Comments on this topic appear below.
What does the ONDP say to people who want public funding for Muslim schools?
Tue, 2009-03-10 15:43
#1
M. Spector
What does the ONDP say to people who want public funding for Muslim schools?
Tue, 2009-03-10 15:43
#2
M. Spector
Some suggestions:
(a) We don't trouble ourselves with your petty concerns, because we're busy worrying about jobs and the environment;
(b) Funding your schools would be political suicide for us;
(c) Oh, look over there at the phony-baloney 22 percenters who are underfunding the education system;
(d) Catholics have more votes than you do, so we support funding their schools and not yours;
(e) Catholics are a historically oppressed minority group, and you aren't;
(f) If we funded your schools, we'd have to fund everybody's religious schools (oh, wait...);
(g) It's a dead issue, because John Tory lost the last election;
(h) [Yawn!];
(i) We're already providing funding (and we'd like to provide more) for a public secular school system that welcomes people of all classes, faiths, and races; if that's not good enough for you, then pay for your own frakkin' private schools;
(j) Go away and come back in two years' time when our task force on education funding will be reporting to a convention on recommended changes to the funding of schools (but don't hold your breath);
(k) You're just trying to distract us from the real issues in education;
(l) Name one single child who has been denied an education because of lack of funding for Muslim schools - just one. You can't, can you? So there;
(m) Okay, we'll support funding your religious-based schools; after all, we wouldn't want to force Muslims into [b]amalgamating[/b] with the secular public schools system;
(n) Bugger off! We're sick and tired of the politics of division;
(o) Hey, haven't you heard? There's a recession on.
Tue, 2009-03-10 15:54
#3
Golly, so many good suggestions! Bearing in mind we're a way's yet from the next election with so many bright shiny objects to distract us, we can try a few to see how they fly.
Forget (b) or (d).. The truth? I mean really!
I might start with (h), then open my eyes to see if they're still there.
Probably end up with a combination of (n) and (a). Failing that, (j) can take us through into the next election cycle. Repeat as necessary.
Tue, 2009-03-10 16:11
#4
What Does the ONDP say to people who want public funding fo Muslim Schools?
I can't answer for them, but I would want them to say NO!
No to any expansion of Funding Religious Schools!
The Same Answer that the public gave John Tory in the last Provincial Election. NO!
Tue, 2009-03-10 16:17
#5
M. Spector
No to any expansion of Funding Religious Schools!
You don't see any contradiction in supporting the funding of some (actually 93% of) religious schools, while opposing the "expansion" of funding to the other 7%?
If funding for religious schools is a good thing, then why oppose expanding it?
Tue, 2009-03-10 17:21
#6
Also, Harper continues to underfund post-secondary research and development, PSE in general, and federal science programs which could have meant something for innovation and productivity in your future secularist Northern Puerto Rico.
I was thinking Catholicphobes everywhere might be somewhat concerned that their future atheist-genuses might be digging ditches seasonally and collecting pogey in winter instead of attending college or university. But they might be consoled that their children wont be pressed-ganged by Carol Pope and the Church into waging new wave jihad in countries like Afghanistan in order to reinstall the USSA's former Islamic gladios turned respectable politicians and US-backed drug dealers. But that's just me thinking out loud again. Keep the faith and drive alive, but most of all, be warily vigilant of Catholics hiding in trees everywhere, waiting to force Jeebus and holy hand grenades down your gullets when you least expect it.
Tue, 2009-03-10 17:28
#7
M. Spector...Bravo.
Tue, 2009-03-10 17:36
#8
Don't worry Spector, I'm sure the ONDP that says school funding is "a distraction from more pressing issues" is coming up with the most bold, dynamic, progressive, radical platform to protect people's homes, pensions and jobs that you've ever seen.
Tue, 2009-03-10 17:55
#9
Just wait until your pension funds declare huge losses, and Pee3's are the norm in public Ed, and the bills come rolling in for McGuinty's bottomless nuclear money pit. Youll all want a shrubbery about the same time.
Tue, 2009-03-10 18:12
#10
(p) I believe in public education where the Jewish, Muslim and Hindu kids learn and play together (oh wait, that was McGuinty);
(q) You're OBSESSED with this issue, which shows contempt for those who are losing their homes, their jobs and their livelihoods
(r) I only think the NDP talk about issues that unite workers as a class and talking about religious school funding divides working people
Tue, 2009-03-10 18:14
#11
(s) let's pin the McGuilty Liberals' broken promise no. 0x33 on the ONDP yeah!
