|
Post by hartlikeawheel on Jun 12, 2007 11:24:15 GMT -5
The teens and their parents are coming out of the woodwork.
I swear we have been getting invitations from people we scarcely even know. They must have made up their guest list from the phone book.
The girl down the block has only spoken two words to me in 18 yrs, "No thanks." And Marion told me she had never spoken to him.
One party we went to the girl had already written up the thankyous and handed them out at the party. Ours said, "Thank you so much for the gift. It meant so much to me that you came." Good grief!
Of course the expected gift is cash so that's what we do. But I was saying to Marion the other day it would be fun with these opportunists to wrap a set of dishtowels or a knick-knack. Hee-hee.
|
|
|
Post by doctork on Jun 12, 2007 12:01:47 GMT -5
My son, who is a graduating senior himself, has received 5 or 6 invitations to graduation parties, not addressed to parents. He asked me if he was supposed to bring gifts. I dunno - he's a kid, he should ask his friends what they are doing. Whatever he decided, it did not involve asking mom or dad for money.
That's OK, he has a part-time job and is very thrifty with his own money. The National Bank of Spencer probably has more money than mom and dad.
He's received cards (with checks) from a few family friends and relatives. We have sent out no announcements or invitations to parties. I was disinclined, as it does seem like begging for cash. Plus I don't have time or money left for that after the endless parade of prom, senior pictures, the graduation party ($180!!), baccalaureate, and eventually, the actual graduation itself.
Pretty curmudgeonly of me when he is the "baby" and we'll be looking at that empty nest soon. Frankly, along with the sadness, I have considerable relief. At least until the college tuition bills start rolling in.
|
|
|
Post by gailkate on Jun 13, 2007 9:00:33 GMT -5
Did most of us here have graduation parties? I didn't and don't remember it being an issue at all, back in the olden days. My aunt gave me a set of cheap Fingerhut luggage that lasted forever. A friend of my mother's gave me a pair of earrings which absolutely mystified me. Wearing earrings was not yet hip, much more grown up than I was ready for.
I gave the kid next door a Bartlett's Quotations, the daughter of a friend a lovely set of - yes! - towels. For holier-than-thou cousins we never see I gave donations to Lutheran World Relief. The whole money-gimme makes me cranky.
|
|
|
Post by slb2 on Jun 13, 2007 10:51:21 GMT -5
I had a graduation from high school party back in 1981. My godparents surprised me by showing up. No party after college graduation. My oldest, now a junior in high school, doesn't want a party when she graduates.
|
|
|
Post by joew on Jun 13, 2007 14:16:49 GMT -5
As Richard Nixon said, "Who needs it?"
|
|
|
Post by doctork on Jun 13, 2007 15:32:41 GMT -5
I did not graduate high school. Having gotten sick to death of it half-way through my senior year, I left and ran away to Europe, where I got a job in Paris. I do not feel any deficiencies for having skipped any graduation parties, or even the Senior Prom.
My mother came to my medical school graduation and she was very happy. The day I finished my residency was one of the happiest days of my life, truly deserving of celebration, but there was no party when I left the hospital premises at 7:00 am on July 1. I just went home to get some sleep.
Mail me the diploma, please, and skip the party.
|
|
|
Post by hartlikeawheel on Jun 13, 2007 18:31:23 GMT -5
Dr! You surprised me.
Neither of my children "officially" graduated from high school. They are bright and creative and couldn't stand it either.
I can hardly blame them after the last few times I visited their high school. There were police in the hallways and I actually felt afraid when the bell rang and I had to run the gauntlet of some pretty scary teens. And we don't live in a big city town.
Meeting with the senior staff wasn't much less intimidating.
This school is also considered one of the best high schools in MN which frightens me.
Keep in mind that I've worked in a state hospital with the mentally ill and dangerous in the lower third of MN and little backs me down.
My daughter was physically assaulted by a girl who had been transferred from school to school because of her agressive behavior but I couldn't get any help for either of them. The police referred me back to the school. The school referred me back to the police. Scary. No one wants to take responsibility these days, it seems.
She was also sexually assaulted by a teacher but that's another story. But, nonetheless, one of the reasons why she didn't finish school in a conventional way.
And there's the big secret that nothing untoward is happening.
