Gay High

[London Geezer]

I am so staying outta this topic but I'd like clarify to one last thing.

one is a physical condition which can or cannot change at any given time. the other is a psychological preference embebbed in people's personalities. physical appearance can be changed, sexual preferences cannot be changed (unlike some people used to think until not long ago)

while I see where you are going with this. if the Psycological condition can be changed, should it be enforced by the state?

never did i say that "being gay" is a "psychological condition". but if any psychological condition, like depression, can be cured (and it is curable to a certain extent), then OF COURSE the state should give free treatment and special opportunites to people who cannot afford to get treated!!!
it workd like this everywhere, and i thought it worked like this in the US too...

 

[Joe DeFuria]

I understand why some are unhappy with public funding for private institutions, but personally I don't see an issue with this particular cause.

Of course not, because you can't look past your personal bias.

Besides, there are other sources of funding that are far more reprehensible than this school could ever be.

Ahh, classic re-direction. Yes, we all saw that thread Natoma...Where's the outrage? The thing is gonna get canned, and rightfully so. Move along...

 

[London Geezer]

I will say the answers to the questions for london-boy would still be interesting to hear, although they don't appear to be exactly pertaining to this case.

questions? answers? did i miss anything?

 

[Dr. Ffreeze]

london-boy,

to be honest i'm starting to see your points, guys. slowly but yeah i do see where u're coming from.
still the fact that "class B" is being helped and "class A" is not doensnt mean that we just should not help anyone.

I agree that we need to help BOTH Person A and Person B. What they go though is pain and simple WRONG. I feel 100% contempt for people that use their physical superiority to dominate and harm others. Using one's physical abilities to harm others is not for the strong, but for the weak of spirit. I can't say this enough, utter contempt. Those that do this to ALL people should be held accountable. The source of the problem needs fixed.

Dr. Ffreeze

 

[Natoma]

I understand why some are unhappy with public funding for private institutions, but personally I don't see an issue with this particular cause.

Of course not, because you can't look past your personal bias.

I can't look past my personal bias because I understand why you have an issue with it, but I don't? If I couldn't look past my personal bias then I wouldn't see your point of view at all.

Besides, there are other sources of funding that are far more reprehensible than this school could ever be.

Ahh, classic re-direction. Yes, we all saw that thread Natoma...Where's the outrage? The thing is gonna get canned, and rightfully so. Move along...

Whether or not it's getting canned does not change the fact that it's fully funded with all of our tax dollars until 2005.

Again, where's the outrage? That's millions, if not billions, that could have been used for something far more productive. Down the drain.

 

[Joe DeFuria]

Do some feel that Faith Based Initiative is a good thing while the school is not? Why?

We already know that I don't think publically funding this school is a good thing.

Faith based initiative? That depends on how it's implemented of which I don't know the details. If there is

1) no religious criteria for giving the money out / refusing to give the money, then I don't have problems with it. (We'll give it to Christian relgious outlets, but not Muslim ones.)

2) There has to be a tracking and accounting and reporting back to the federal government for how the money was spent. (So it can be evaluated for relevance).

I don't see why religious institutions should be excluded from being vehicles to assist others. (At the same time, I don't really see why religious institutions should be free from paying tax either...)

 

[Natoma]

london-boy,

to be honest i'm starting to see your points, guys. slowly but yeah i do see where u're coming from.
still the fact that "class B" is being helped and "class A" is not doensnt mean that we just should not help anyone.

I agree that we need to help BOTH Person A and Person B. What they go though is pain and simple WRONG. I feel 100% contempt for people that use their physical superiority to dominate and harm others. Using one's physical abilities to harm others is not for the strong, but for the weak of spirit. I can't say this enough, utter contempt. Those that do this to ALL people should be held accountable. The source of the problem needs fixed.

Dr. Ffreeze

I definitely agree that the source of the problems need fixing, and they are indeed getting fixed with more guidance counselors and more acceptance in the public school system for homosexual students, among other things. Until that point is reached however, this is a stop gap solution proposed and funded by private philanthropists, and now partially funded by the NYC government.

 

[notAFanB]

never did i say that "being gay" is a "psychological condition".

nor did I.

but if any psychological condition, like depression, can be cured (and it is curable to a certain extent), then OF COURSE the state should give free treatment and special opportunites to people who cannot afford to get treated!!!

although I might disagree to the extent of state involement in the 'cure', I'd agree that a psychological 'disease' should be treated.

it workd like this everywhere, and i thought it worked like this in the US too...

not clear on how the US medical system operates so I'll refrain from any comments here.

 

[Joe DeFuria]

Whether or not it's getting canned does not change the fact that it's fully funded with all of our tax dollars until 2005.

Apparently not. (See other thread.)

Rather than dreail this thread with another example of stupid spending, take it back to the other one.

 

[Dr. Ffreeze]

london-boy,

questions? answers? did i miss anything?

You answered them, it is post lag. I didn't read your comments until after I responded to Natoma.

Thankx,
Dr. Ffreeze

 

[Natoma]

Do some feel that Faith Based Initiative is a good thing while the school is not? Why?

We already know that I don't think publically funding this school is a good thing.

Faith based initiative? That depends on how it's implemented of which I don't know the details. If there is

1) no religious criteria for giving the money out / refusing to give the money, then I don't have problems with it. (We'll give it to Christian relgious outlets, but not Muslim ones.)

2) There has to be a tracking and accounting and reporting back to the federal government for how the money was spent. (So it can be evaluated for relevance).

