It was in no way a superior product like they want you to believe anyway. It was obvious in college that I had inferior math and science education, and I was considered a high performer in my high school!
They even turned me off religion completely, so fail on all counts.
are you missing a NOT in there? as in `I'm NOT for vouchers because I don't think I should have to pay with my taxes for religious indoctrination masquerading as public education. `?
because as it stands, your comment makes as much sense as saying
> if you are not paying for the product you are the product
Just because you are paying does not mean you are NOT the product, to spell it out.
Similarly, just because people have the option to pay for their Islamic Madrasah or whatever Jewish or Christian equivalents are with vouchers, does not mean they will not try to shove their ideologies down everyone in public education in the next election cycle.
No, I'm not. A vision of equity advanced by kneecapping math education in public schools is no less faith-based than creationism taught in private schools. If anything, I'd guess creationism is less damaging to students.
This:
bolsters shitty religious propaganda
dumbs down the students receiving substandard education
props us churches
drains money out of the public schools
requires that I pay a part of my taxes to an unaccountable religious organization.
This isn't a requirement for vouchers. You can simply state that religious schools aren't eligible.
Just under a third of Californian's aren't religious [1]. Nobody is proposing to ban religious schools.
If you can't swing it, make the choice local. Each county or whatever can vote on whether to permit religious vouchers. The Bay Area will ban it. The Central Coast won't. This remains better than the status quo. [1] https://www.pewresearch.org/religion/religious-landscape-stu...
There is a powerful political and legal movement behind the idea that state-funded religious indoctrination is not only permitted, but required.