New idea for a Catholicphobe thread:
Let's bust a rhyme from now on when discussing red herring old line party legacy issues. It's more fun.
Tue, 2009-03-10 18:22
#12
(r) Show me the word "Muslim" in the Canadian Constitution.
(s) Where were you in 1867 when our education system was being set up?
(t) Some people (not us, mind you) may fear we are funding madrassas in our own back yard.
(u) We secretly want to stop funding the Catholics also.
(v) What are you, a Liberal shill?
(w) Look, our troops are protecting Muslim girls' schools in Afghanistan - get your priorities straight!
(x) If you sign the right papers, you can send your kids to a separate Catholic school - think of it as an interim solution - you're an Abrahamic faith too, aren't you?
(y) Y not?
(z) Keep checking the poll results and focus groups - our principles are subject to change without notice.
Tue, 2009-03-10 18:45
#13
(z.a.1) because aboriginal education is overrated, and it's not too late to assimilate this generation of native Canadians to whitey's world ... na-na na!
(z.a.2) And besides, we're not real theophobes. We support the ISI-backed Taliban and public education for girls simultaneously - but not their cousins listed in CIA's database of expendible jihadi assets - because they shizznit dont stizzink
Tue, 2009-03-10 21:47
#14
(aa) Michael Prue opened up the "third rail of Ontario politics" and only got 11% - which means that our party clearly supports funding 93% of the parochial schools that are Catholic and that's it.
(bb) Andrea Horwath and Peter Tabuns had more leftwing platforms than Prue and they support funding Catholic schools - therefore funding public and separate schools is the most leftwing position
(cc) The 25% of Ontarians that support the status quo is higher than the percentage of Ontarians that support extending funding to other religious schools
Tue, 2009-03-10 21:49
#15
http://www.thestar.com/OpinionPopImageGallery/127057
______________________________________________________________________________________________ We are like cloaks, one thinks of us only when it rains.
Tue, 2009-03-10 22:13
#16
(dd) And we like to quote percentages pertaining to status quo, even though the large minority of relentless voters always vote old line party no matter how far down the toilet theyve flushed the economy and enviro. It's like favourite hockey teams and tradition, really. But dont bug us to support a modern electoral system or getting rid of that other abomination of democracy, the red chamber. Cuz things are fine with the quo otherwise
(ee!) Because four million plus Ontarians who didnt show on election day really do support smiting Catholics and acknowledge benefits of Pee3's by their apathy
Tue, 2009-03-10 22:19
#17
peterjcassidy
How about we let them in the debate on school funding along with those who want to cut funding to Catholic sxhools and those who went to fund Jewish schools or Aboriginal schools or French schools or those who want to have comparative religion clases in a public chool system or permit religious instrucion after regular school hours/?
Tue, 2009-03-10 22:44
#18
I'm confused, Peter. What are the parameters of the "debate" going on in the ONDP? Didn't the resolution essentially say that questioning the commitment to four systems was off-limits?
Tue, 2009-03-10 23:18
#19
peterjcassidy
I'm confused, Peter. What are the parameters of the "debate" going on in the ONDP? Didn't the resolution essentially say that questioning the commitment to four systems was off-limits?
As I posted:
=========================
Our party had the balls to have,. in the middle of a leadership race, a debate on school funding. After a great heated debate the ONDP convention pssed a resolution that , while it firmly commits to the existing 4 schood system at this time and speaks of other funding issues, establishes a task force to examine all aspects of schhol funding. That resolution had been given first prioirity by our leadership on a block of resolutions to be debated and it guaranteed we had a great democratic debate, with strong criticism of existing policy.
I am proud of my party and its leadership, especially Dennis Young. 
Join us . Let's continue the debate within our party,
solidarity
Peter
+++++++++++++++++++++++
Basically we commited to the existing 4 school system at this time opposed any forced amalgamation and established a task force to explore all alternatives. I can'tt imagine such a debate not including the option of funding more than one denomination (See UN) .I am sure "Hamas Horwath", like "Taliban Jack", is willing to talk to Muslims even if they want tp make a publlc case that if Catholic schools are funded, what about us? And there are Jews and Christians and Aboriginals and French and rural and urban and a whole bunch of people, who might want to speak on the issue of school funding.
