Stimate domn,
Daca eu incurc subiectul, fiti va rog amabil si descurcatil dumneavoastra.
Nu de alta dare eu traiesc de mai mult de jumatate din viata mea intro
societate in care subiectul "incurcat" cum considerati dumneavoastra creeaza
bazele torelantei intre religii de peste 200 de ani
Si daca nu sunt clar, sper sa intelegeti ca valoarea credintei in cetatean
nu presupune si decalararea unei anume credinte fie chiar si majoritara asupra
altora.
Oricum insa daca vreti sa taiem firul in patru va astept pe grupul Separarea
biserici deStat
va voi trimite o invitatie speciala.
Vasile Bouleanu .
mousastefan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
--- In [email protected], Vasile Bouleanu
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> Cred ca este timpul sa incepem sa intelegem necesitatea
> separarii cetateanului in viata publica de credinciosul din
> fiecare dintre noi.
cred ca perpetuati o confuzie. Exista doua subiecte:
1) separarea bisericii de stat
2) viata religioasa in societate
D-voastra incurcati subiectul 1) cu subiectul 2).
E imposibil ca in viata publica credinciosul sa nu se manifeste.
Este intolerant sa nu permitem credinciosului sa se manifeste
in viata publica.
Este dictatorial a interzice religiosului sa se manifeste
in viata sociala.
Este o incalcare a libertatii de exprimare a interzice religiosului
sa se exprime in viata publica.
>
> Persona ma decalr deschis un suporter al totalei separari a
> Bisericii de Stat inclusiv oprirea oricarei contributii de la buget
> pentru orice cult indiferent cat de numeros este.
> Prezenta icoanelor si a pretinsei educatii religioase in scoli
> este o blasfemie si ogreseala care creeaza o falsa credinta un
> sentiment de pretinsa apartenenta religioasa dar care nu educa
> credinta in copii. Locul credintei si educatiei religioase raman
> Bisericile indiferent de denominatie .
Vedeti?
D-voastra incurcati subiectul separarii bisericii de stat cu
subiectul libertatii de exprimare religioasa in societate.
Un om religios isi exprima dragostea fata de aproape in functie
de religia de care apartine. Crestinii ortodocsi folosesc icoanele.
Este dreptul lor la libera exprimare.
> Modelul USA ramane in opinia mea cea mai buna forma de
> coexistenta intre stat si Biserica.
Aici va referiti la separarea bisericii de stat.
Numai ca in contextul sistemului de invatamant public american
modelul SUA este un model falit.
In sistemul public american, simbolurile religioase sunt
interzise, in schimb simbolurile ateiste, simbolurile noilor
religii de tip "multiculturalist" ori "corect politic" sunt
afisate pe peretii scolilor, ba multiplicate printr-o industrie
specializata.
Sistemul public american este falit, produce ciurucuri,
motiv ca SUA este nevoita sa importeze forta de munca calificata,
caci absolventii de liceu americani nu stiu matematica, nu stiu
sa citeasca, sunt total needucati.
Motiv ca parintii americani migreaza in suburbii, unde isi dau
copiii la scoli private, in majoritatea cazurilor, religioase
(unde se afiseaza simboluri religioase pe pereti).
partea interesanta este ca in aceste scoli private, de tip
religios (foarte multe catolice) studentii sunt evrei, musulmani,
hindu, samd.
> Oare cum se justifica orbirea legiuitorilor romani in fata
> experientei celei mai puternice republici din lume condusa
> democratic ?
cum se justifica orbirea d-voastra, a unui cetatean american
care nu vede ce se intampla in jurul sau?
Stiati ca in scolile publice din marile metropole americane,
numarul copiilor albi a scazut sub 4%?
Stiti de ce?
Fiindca parintii s-au saturat de educatia publica in scolile
metropolitane.
Nu numai atata, copiii ramasi inregimentati in scolile publice,
sunt copiii imigrantilor, majoritatea saraci, iar sistemul
public american isi bate joc de ei. Parintii lor au emigrat
din tarile lor ca sa dobandeasca o viata mai buna pentru
ei si copiii lor, in schimb primesc cadou din partea statului SUA
un sistem public de invatamant falit care transforma copiii
lor in scursori sociale.