I don't see why religious institutions should be excluded from being vehicles to assist others. (At the same time, I don't really see why religious institutions should be free from paying tax either...)

The Faith Based Initiative proposed by Bush would be for providing religious institutions only with money to do their work, be they christian, muslim, hindu, jewish, buddhist, etc. It would also fully and completely recognize and legalize a complete partnership between the government and the church.

However, these institutions already receive federal funding under the umbrella of "charities." Not to mention the little problem of separation of church and state that we hold so dear in our country.

 

[London Geezer]

nor did I.

i know, i was just clearing that up because i felt i hadnt been clear...

not clear on how the US medical system operates so I'll refrain from any comments here.

same here...

 

[Dr. Ffreeze]

Natomi,

I definitely agree that the source of the problems need fixing, and they are indeed getting fixed with more guidance counselors and more acceptance in the public school system for homosexual students, among other things. Until that point is reached however, this is a stop gap solution proposed and funded by private philanthropists, and now partially funded by the NYC government.

To fix the root cause, I wonder if $3,200,000 would have been better spend hiring guidance counselors than giving it to this school to help 50 to 150 students? I do see how some people could want to make a stop gap solution, like this school. I am just not comfortable with the fact that government money, that comes from everyone, is giving to an organization that segregates.

School vouchers are an interesting idea. If these NYC gave out school vouchers to all students, and 50 to 150 students gave their vouchers to this school, I would be ok with that.

Dr. Ffreeze

 

[Joe DeFuria]

The Faith Based Initiative proposed by Bush would be for providing religious institutions only with money to do their work, be they christian, muslim, hindu, jewish, buddhist, etc. It would also fully and completely recognize and legalize a complete partnership between the government and the church.

However, these institutions already receive federal funding under the umbrella of "charities." Not to mention the little problem of separation of church and state that we hold so dear in our country.

I'll just let Bush respond:

http://www.whitehouse.gov/government/fbci/booklet.pdf

“I recognize that government has no business endorsing a religious creed, or directly funding religious worship or religious teaching.
That is not the business of the government. Yet government can and should support social services provided by religious people, as long
as those services go to anyone in need, regardless of their faith. And when government gives that support, charities and faith-based programs
should not be forced to change their character or compromise their mission.”

President George W. Bush

So

1) Religious groups cannot discriminate to whom aid goes. (Maintains fairness/equality)
2) Religions groups do not need to "conform" or "comprimise" their beliefs to the government as a condition for participating. (Maintains separation.)

 

[Natoma]

Why the need for faith based initiatives at all Joe? I mean, they're already considered Charities, and being considered a charity does not force a group to compromise their mission or their faith.

So why the need for faith based initiative at all?

 

[Dr. Ffreeze]

Joe DeFuria,

1) Religious groups cannot discriminate to whom aid goes. (Maintains fairness/equality)

Interesting quote. So government can't give money to religious groups that discriminate to whom the aid goes too, yet the school in question does.

I think that is what is the root of your and my issues with money going to this school.

Interesting,
Dr. Ffreeze

 

[Natoma]

Natomi,

I definitely agree that the source of the problems need fixing, and they are indeed getting fixed with more guidance counselors and more acceptance in the public school system for homosexual students, among other things. Until that point is reached however, this is a stop gap solution proposed and funded by private philanthropists, and now partially funded by the NYC government.

To fix the root cause, I wonder if $3,200,000 would have been better spend hiring guidance counselors than giving it to this school to help 50 to 150 students? I do see how some people could want to make a stop gap solution, like this school. I am just not comfortable with the fact that government money, that comes from everyone, is giving to an organization that segregates.

Understandable. The kids that I met were generally far better off in a segregated environment due to the trauma that they had experienced in regular high schools. While segregation is at conflict with the very core of my beliefs, sometimes there isn't an option. I would be very much opposed to this if NYC came up with this school and forced gay students into the situation, however, that is not the case, which is why this isn't like historical segregation that some have likened it to.

School vouchers are an interesting idea. If these NYC gave out school vouchers to all students, and 50 to 150 students gave their vouchers to this school, I would be ok with that.

Dr. Ffreeze

That's why some legislators are against the idea. For that very reason. Public funding for private institutions that are not regulated by the government.

 

[Joe DeFuria]

Why the need for faith based initiatives at all Joe? I mean, they're already considered Charities, and being considered a charity does not force a group to compromise their mission or their faith.

So why the need for faith based initiative at all?

Because it's another vehichle, with existing establishments at a local level, to distribute funds to those who need it. I thought that was obvious.

Or do you think that "charities" all by themselves are doing a more than effective job?

 

[Natoma]

Why the need for faith based initiatives at all Joe? I mean, they're already considered Charities, and being considered a charity does not force a group to compromise their mission or their faith.

So why the need for faith based initiative at all?

Because it's another vehichle, with existing establishments at a local level, to distribute funds to those who need it. I thought that was obvious.

Or do you think that "charities" all by themselves are doing a more than effective job?

Religious Group A is already a Charity. If they dole out $50 Million a year in charity work, that won't change if they are now all of a sudden a faith based organization that happens to do charity.

So again, why does a religious group that is already considered a charity need a special moniker that specifically deems it as a religious institution and, by the very language used on the website, entangles it further with the government, which by definition of our laws is illegal?

p.s.: That's one reason why it's been defeated over and over and over and over and over again in Congress.

 

[Joe DeFuria]

Interesting quote. So government can't give money to religious groups that discriminate to whom the aid goes too, yet the school in question does.

Exactly.

I think that is what is the root of your and my issues with money going to this school.

It certainly is the case with me.