But all that is just my venting.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
The graduation parties. I don't remember much of mine except that a friend of my mom's gave me a lovely silver bangle bracelet which I still wear with a lot of appreciation. People actually gave gifts in those days.
Neither of my children wanted the big fuss of a party although friends did give gifts. I don't remember a lot of money being involved.
When I graduated from college Mom and Dad invited all of our close relatives to a nearby Chinese restaurant and they threw a huge multi-entree feast. It was so much fun. Hot as heck with no air-conditioning and we were enjoying all being together.
I don't even remember the gifts but I remember being with "my people" and how much fun we had.
My sober and serious Aunt Laura got a bit tipsy on the wine and my minister cousin passed her the last of his glass and said "Waste not; want not."
The money is gone, nearly all the gifts are forgotten. But the memories are here.
|
|
|
Post by joew on Jun 13, 2007 22:02:57 GMT -5
Dr! …Neither of my children "officially" graduated from high school. They are bright and creative and couldn't stand it either. I can hardly blame them after the last few times I visited their high school. There were police in the hallways and I actually felt afraid when the bell rang and I had to run the gauntlet of some pretty scary teens. And we don't live in a big city town. Meeting with the senior staff wasn't much less intimidating. This school is also considered one of the best high schools in MN which frightens me. … My daughter was physically assaulted by a girl who had been transferred from school to school because of her agressive behavior but I couldn't get any help for either of them. The police referred me back to the school. The school referred me back to the police. Scary. No one wants to take responsibility these days, it seems. She was also sexually assaulted by a teacher but that's another story. But, nonetheless, one of the reasons why she didn't finish school in a conventional way. And there's the big secret that nothing untoward is happening. But all that is just my venting. … A bit off topic, but I can't forbear commenting that this sort of thing is part of the reason we have to get away from relying on state schools to educate our children. Despite (or is it because of) the election of school boards, the state schools are not responsible to the parents. Because they are arms of the government, they have to accord the rights the government gives to citizens, rather than standing in loco parentis with regard to the children, which would enable them to enforce discipline and order as parents wish.
|
|
|
Post by slb2 on Jun 14, 2007 0:01:24 GMT -5
good and fine to say that joew, but if the public school isn't educating Johnny/Mohammed/Felix, his drugged out/poor, illiterate, immigrant/too-busy-as-I-earn-a-cool-billion parents aren't going to do the job, either. So where does that leave Johnny?
|
|
|
Post by doctork on Jun 14, 2007 1:27:17 GMT -5
Joew, I'm not sure what you are getting at. We are all free to remove our children from the public schools if we choose, though this can depend upon a family's disposable income or ability to homeschool, or the child's ability to garner scholarship aid for private school tuition.
Should we offer everyone private school vouchers? Operate charter schools as the main vehicle of education? Those are public schools, though they are usually operated privately.
Or are you saying that all education should be privately financed? Or just K - 12? Or something else?
And anj, not to worry about the high school drop out business, as I do have a real college degree and a medical school diploma. I would have been eligible to graduate in January of my senior year, as I had plenty of academic credits, but I lacked one semester of gym. Louisiana required four full years of gym for a high school diploma; I had three-and-one-half.
I left without the diploma anyway, but before I took the job in Paris, I spent one month at the Outward Bound School in the German Alps. They gave me a certificate for that, I sent it to my former HS Guidance Counselor, and she petitioned the State Board of Education for an exception on my behalf, to count Outward Bound as a semester of Physical Education. That came through about a year later, and I am now officially a graduate of that New Orleans Public School.
That school was the first NOLA public high school to reopen after Katrina - as a Charter School.
|
|
|
Post by slb2 on Jun 14, 2007 1:37:08 GMT -5
DocK, you've been exalted for graduating from NO public high. But cha-know, I hear a lot of negative things about the education in Louisiana. Shed any light on that?
|
|
|
Post by hartlikeawheel on Jun 14, 2007 13:48:15 GMT -5
One last comment on graduation gifts and then I think we should continue with our analysis of current education. Very interesting.
That comment was from a farm girl with five brothers. She told me that when she graduated she got a set of luggage and all her brothers got cars. Now there's a strong message!
Yes! Let's talk some more about the state of our public schools and options.