Would you see the debate just should we cut funding to Catholic Schools- Yes or No?
Tue, 2009-03-10 23:40
#20
You don't see any contradiction in supporting the funding of some (actually 93% of) religious schools, while opposing the "expansion" of funding to the other 7%?
Of course he doesn't. But he's also concerned that if the ONDP called for one school system, they'd do about as well as the Lib Dems in the last UK election.
Tue, 2009-03-10 23:40
#21
Fidel:
a) Stay on topic. The topic of this thread is religious school funding. If you can't stay on topic, then stay out of this thread, please.
b) Stop the namecalling.
Thanks!
Wed, 2009-03-11 00:45
#22
Aye-aye!! It's all my fault. Please, everyone, feel free to dump on me for these idiotic Catholicphobe threads in what is a time of unprecedented attack on social democracy by Pinocchio and his 22 percenters in Puerto Toronto
Wed, 2009-03-11 01:16
#23
Fidel:
a) Stay on topic. The topic of this thread is religious school funding. If you can't stay on topic, then stay out of this thread, please.
b) Stop the namecalling.
Thanks!
And fyi, LeighT's dubious historical lesson was wrong in that now closed thread where you warned me for calling him a troll. I did PM you after but no reply. I was going to let that slide until this latest castigation. And so,
1) the Soviets did NOT murder 2 million Ukrainians and Jews in that country from 1941 to 1944.
2) I wont be apologizing to that poster soon. Ban me if you want, but I refuse to be browbeat by either moderators having a bad day or trolls giving bad history lessons
Wed, 2009-03-11 01:25
#24
If anyone in this thread actually wanted to extend public funding for Muslim schools in Ontario, then i guess we'd have something to talk about wouldn't we?
Wed, 2009-03-11 01:30
#25
M. Spector
But we [b]do[/b] have something to talk about here.
There are real people out there who think the government should fund all religious-based schools, as John Tory proposed. What does the NDP have to say to them?
If you don't think it's a topic worth discussing, then I guess we'll put you down for answer (d).
Wed, 2009-03-11 01:45
#26
I believe the government of Ontario should either fund all types of schools or only fund a single public system.
I do not believe it is fair that only the Catholic system gets funded.
______________________________________________________________________________________________ We are like cloaks, one thinks of us only when it rains.
Wed, 2009-03-11 01:48
#27
M. Spector
Webgear, that's not unlike the kind of argument a supporter of funding for Muslim schools might make. (I'm not criticizing it, BTW).
The challenge to the NDP is: How do you respond to it?
Wed, 2009-03-11 02:00
#28
If I was part of the NDP leadership and high council, personally, I would stick to my beliefs and ethics.
It may cost me and the party public support however if you beginning selling your soul for a few more votes, where does it stop?
( I only posted because I pay property tax in Ontario.)
______________________________________________________________________________________________ We are like cloaks, one thinks of us only when it rains.
Wed, 2009-03-11 02:05
#29
peterjcassidy
I believe the government of Ontario should either fund all types of schools or only fund a single public system.
I do not believe it is fair that only the Catholic system gets funded.
______________________________________________________________________________________________ We are like cloaks, one thinks of us only when it rains.
Which gives us a perfectly valid addition to the debate.
Wed, 2009-03-11 02:19
#30
There is no such challenge though. The large majority of Ontarians couldnt care less about separate school funding.
If they did, then the four million plus eligible voters who didnt vote would have. Apparently they were immersed in all that MMP literature that was never delivered, or delivered far too late, and they missed the polls.
Next thread should be entitled:
What would Team Pinocchio say when asked if their 22 percent dictatorship in Toronto would ever dream of introducing "AFP"ee's to public, public-private, private, aboriginal, Catholic, and all school funding in Ontario, faith based and not, and without any legislative debate or so much as a single public consultation on the matter?
I bet a This Hour has 22 minutes reporter would swoop in and attempt to chalk his wooden nose thinking it was a pool cue
Wed, 2009-03-11 02:39
#31
M. Spector
The large majority of Ontarians couldnt care less about separate school funding.
If they did, then the four million plus eligible voters who didnt vote would have.
Huge non sequitur.
