Whatever ... like I said, stick to physics.

:o)

David (in Camelot ;-) hit the nail on the head ... who would teach religion in the schools? Are they going to hire a Muslim to teach Muslim, a Jew to teach Judaism, etc. No they will hire a jack of all trades but a master of none, and how can he be objective and not partial to his own belief system? The other thing with government schools is you have no say in what your children are taught. I don't believe in evolution, but unless I want to pay for my children to go to school somewhere else (after having already paid for their education once through taxes), I have no choice in what they are taught. If they go to public schools, they are indoctrinated in the religion of the state. Liberalism, environmentalism, evolution, sexual diversity, political correctness - these are all the tenants of the religion of the state which is taught in government schools, and make no mistake it IS a religion. These all represent moral values and worldview formation.

Jack and Mike, while I am a Christian, I don't think religion (of any kind) should be taught in government schools. I believe the teaching of religion is a function of the church not the government. On the other hand, public education is not really a function of the government either.

Government schools are sheep factories ... they manufacture sheep who THINK they have inquiring minds.

I wonder what Agnew was specifically referring to here.

Government schools are sheep factories ... my new bumper sticker ;-)

... by the way, most of the Founders and many of our early presidents were home schooled (and Christian). Just imagine how much better this country could have been if they'd had the benefit of our government schools.

Reston, how many home schoolers have you met and talked with? Your hatred of Christianity and religion and your liberal world view so obviously colors everything you think and say, I can just about predict your replies before you make them. Do you fancy yourself a free thinker? Then why do you always parrot the liberal/Democrat party line?

You nailed it Logan. That and religious reasons is why we home school. My son went to a government school kindergarten, and even at that age I could see the indoctrination in socialism, environmentalism and political correctness even though we live in a pretty conservative small town. You see extremes of this in places like California, and I hear parents say, "I'd never send my kids to government school THERE". However, I don't think there are any schools safe from this government endoctrination. The federal government keeps them all in line by dangling the "federal funding" carrot in front of them.

I don't think we have to worry about that with the political elite in America. Our problem is impovrishment of knowledge among the political elite.

Great quote!

Jack, do you think Ken Lay took more money out of the pockets of working Americans than the welfare program? I doubt it. Anyway, they are both wrong. The lawbreakers (Ken Lays) should be punished (and I don't mean sent to some country club prison), and the welfare abuses should be stopped. I think we as moral humans should help our fellow man in need, but it has to be VOLUNTARY. The purpose of government is not to take our money by FORCE to give it to who THEY deem needy.

I'm with you Joe. I worked in a ministry of my church where we provided help to families in emergency need. Many of our calls came from a government housing project. We always investigated requests to make sure they were valid which took me over to the apartments every once in a while. The apartments were mostly rent free, and many had their utilities paid. It's pretty disheartening to go in these places and see the residents with big screen TVs, cable (which I can't afford), cell phones, etc. Their kids have new bikes and electric scooters and expensive name-brand clothes and shoes. Many of the things they have, I can't afford because we choose for my wife to stay at home with the kids. I don't expect them to be given to me by Uncle Sugar, but it's upsetting to see these people who live off of the fruits of MY labor having nicer things than I can afford for my family.

... sorry for the long link. Both lines above make up the one link.

Someone a week or two ago made a comment about how much better off England was due to their gun bans ... read this article.

I see your point Logan, but where a house is concerned I'm not sure. What if you have a reputable builder who suddenly develops a crack habit ;-) and starts taking shortcuts? You can't see inside the walls to see what wiring or plumbing or stud spacing he used. You can't dig up the footings to see haw well he laid the foundation. Then again with our current system of building inspectors, you have the potential for bribes and other graft. Anyway, as you said, this is the least of our problems. If we could get back to a Constitutional government in all ways except building codes, I'd be OK with that ;-).

Reston, read carefully the next quote listing the 10 planks of the Communist Manifesto. Big business isn't the thing to fear. The thing to fear is big business joining with big government. If allowed to work properly, the free market will take care of big business, but when they join with big government and are allowed access to legislation and the backing of the FORCE of government, their corruption is then unstoppable. MJG from Canada, you must be new here. Most who reply here just want to be left alone by government and allowed to live their own lives as they see fit. If I wanted to generalize, I could say, the trouble with you Canadians is that you don't care about liberty and want big government to take care of you.

The Left's 10 Commandments.

A couple hundred like him in Congress and we might could restore this Constitutional Republic.

I like the "not broken in from birth" part. Actually, it's a creeping thing. We are more "broken in from birth" than our parents were, and our children will be more so than we are. The things which gall us now will be standard fare for our children, and so on, and so on. Makes you wonder where it will all end up.

Jack, The office of president was originally intended to be a primarily administrative office. It never was intended to wield the kind of power it does today. Unlike in Washington's day, todays president is more like a king or an emporer. By the same token, the federal government was never intended to have the kind of power they hold today. The seat of government was originally intended to be in the individual states.

A great (political) mind with no morals or scruples is no asset.

Note the contrast in the way of thinking between the Founders and the power-hungry politicians of today. Adams feared too much power in the hands of government ... most politicians today crave it and will do anything to get it. Imagine a president today who took the office to serve his country out of duty, not desire for power ... who would refuse a salary to help the country ... who would step down when the people wanted to make him king. This is what George Washington did. Are there no men like this in our country today?

O, for a John Adams in our day.