Do you think we should move to the political forum?
|
|
|
Post by joew on Jun 14, 2007 15:46:25 GMT -5
Parents would do well to send their children to private or religious schools/create heir own/homeschool. I know not everybody can do it, but I think everybody who can would be wise to do so. Vouchers would be great.
I didn't intend to hijack the thread, just to throw in an aside about hart's experience with her daughter's school. If people want to discuss it further, hart is probably right that it belongs under politics.
|
|
|
Post by slb2 on Jun 14, 2007 16:48:54 GMT -5
I'd prefer to discuss it here as I am shy of politics.
I think, joew, that that sort of isolationism is an unloving way to be. I think that in most every instance, we need to be out there amongst the crowd. If I took my kids out of the mix, it sends a bad message, imo, to both my children and to the rest of the children in the public schools.
While I done homeschool and private school with my kids, I think it's overall best to send them to public school.
|
|
|
Post by slb2 on Jun 14, 2007 16:49:54 GMT -5
And I'm leaving my typo above because it cracks me up. ![:D](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/smiley/grin.png)
|
|
|
Post by gailkate on Jun 14, 2007 18:32:21 GMT -5
Me, two, slb!
I've never understood why people think they can't homeschool while their kids are in public school. Anyone who wants more than the school offers can certainly augment in myriad ways - and bless'em, they should!
But I don't want to pay for religious, private, military or otherwise non-public schools. No way no how.
And "we need to be out there amongst the crowd" doesn't mean various group activities for kids exactly like oneself. At some point, the world is there to be dealt with and kids who move from their home bubble to their private college bubble to their know-the-right-people occupational bubble are too sheltered to be thoughtful citizens.
|
|
|
Post by doctork on Jun 14, 2007 21:26:36 GMT -5
DocK, you've been exalted for graduating from NO public high. But cha-know, I hear a lot of negative things about the education in Louisiana. Shed any light on that? I can speak for the New Orleans area, not so much for the rest of the state. I attended the best public high school in the state of Louisiana, and I think it still fits that description. It was an academic magnet school then, sometimes listed among the top 100 high schools in America. It is a charter school now because of fears that the low-brow populist element in the New Orleans Public School District, and Orleans Parish would re-open it after Katrina as an ordinary high school, losing the best the state had to offer. An extraordinary effort by students, parents, faculty and alums was the subject of a front page story in the Wall Street Journal, and was the reason for success in converting to a charter school and re-opening (on January 17, 2006, less than 6 months post-Katrina) as a public academic magnet school under charter operation. There are two other public magnet schools plus an outstanding school of the arts. Almost all the rest (save a couple dozen other charter schools) are operating under state management, having been seized from NOPSD for inadequacy. Almost everyone in the city who cares about education for their children sends them to private schools, unless they can secure admission to the public magnet schools. The parochial schools are quite good, and pretty available even to the poor, if you live in the neighborhood and, perhaps, belong to the parish. There are several excellent non-sectarian private schools, and an excellent K - 12 historically Jewish school (Isadore Newman School, alma mater of the football-playing Mannings), which of course admits qualified students of all faiths. Those are all very pricey. When I was in NOLA last January, I had lunch with a Muslim doctor originally from Pakistan, who had just moved there because she and her husband both found jobs at the medical school. Their son was attending Newman, and she thought it seemed pretty good, but wanted to know if I could confirm that reputation, having grown up in the area. I reassured her it is an excellent school, a good choice for her academically talented son. When I was in high school, I had many friends at Newman (all Jewish) despite the fact that our schools were academic and sport rivals. I don't think any of us even knew what a Muslim was back then, much less met one in class. Public education in New Orleans is in shameful tatters, which breaks my heart. I try to see the current situation as an opportunity to rebuild from the ground up, much better than before. I believe the same is true for New Orleans healthcare - a great opportunity - which is why I was looking for a job there. If one does not have a strong Pollyanna component to one's outlook, the future there is very bleak without education and healthcare, notwithstanding current Katrina issues, which only highlighted a pre-existing disaster.