There is no evidence whatsoever that significant numbers of non-voters abstained because they don't care about separate school funding. In fact, [b]all three of the incumbent parties were in agreement on separate school funding.[/b] So anybody who cares about separate school funding would have no basis for choosing one party over the others!
Separate school funding was [b]not[/b] an issue in the last election - except of course for the Greens, who oppose separate school funding, and attracted more voters than ever before.
So if you are going to speculate about why so many people don't bother voting, apathy over the separate school funding issue is about the least likely explanation. More likely, they were unable to see any real difference between the three incumbent parties.
Wed, 2009-03-11 03:00
#32
The challenge to the NDP is: How do you respond to it?
By changing the subject.
Wed, 2009-03-11 03:03
#33
M. Spector
And deJong's party won a whopping 8 percent of the vote and zero seats in the legislature for their efforts. I think if I were a green or civil liberties supporter, I'd drop the divisive issues and demand a modern electoral system.
"Drop the divisive issues"? Yeah, great advice. Who wants controversy during an election campaign?
And now we learn you're not a supporter of civil liberties....
Progressive Conservative Leader John Tory has caused an uproar in the province with his plan to extend government funding to all faith-based schools that meet criteria.
It has become the most controversial issue in the election campaign.
And the antecedent of the pronoun "It" is not separate school funding, but Tory's plan to extend funding to all faith-based schools.
Wed, 2009-03-11 03:03
#34
Separate school funding was [b]not[/b] an issue in the last election - except of course for the Greens, who oppose separate school funding, and attracted more voters than ever before
And the Greens may have also garnered some votes due to a perception that party of greener capitalism might save the world from dangerous climate change at a time when people were increasingly concerned about ... dangerous climate change.
And deJong's party won a whopping 8 percent of the vote and zero seats in the legislature for their efforts. I think if I were a green or civil liberties supporter, I'd drop the divisive issues and demand a modern electoral system. Oh look! ...
School funding fight escalates 2007
The Ontario government should stop funding Catholic schools, according to the Canadian Civil Liberties Association.
Progressive Conservative Leader John Tory has caused an uproar in the province with his plan to extend government funding to all faith-based schools that meet criteria.
It has become the most controversial issue in the election campaign.
Wed, 2009-03-11 03:04
#35
And deJong's party won a whopping 8 percent of the vote and zero seats in the legislature for their efforts. I think if I were a green or civil liberties supporter, I'd drop the divisive issues and demand a modern electoral system. Oh look! ...
The Greens were just as supportive of MMP as the NDP was.
Wed, 2009-03-11 03:15
#36
And deJong's party won a whopping 8 percent of the vote and zero seats in the legislature for their efforts. I think if I were a green or civil liberties supporter, I'd drop the divisive issues and demand a modern electoral system. Oh look! ...The Greens were just as supportive of MMP as the NDP was.
And I think it possible that the Greens may have appealed to some number of voters due to a perception that that party of greener capitalism might save the world from dangerous climate change at a time when people were becoming increasingly concerned about dangerous climate change, and not necessarily for their brinkmanship on any particular aspect of public school funding.
Wed, 2009-03-11 09:48
#37
I know I am only one person, but I vote NDP federally and usually vote NDP provincially, but I voted Green in the last election almost solely on their principled stance on Separate school funding.
Wed, 2009-03-11 10:22
#38
You don't see any contradiction in supporting the funding of some (actually 93% of) religious schools, while opposing the "expansion" of funding to the other 7%?
No I don't see any contradiction. I also know that there are two ways to lose an election. One is to expand Religious funding (Alah the handoff Bill Davis to Frank Miller, then the John Tory Debacle). There other is to close down Catholic Schools.
If funding for religious schools is a good thing, then why oppose expanding it?It's not a good thing.
But whats done is done, and the Liberals, NDP and PCs all incorporated the Separate Schools into their platforms back in the 70s and 80s.
Live with it.
Wed, 2009-03-11 10:33
#39
Frustrated Mess
What does the ONDP say to people who want public fundinWhat does the ONDP say to people who want public funding for Muslim schools?
No.
Wed, 2009-03-11 10:36
#40
What FM said.
Wed, 2009-03-11 10:58
#41
I guess a variation on this question would be to ask "What does the NDP say to people who want Arabic (or Chinese or Punjabi etc...) to be made an official language of Canada? - after all why should only English and French be official languages with funded school boards across the country etc... - why shouldn't other languages have equal status?