Va dau un link la un articol pe tema aceasta:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070107/ap_on_re_us/mayors_schools
Mayors seek to take charge of schools
By NANCY ZUCKERBROD, AP Education Writer
WASHINGTON - The statistics tell a sorry tale about the public
schools in America's capital. A majority of fourth- and eighth-
graders are failing to read or do math at basic levels. Roughly four
in five schools are not meeting achievement goals under the federal
No Child Left Behind law. Just 43 percent of students graduate from
high school in five years.
The new mayor, Adrian Fenty, got an earful about the situation during
last year's campaign. "I heard repeatedly, 'Fix the schools.' It was
a tidal wave," Fenty said.
So he is trying to do what a dozen other city leaders around the
nation have done: gain control over the schools. For Fenty, that
means convincing the city council and Congress to support his plan to
require the superintendent to report to him and to further limit the
authority of the elected school board. A majority of council members
have signaled a willingness to back the new mayor.
The problem for Fenty and his colleagues is that mayors generally
lack the power to overhaul schools.
"Mayors are held accountable for something they have no
responsibility for," said Fritz Edelstein, who recently stepped down
as a senior adviser to the U.S. Conference of Mayors.
In most places, elected school boards and the superintendents they
hire govern school districts. It is a structure set up about a
century ago to insulate schools from political strife and corruption
in city government.
Yet it has not always worked as planned.
For example, before a mayoral takeover of New York City's schools, an
investigation into a Bronx school board Bronx found that members
routinely misused district personnel and resources once ordering X-
rated pay-per-view movies.
Those kind of problems, plus low voter turnout for school board
elections and sagging test scores, have fueled a movement since the
1990s for mayoral control of schools. Besides New York, it has
happened in Boston, Chicago, Cleveland and Harrisburg, Pa.
The California Legislature gave the Los Angeles' mayor partial
control over schools. But a judge last month struck down that law,
saying it violated that state's constitution. The mayor is appealing.
Mayoral control of schools is being debated in Albuquerque, N.M., and
Seattle too.
City leaders and their allies make the case that better schools help
make cities prosper. Mayors say they are better equipped to take on
the infighting, inertia and high turnover rates associated with
school boards and the superintendents who report to them.
New York's mayor, Michael Bloomberg, put it this way when Fenty and
members of the District of Columbia City Council visited
recently: "There's an old story that a camel is a racehorse designed
by a committee and there's a lot more truth to that than not,"
Bloomberg said. "You don't run things by committee. You don't try to
come to consensus when it's our children's future."
Such statements have earned Bloomberg criticism from people who say
he has failed to seek community input and operate in a transparent
way, said David Bloomfield, who heads a program at Brooklyn College
that trains school administrators.
Bloomfield said there has been an increase in no-bid school contracts
since the mayoral takeover in 2002 and that many parents feel there
is no place to air concerns without an elected board.
Michael Kirst, a professor emeritus at Stanford University and an
expert on school governance, said a takeover makes the system less
democratic.
"Before mayoral control, you'd go to your school board member and
raise hell," Kirst said. He said the trade-off is "strong, integrated
leadership."
Bloomberg, a Republican in his second term, says he has broad support
among voters, including for his handling of schools. A recent public
opinion poll put his approval ratings around 70 percent.
Ken Wong, a school governance expert at Brown University, analyzed
test scores in about a dozen cities with mayors in charge of schools
from 1999 to 2003. The results showed modest but statistically
significant progress in reading and math for elementary and middle-
school students. Wong said data is insufficient to make the same
judgment about high school students.
"Mayors are turnaround artists, not saviors. Our analysis suggests
that mayors can steer the ship in the right direction, but that there
is still a long way to go before their districts achieve acceptable
levels of student achievement," Wong wrote in a report accompanying
his analysis.
Tom Payzant, who recently stepped down after a decade as the mayor's
appointed school superintendent in Boston, says it was important for
him to be part of the mayor's Cabinet.
"When you think about trying to align policies and programs that
affect children, youth and families, there is a much greater
opportunity than there is in the system where the municipal
government is totally separate from the school government," Payzant
said.
Critics say it is precisely because mayors have so many other issues
to address that schools should be managed separately.
"Mayors have a lot on their plate. It's a wonder that some of these
mayors think they also have time to take over public schools," said
Anne Bryant, executive director of the National School Boards
Association.
Yet Fenty, sworn in last week as Washington's mayor, said he would
make the time.
"We have a crisis on our hands," Fenty said in a news conference
describing his bid for school control. "I am asking today for that
responsibility to be placed squarely on my shoulders."