|
|
|
Post by doctork on Jun 14, 2007 22:10:13 GMT -5
Parents would do well to send their children to private or religious schools/create heir own/homeschool. I know not everybody can do it, but I think everybody who can would be wise to do so. Vouchers would be great. I didn't intend to hijack the thread, just to throw in an aside about hart's experience with her daughter's school. If people want to discuss it further, hart is probably right that it belongs under politics. I'm OK with this thread for a discussion of schools; the topic is Graduation, and one gets to graduation by proceeding through some sort of school. I believe it is important to have a strong public school system, and also to have choices. Some public school districts are terrific with no need for private education, though one may choose it. Other school districts are like New Orleans, total failures; those families deserve to have the voucher option to use their tax dollars for a good education. This is being done in Milwaukee with many reports of success. I understand those vouchers are used mostly by inner city parents to send their children to (mostly parochial) private schools, which are better. I think such "competition" compels the public schools to improve. In our family, we've chosen the schools needed to meet our kids' needs. It's been mostly public schools, but our ADHD kid needed private high school. Her younger brother liked the looks of her school, so he went there for his middle school years, then returned to the public system for greater diversity in high school. All three have chosen a public university education, though only one stayed in-state. A hit to the wallet as out-of-state residents, but I'm glad we had the choice. At my high school senior son's honors ceremony this week, almost a quarter of the class (about 75 of 300) graduated with honors and scholarship awards, yet probably half of those chose the local community college for their next step, including the valedictorian. Most were motivated by the low cost, because even with scholarships, and even with in-state tuition breaks, the University of Washington is pricing itself out of the range of many middle class families. That seems sad - the best public university unavailable to qualified students because costs are too high for the average family.
|
|
|
Post by joew on Jun 14, 2007 22:59:13 GMT -5
Maybe 15 years ago a (public) high school classmate of mine served on a committee which the school committee had appointed to consider some question which I forget. Our public schools have always been considered very good. My classmate, as part of his duties, observed a number of high school classes. He told me he was shcoked at the disorder in the classes and at the disrespect toward the teachers. When the disorder and disrespect in a good high school is shocking, it seems to me that the system is beyond repair. Maybe in the lower grades, before the children become rebellious, public schools can work. But if we can teach everybody the three r's and a bit of civics before they leave eighth grade, non-public high schools, made available to all by a voucher system, can provide an orderly and disciplined atmosphere for secondary education for those who want it.
When public schools were created, they were established and run by the local communities. Now it seems to me that they are under the thumb of the federal Department of Education, the corresponding state agencies, and the federal courts, and local control is severely attenuated by the bureaucracies. Parents should reclaim control of their children's education.
|
|
|
Post by SeattleDan on Jun 15, 2007 0:55:14 GMT -5
Ah, it's always the federal gov't that does education in. Actually, there is a sense that I agree. The NO-CHILD-LEFT-BEHIND act makes every classroom a teach to the test operation.
I received a wonderful publci school education. I had wonderful teachers, by and large, (minus the lecherous Biology Teacher, who wasn't that bad as a teacher, but he eventually had to 'quit') and I cherish those days educationally. Home-schooling is for those who don't want their kids to learn the evils of Darwinism.
|
|
|
Post by slb2 on Jun 15, 2007 1:08:15 GMT -5
Oh shush, danno. ![;)](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/smiley/wink.png) Homeschooling is not only religious-based. I have several friends who homeschool and it's more to meet their children's needs than anything they want to "keep" from their kids. The NCLB mandate begun with Bush's presidency has had an awful effect on my son. He's a late reader and the school, in their sweaty pursuit of the Blue Star Award, or whatever it is, has nearly turned him off of reading. I've persisted, found material that cues his interest and I read to him every day. He loves the interaction and will sometimes read ahead when I'm busy and he's eager to find out what will happen. But at school? He hates to read because there's so much pressure and intensity that the teachers don't even seem to realize they evoke. Why can't my Joe have bookie for fifth grade next year? ![:(](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/smiley/sad.png)
|
|
|
Post by doctork on Jun 15, 2007 9:29:51 GMT -5
My own public high school described above was totally abandoned by the state and the feds. It was the school community who rebuilt it after Katrina.
OTOH, our state Office of the Superintendant of Public Instruction (OSPI) requires a two year "Culminating Project" be completed by seniors before graduation. My four-year-honor-student son completed every step successfully along the two years, and then in his final presentation, he spoke for 8 minutes instead of 10 minutes, so he was failed on the whole project and barred from graduation.
I had to spend two weeks battling the principal, the school district, the OSPI, and finally appealed to my state representative who chairs the Education Committee. Spencer was allowed to present again, passed, and is graduating. In spite of this cockamamie state OSPI scheme, he did get a good education.
