[talaniman]

No, there are other solutions.

Like despite differences we can cooperate for a common good?

[Wondergirl]

Like despite differences we can cooperate for a common good?

And wasn't that the entire point of Obama's speech?

Without trying very hard, I can think of ten ways for religious schools to cooperate and coordinate.

[talaniman]

A joint bake sale to benefit needy hungry kids? I know you like to bake. :D, :)

[Wondergirl]

A joint bake sale to benefit needy hungry kids? I know you like to bake. :D, :)

I also like to cook -- so a joint picnic with grilled meats and lots of homemade side dishes and desserts.

A joint school dance in the gym.

Combined art or music classes.

[tomder55]

Now you are questioning the contributions that Catholic Schools bring to the table ? Let me make it clear ;Catholic Schools are NOT a source of division .So the Emperor's premise is fundamentally flawed . He must be thinking of madrassas .

[Wondergirl]

now you are questioning the contributions that Catholic Schools bring to the table ?

Huh? WHO is questioning Catholic school contributions??

[Athos]

And wasn't that the entire point of Obama's speech?

Yes, it was, and it was a good speech.

But, his comment on religious education was not good. No matter how people here break down the paragraph in question, the words are very clear. The very fact that some here are going to extreme lengths to turn his words upside down should tell you that he misspoke.

I like Obama but I think he should be taken to task when he says something he shouldn't. This is not the first time his words have been too far ahead of his brain.

[Wondergirl]

Yes, it was, and it was a good speech.

But, his comment on religious education was not good. No matter how people here break down the paragraph in question, the words are very clear. The very fact that some here are going to extreme lengths to turn his words upside down should tell you that he misspoke.

I like Obama but I think he should be taken to task when he says something he shouldn't. This is not the first time his words have been too far ahead of his brain.

I see absolutely nothing against Catholic schools (or Protestant ones) in what he said. “If towns remain divided—if Catholics have their schools and buildings and Protestants have theirs, if we can’t see ourselves in one another and fear or resentment are allowed to harden—that too encourages division and discourages cooperation.”

He is speaking about DIVISION, minds and hearts not being able to meet, and not about the quality of the schools.

[Athos]

We've come full circle. I think the discussion is done. Both sides have said their piece and there's really nothing more to say.

No point in starting over again.

[Wondergirl]

We've come full circle. I think the discussion is done. Both sides have said their piece and there's really nothing more to say.

No point in starting over again.

Good wiggling. Should I close this thread?

[Wondergirl]

>thread closed, then reopened<

[tomder55]

>threads merged<

Just thought I'd ask since I don't think there is a consensus or agreement that the last word was said on the emperor's offensive words about Catholic Schools.
You see ,freedom of association is an implied right guaranteed in the 1st amendment . Maybe that's his real beef. He thinks Constitutional guarantees of freedom of religion and association are destructive and divisive .

[Wondergirl]

Just thought I'd ask since I don't think there is a consensus or agreement that the last word was said on the emperor's offensive words about Catholic Schools.

He didn't say anything about Catholic schools that he didn't say about Protestant schools, and it wasn't offensive.

You see ,freedom of association is an implied right guaranteed in the 1st amendment . Maybe that's his real beef. He thinks Constitutional guarantees of freedom of religion and association are destructive and divisive .

Ireland has a 1st Amendment?

[Athos]

>threads merged<

Just thought I'd ask since I don't think there is a consensus or agreement that the last word was said on the emperor's offensive words about Catholic Schools.
You see ,freedom of association is an implied right guaranteed in the 1st amendment . Maybe that's his real beef. He thinks Constitutional guarantees of freedom of religion and association are destructive and divisive .

Huh?

[talaniman]

This has nothing to do with rights or freedoms but in the difference of opinion how his words were interpreted by various people. The last I checked we all have the right to that opinion whether we agree or not.

I guess we can all spin, debate, and call names, but at some point our differences have to be bridged. Obviously not today .

[speechlesstx]

No, there are other solutions.

So he wants to keep them in separate schools?

[speechlesstx]

>thread closed, then reopened<

So that's your idea of an honest debate, closing the thread?

[speechlesstx]

This has nothing to do with rights or freedoms but in the difference of opinion how his words were interpreted by various people. The last I checked we all have the right to that opinion whether we agree or not.

I guess we can all spin, debate, and call names, but at some point our differences have to be bridged. Obviously not today .

I can respect your opinion on a subject, but not denial of his plain words which is how this thread started.

[Tuttyd]

Why is it you don't hold the others here to that standard? You let much more egregious violations of your standard go on a regular basis.

I wasn't trying accusing you of manufacturing a limited quote. If it sounded like that then I apologize.Obviously you didn't write the article- just posted it.

The main issue from your point of view seems to be an honest debate. I would suggest that for their to be an honest debate on this issue then we need to go beyond what was quoted in the feature article.

As I said in a previous post:

(a) The speech references schools as symbols of history.

(b) He then goes on to talk about actual schools. (This is the reference found in the article).

(b) The speech goes on to talk about symbolism again.

If you want an honest debate then I think people need to talk about a,b and c and not just b

I don't think I have come down on one side or the other.

[speechlesstx]

I wasn't trying accusing you of manufacturing a limited quote. If it sounded like that then I apologize.Obviously you didn't write the article- just posted it.

The main issue from your point of view seems to be an honest debate. I would suggest that for their to be an honest debate on this issue then we need to go beyond what was quoted in the feature article.

As I said in a previous post:

(a) The speech references schools as symbols of history.

(b) He then goes on to talk about actual schools. (This is the reference found in the article).

(b) The speech goes on to talk about symbolism again.

If you want an honest debate then I think people need to talk about a,b and c and not just b

I don't think I have come down on one side or the other.

It was my choice to focus on what I wanted to discuss. If you want to call it symbolism then fine, but among those things (all of which I acknowledged) that encourage division and discourage cooperation, and the complaint from Catholics, was separate schools for Catholics and Protestants.

Is that true, were they singled out specifically? Yes. Was that not the complaint from Catholics? Yes, again.

The dishonesty came in those denying he singled out segregated religious schools. He did indeed and that is the subject of my post. It's not rocket science. If someone wants to focus on the other aspects they can start their own thread, this one is about the effects of segregated religious schools.