenses were only available to Episcopalians (nee Anglicans) and Lutherans (for the Germans imported for fledgling manufacturing efforts). And preaching without a license -- particularly by Primitive Baptists, who were abolitionists, got you arrested if not lynched by mobs before, during or after your jail term. Hence his migration north and west into the Ohio River Valley.

@redredred [quote]cost is minimal and, since childless people are taxed to support public schools, the public cost of erecting such displays is acceptable.[/quote]

Apples and oranges IMHO. Childless people are taxed for PUBLIC schools because the entire citizenry and country benefits from an educated citizenry and workforce. There is an expectation that these PUBLIC schools will be open to all, and as free of political and religious indoctrination as possible so it benefits all and not a few. Which is why the school voucher system is such a volatile issue when the primary alternatives available are sponsored by organized religions preaching their wares or political ideologues.

Now churches will argue that their charities -- including hospitals, schools, food for the poor, etc. -- benefits all as well, and that they are non-profit and tax-exempt. But most are in it for the proselytizing and political benefits. And if they want to continue being non-profit and tax-exempt, they shouldn't be getting openly involved in political issues and campaigning for political candidates.

@dancingtongue You haven’t made your case. I submit the benefit to childless people of PUBLIC education is easily no greater then the benefit provided by the bulk of church charity. Beth Israel hospital, Mount Sinai, Cedars Lebanon, St Jude and thousands of others benefit people greatly. The occasional use a smidge of public land is insignificant.

Public education might have once been of some value to the public but the product they turn out is pretty poor compared to private, and in many cases religious, schools. Vouchers would make it accessible to virtually all.

@redredred There is no secret as to why public education has a poorer track record -- they are required by law to take all students, provide special classes for those with special needs, and can't turn students away. So the playing fields are uneven with public schools having to do more with less, and they already have been having their revenue streams significantly squeezed with reductions in property taxes and voucher programs further erode their funding by giving it to the private schools which have none of the mandates.

The U.S. became the dominant economic power in the world when they became the first nation to provide public education through the 8th grade and generated a more educated workforce and middle class. Now we are losing ground daily to countries who provide public education through college.

@dancingtongue Gosh, that leaves unanswered why the numbers from other countries, many with the same requirements but without unionized teachers look like this:

@redredred And what are the funding levels in those other countries, the compensation levels for the non-union teachers, the class sizes, and the level of parental involvement/support on disciplinary issues? Cherry picking union teachers leaves a lot of unanswered questions as well.

@dancingtongue I suppose you image there’s a valid excuse for every shortfall in our educational system and that Slovenia has many more advantages we can’t quite muster.

@redredred No, I realize that our educational system has a wide range of problems, not all of which fit into one ideology or the other. And that Slovenia has as well, but probably has a few advantages too. Probably beginning with the fact that all the kids are in school because they and/or their parents value education, and they most likely are raised to respect their teachers' authority so discipline in the classroom is not the number one job requirement of the teacher. And of course only kids in school are being tested for the test scores you are throwing around -- not the general population.