His project had to do with teaching Sunday School, because he used to want to be a teacher. Not any more, not after that experience.
|
|
|
Post by gailkate on Jun 15, 2007 11:17:52 GMT -5
K, your story supports my belief that basic curriculum belongs at the Federal and not State level. We, too, went through a mess with a state curriculum and testing system that was far too "imaginative" and unfair. Now we've switched to one that's far too rigid and leads to teaching to the test.
But I'd like to see us work on improving public education rather than abandoning it. NCLB was never funded and didn't set thoughtful standards. I'd like a national requirement for 4 years of US and World history. Reading and writing requirements should be standardized (though that's very hard to do) so that kids can't breeze through with creative writing and never learn standard English. In addition to math classes separated into algebra, geometry, calculus, etc., I'd like a core of practical math and statistical reasoning.
And if we're willing to give vouchers to religious schools, then we'll have to give them to Muslim, Wiccan, you name it. Maybe that's ok, but I prefer total separation of church and public education.
|
|
|
Post by doctork on Jun 15, 2007 13:24:29 GMT -5
Even homeschoolers taught by their parents have to meet state and local school district standards to fulfill legal requirements that all kids between 7 and 16 must be "in school." So any Wiccan or Muslim schools should be in compliance with those standards, regardless of funding source.
While everyone benefits from good public schools, when public education is bad, the population is paying for a product they don't receive. The voucher programs aim to correct that by providing alternatives - often those who most need vouchers (inner city kids) don't have the money for private schools.
Charter schools are still public schools, usually with unique curricula not otherwise available (math and science, the arts), but operated by private entities in accordance with local standards.
Federal and state governments outsource many functions to private for-profit entities. I believe that education can be outsourced to faith-based organizations legally and effectively, as long as those served are not proselytized to the particular faith as a requirement of receiving the service. The public gets more bang for its buck - the dollars go to the service, not the profit margin, and who knows better how to serve that community than the organizations already living and working there?
I'm not Catholic, and have never attended or sent my kids to Catholic schools; I've just observed their excellent results in comparison to the local public schools.
I work for a program that provides access to free medical care for low-income uninsured residents of our county. It is operated by the St. Luke's Foundation (religious organization) with grant funding from the state, city, and county, as well as private donations.
|
|
|
Post by gailkate on Jun 15, 2007 14:03:10 GMT -5
Many Catholic schools do provide an excellent education. They also provide religious instruction with which I disagree. Fundamentalist anything teaches positions with which I disagree: subjugation of women to men, anti-gay, anti-inferior race, "eye-for-an-eye," all sorts of versions of creation. Those are protected religious positions and they can crop up in public schools, too, but then there is recourse for parents who want the proselytizing stopped.
This is an extremely difficult area. I'd like to see inner-city parents have options, but I don't want to see teachers and school boards scapegoated for huge societal problems. Those high schools with disruptive students that Joe describes are very real, and teachers are not responsible for them. Fewer and fewer people are willing to go into teaching because it's so draining and sometimes plain dangerous. What can we do about that?
We have charter schools here, and some are terrific - definitely not all. Some continue to show abysmal student progress. We need to make all schools terrific. The standard phrase about charter schools is that they don't have to operate under all the school requirements/restrictions. That's not really clear - if we know public school requirements and restrictions are counter-productive, let's scrap them for all schools.
Millions of childless people like me and Joe pay taxes to support public education of our future citizens. He is willing to pay for vouchers, but I am not. Maybe we should all be able to designate where we want our education taxes to go. Or just a percentage - Joe's can go toward vouchers, and mine can go toward more teacher aides, musical insturments, bus trips to enriching experiences. Minneapolis just built a huge gorgeous downtown library but it can only offer limited hours. My guess is the majority of kids in school have never seen it.
|
|
|
Post by Brit on Jun 15, 2007 14:36:40 GMT -5
Now you have got me going - but I won't.
There are too many people extolling the virtues of their religion or faith and rearing children to consider anyone else who is not of their faith as being inferior. In some cases, the fundamentalist sector of these faiths wish to see the entire demise of another's faith or religion.
This, in turn, foments dislike - or even hatred - of anyone who is not of that faith or religion.