Wed, 2009-03-11 11:22
#42
Frustrated Mess
No.
Wed, 2009-03-11 12:20
#43
What would Pinocchio's guvmint say to an [url=http://www.metronews.ca/toronto/local/article/194461][color=red][b]Afric... school in Toronto?[/b][/color][/url]
Wed, 2009-03-11 14:12
#44
FM
Why shouldn't other languages have equal status?
Why can't Canada have several official languages?
______________________________________________________________________________________________ We are like cloaks, one thinks of us only when it rains.
Wed, 2009-03-11 14:42
#45
peterjcassidy
I guess a variation on this question would be to ask "What does the NDP say to people who want Arabic (or Chinese or Punjabi etc...) to be made an official language of Canada? - after all why should only English and French be official languages with funded school boards across the country etc... - why shouldn't other languages have equal status?
and what should the ONDP say to those who want to abolish French language education in Ontario:
-------------------
French language education in Ontario, is so much more than studying in French. FLE is…
- a constitutional right
- the chance to live a unique cultural experience in a French environment
- the choice of becoming bilingual for life by developing linguistic abilities in the country's two official languages
- a learning setting that promotes excellence and success, with a dedicated understanding of each individual's needs
- access to a dynamic community
- a passageway to greater opportunities and a bright future in a globalized society
As stated in the preamble of The French Language Services Act, in Ontario, the French language is recognized as an official language in education.
The province recognizes the contribution of the cultural heritage of the French-speaking population and wishes to safeguard it for generations to come.
The rights to a French education in Ontario are defined in section 23 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. In order to be eligible to attend the elementary or secondary schools, certain conditions must be met. A person meeting these conditions will be recognized as being a right-holder of the French language education in Ontario.
Right-holder
French language schools welcome the children of every Canadian citizen:
- whose first language learned and still understood is French OR
- who has received his or her education, at the elementary level, in French in Canada OR
- who has a child who has received or who is receiving his or her education at the elementary or secondary level in French in Canada.
French language schools pride themselves in their accessibility and strive to reflect the cultural diversity that makes up Ontario's Francophone community. In support of this, the Ontario Education Act allows individuals who are not French-language right-holders to seek admission for their child, in a French-language school.
This request will be processed by an admissions committee, as prescribed by the Ontario Education Act and according to a process determined by the school board. For more information, visit your local school board's Web site.
The right to French language education at the post-secondary level
With regards to the post-secondary institutions and training agencies, the choice to further ones education is an open door. These institutions offer an array of programs and services in French. The specialized disciplines taught will provide not only a unique education but also the skills necessary to succeed.
Wed, 2009-03-11 14:42
#46
M. Spector
No I don't see any contradiction. I also know that there are two ways to lose an election....
But whats done is done....Live with it.
Okey-dokey. I'll put you down for (b) and (d) then.
Wed, 2009-03-11 14:52
#47
M. Spector
I guess a variation on this question would be to ask "What does the NDP say to people who want Arabic (or Chinese or Punjabi etc...) to be made an official language of Canada? - after all why should only English and French be official languages with funded school boards across the country etc... - why shouldn't other languages have equal status?
The difference between that question and the thread title is that no hypocrisy is required in order to give a satisfactory explanation as to why French and English are the official languages of Canada; whereas a great deal of hypocrisy is required in order to try and convince someone that Catholic schools, alone of all religious sects, should be given public funding.
It certainly didn't fly with the UN Human Rights Committee, for that very reason.
Wed, 2009-03-11 14:53
#48
Sorry forgot this was the ONDP thread. It feels so much like the group that lobbied John Tory and the Conservatives.
But yes, the madmax party understands that following the lead of the Progressive Conservatives would result in Zero Electable madmax Mpps.
Wed, 2009-03-11 14:59
#49
M. Spector
Is that your final answer?
"Sorry, Muslim voter. You can just go fly a kite because if we supported funding for your schools, nobody would vote for us. But we'll continue to support funding for Catholic schools for the very same reason."
Would you expect such a voter ever to consider voting for such a crassly unprincipled and opportunistic party?
Wed, 2009-03-11 15:32
#50
Would you expect such a voter ever to consider voting for such a crassly unprincipled and opportunistic party?
Of course not. But. . . what other party would you suggest they vote for instead?
Wed, 2009-03-11 16:04
#51
Yeah, its still
NO