Read other letters about this article

• Tuesday, November 6, 2007 07:44 AM

  I think epeoples was right

  epeoples wrote:

  Ron Paul is a signatory to a public proclamation condemning any government role in education which reads as follows:

  "I proclaim publicly that I favor ending government involvement in education."

  In Ron Paul's America people who couldn't afford a private school for their children would simply be out of luck.

  Glenn responds:

  That is completely irrational. Just because the Federal Government can't do "X" doesn't mean that "X" won't be done. There is such a thing as state government, and municipalities, and they can operate and maintain public school systems, too.

  Glenn, what epeoples was pointing to was Paul's support for a group that opposes ANY government control of education, not just federal government involvement.

  Here's the mission statement from the Alliance for Separation of School and State's website:

  "We believe parents, and not the state, should be in charge of their children's education. That control may take many forms and levels of involvement, but the state will never be part of the picture."

  So, although you characterize Paul's position as "that the Constitution does not allow the Federal Government to do so, regardless of whether it's desirable" his support for this group, at least, indicates Paul might actually favor homeschooling, and oppose even state or local governments from running schools because he thinks homeschooling is more "desirable."

  —Jestaplero Read Jestaplero's other letters
  Permalink
  Flag
  Click "Submit Flag" if you feel this post is inappropriate. Explain why below if you wish.

  Cancel