A secular society, in my opinion, is the only way forward.
I'm with gailkate on this one.
|
|
|
Post by joew on Jun 15, 2007 16:12:52 GMT -5
My thinking starts from the premise that one of the basic duties and rights of parents is to educate their children, in the broadest sense of the term — to bring them up. Part of this education is education in the narrower sense of the term — schooling. For well over 100 years, the "default" choice for parents to fulfill this oblligation has been pyblic schools. But as the Supreme Court acknowledged in 1922 (if memory serves as to the date — maybe it was '23 or '24) in Pierce v. Society of Sisters, parents retain the right to select their children's education.
When it comes to matters of religion, morality, and philosophy, parents clearly have the right and the opportunity to indoctrinate their children as they choose. If the parents are rich enough, they can look for a school which will support that indoctrination. If they are not that rich, they have to accept the "default" choice of a public education which is not permitted to support the religious teachings and values which the parents wish to inculcate, and which may well de facto support moral values (e.g., the moral equivalence of homosexual and heterosexual activity) and philosophies (e.g., skepticism) contrary to those the parents seek to instill. So one's ability to exercise one's right to educate one's children becomes a function of wealth. I suppose that is true of other things one may have to do for one's children, such as providing for health care, nutrition, and recreation. But when it comes to the things we think essential, such as health care and nutrition, we have developed and are developing programs to enable parents to provide these things (e.g., food stamps and healt insurance) in ways which do not eliminate the ability of parents to make meaningful choices. For less central things, such as recreation, you still don't get to play polo unless you are rich or lucky.
To me, the good thing about vouchers is that they empower the parents to make the decisions. The tax dollars go to the parents. The parents, not the government, decides where they will go. (When I worked for the federal government, your tax dollars were going to my church.)
|
|
|
Post by brutus on Jun 15, 2007 18:37:37 GMT -5
I gotta wonder if some folks object to vouchers because of possible strings that could be attached. Since many private schools are run by religious organizations, they tend to teach based on the beliefs of the particular church that operates the school. It may be that the government may mandate some teachings that are contrary to the beliefs inherent to these schools. Without being funded via vouchers, they schools are left more free to teach as they wish. ~B~
|
|
|
Post by doctork on Jun 15, 2007 19:27:03 GMT -5
Remember that vouchers are an option to use a private school, not a requirement. No parent is required to use a voucher for their child at a religious school. They may stay in the public school, or use the voucher at a non-sectarian private school. In many Catholic schools, it is common for non-Catholics to be excused from religion class and go to study hall instead, if they prefer - no forced religion.
The restriction most commonly avoided by charter schools is the union contract. They may choose the best qualified teacher instead of the one with greatest seniority; have a longer school day or school year so that students learn more; pay higher salaries to those teachers who are better.
At Franklin (my former high school, now a charter), the most useful feature of charter status was being to rebuild immediately instead of waiting for NOLA school board permission and money. That is why Franklin has been open for 18 months, while most other public schools are still closed. Almost every Franklin teacher returned despite the lack of union "protection," and many gave up higher-paying jobs they had obtained elsewhere in the interim, in order to do so.
I believe that traditional public schools threatened with funding losses (due to parents choosing alternate schools) will improve the public schools, to attract and retain these students. We should improve public schools anyway, but successful efforts to date have been too rare.
We should also count our blessings and remember that in most of the world there are no free public schools; our worst are better than that. But we can do better.
|
|
|
Post by doctork on Jun 15, 2007 19:44:50 GMT -5
I gotta wonder if some folks object to vouchers because of possible strings that could be attached. Since many private schools are run by religious organizations, they tend to teach based on the beliefs of the particular church that operates the school. It may be that the government may mandate some teachings that are contrary to the beliefs inherent to these schools. Without being funded via vouchers, they schools are left more free to teach as they wish. ~B~ ~B~ I think you are correct. Some schools may refuse to accept vouchers because there may be actual or implied strings attached, which they would prefer to avoid. That happens in health care - some clinics sponsored by religious organizations refuse federal funding because of this. I'd note that Catholic hospitals do not allow abortion except for reasons consistent with Catholic religious beliefs, but almost all receive tax support in the form of Medicare & Medicaid funds. Even if the Medicaid or Medicare funds are from taxpayers who are not Catholic or who support abortion rights.
|
|