I am cynical about politics, i'll tell you straight out, and i don't post on the subject or deal with it at all because of my cynisicm...


so had this of been a political discussion well I'd tip my hat at ya...but its not so maybe next time...LOL

Exactly. What I find interesting is that I am often accused of being a Christian apologist or a moron who doubts evolution simply because I question evolution or try to understand the Christian perspective.

For me I'm interested in understanding things, not in taking sides or choosing a belief.


To answer MLOR's post I started this thread because my husband is a Greek speaker and he told me the other day that roughly translated when you use the word Skeptic in Greek it means "THINKING" whereas he's noticed online English speaking people tend to use it to mean "doubter." This made me realize that I have a lot of time wading through crap and fighting online because people are so quick to try to slot you on one side or the other.

So if I question something, somehow I'm ascribed a belief system based on my questions. Whereas the reality is that I'm just thinking and examining what was being said.



(Not sure what your rapist comment is MLOR, as someone who had dealt with that in the past I don't think it's funny in the slightest btw)

This is exactly right. Sheri I see what you are saying but many times your posts are clearly aimed at "debunking religion." And that is most definitely an agenda.

But that's your prerogative to do so. Only it can't be called "skepticism" its really an agenda. Skepticism is a method, not an agenda, and not a position. In my humble opinion.

Thank you so much for posting this. You see, up until a year ago I worked at Nasa Langley Research Center and a lot of people REALLY don't understand the concept of skepticism or the scientific method. In discussion they assume I am close minded because even if I agree in my heart with their outcome, my head needs the deductive process to back it up. A perfect example would be global warming. Do I believe that global warming exists? Yes. Do I believe that man is a contributing factor? Yes I do. However, no matter what I believe in my heart of hearts I also know that there is no hard scientific data to back it up. And I will correct anyone who says otherwise. No matter how good their intentions may be the scientific process has to be an honest one otherwise environmentalists are no better than the current regime that regularly rewrites research outcomes to match their agenda.

Oooh that is a great example with Global Warming, excellent. When I see the data that shows global warming is occurring I can agree that this is true, but as for the evidence of the human impact or what the outcome is going to be, I see that there is an economic agenda attached to global warming issues.

That's a great example. If you question the data, you suddenly are a flat earther who lives in denial. Its like NO, I just need more information.

Awesome post!

I was just about to comment on that as well.

EXCELLENT post Nocturnal_angst.

And welcome to UM.

Well said..good for you...I liked how you worded that

there is a theoretical framework or paradigm in which we are constructing our sources as viable, there is a standard or criteria for 'truths'..is it coherent? is it fertile?? does it have a capacity for self correction? does it mininimize Ad Hoc adjustments after the fact.....blah blah.....


i am not observing anything more than naive realsim and axioms being addressed here...

This is called a SYSTEM. You operate based on a system. This is what I addressed to MLOR earlier. Accepting someone elses system as a basis for your thinking is a way of avoiding responsibility for the way you operate in the method of Skepticism.

You often mention constructs and paradigms and such things in addressing me. As for me I don't ascribe to things like this, so I often have a hard time understanding what you are saying.






I rarely trust statistics because they can be manipulated. I rarely have conclusive opinion about what is a truth. Where I and you differ is in that you don't have conclusive opinions in regard to what is moral. I recall the situation with the man sodomizing the child where you stated for about 15 pages that you wouldn't interfere to stop a man sodomizing a child and I had suggested I think that anyone would do that.

That is not an agenda, but a reaction based on a moral belief.


An agenda is based on a disconnection from others and a judgment. So in saying "Those people over there are not like me because I would not do this because this is wrong" is just a way of segregating people into the piles of the "Good and Bad" without......and here's the key, without ever having to actually DEAL with any of the people.

This might be why you couldn't say that you would interfere with the pedophile because the mode is "AVOID" those who are causing harm.


My angle is to UNDERSTAND those who are causing harm and to get involved. I want to see what is going on in the minds of those who might otherwise be categorized by me as harmful.

In the end the axioms are social constructs. The right and wrongs are social constructs or systems. I have never been one who could follow along with systems that in some way seemed immoral to me.

I think this is because I am a skeptic at heart.

Even the data that suggests the existence of global warming is very questionable. What we know is this, we have had the ability to read the earths' surface temperature for only 150 years. Now, that period can be broken up into three different periods. Period one was relatively warm but we had no data to compare it to. Period two we saw a dropping of the earth's surface temperature that peaked in the 70's when scientists (a lot of the same scientists who are behind the global warming research today) came to the conclusion that we were headed toward another ice age because of the man made pollutants being released into the stratosphere. Now we are in period three which is only slightly warmer than period one. The question is, do we have enough data to accurately make statistical comparisons and outcomes after only a period of 150 years within an eco system that is millions of years old? Most scientists who aren't under immense pressure from special interest groups would laugh at the notion. The one thing we do know about massive climate changing events like the ice age is that they last for thousands sometimes tens of thousands of years. We can also look at geographical information like fossil matter in the Rocky Mountains and know that at some time before the ice-age they were under water. So with this type of geological information we have to ask ourselves what are "normal" ocean levels? We have only had manned exhibitions to the polar ice caps for the last hundred years and satellite imagery for the last fifty years. So how do we "know" what the "normal" mass is? The answer to all these questions is simply, we just don't know. So with no clear evidence that a problem even exists we can't even begin to extrapolate man's impact on the problem. In the end we have to ask ourselves, is it possible that we are causing a problem? The answer is probably. Will it hurt us to clean up our acts and the environment we all eat, sleep, f#ck, and breathe in? Probably not. The question is, can we really get people to make real honest to goodness sacrifices for the betterment of mankind and our planet? Sadly, I have to say, probably not.

True, your dispute is with hyperactive, if you recall it was his pov...but i will speak for him, in knowing him.. He is very clear on his moral positions he lives them .. .... he is also very real and was giving an opinion from his framework, no kids lives inthe wilderness, purposefully stays to himself ... etc........ which he was clear about..... really what pedophile is gonna let you catch them???
the question itself was flawed, even though I see that you are making a judgment based on this within your framework..neither i nor doc... think in this fashion....so wouldn't a free thinker try to see our pov too??? i have not yet read any posts where you 'get us" lol....


I understand you, many feel as you do, they see a moral dictum that is clear, mapped out, and it works for them...


our position is this the morality of some dictums are lacking, and we choose to set our standards at a place with what works for us... we use our lifes as our message....it may not work for everyone, and thats kool but it works for us....

you can't honestly be suggesting we have no ethical code LOL....

i gotta tell you love i can't say i am jsut this, or that cut and dry... all the time, that is for me naive, and not realistic... for me mind you..........depending on what it is I am as human as the next guy....


At this point i am leanring, exploring, weighing, growing, I can't really attach a label as of yet, when I say that a free thinker dosen't limit their flexability of mind or capacity to be responsive to changing circumstances i mean it, I get alot of pov's on um and it adds a richness to the idea/beelif pov whatever you call it.... i'm exploring...

Who is OUR? Again that's another system? You see what I mean? I think as an individual. Not as a member of a group.

I find it interesting for someone who claims to eschew "sheep like mentality" you very often will claim that others give your opinion more veracity rather than just having the chutzpah to stand your ground alone.

Why thank you MMW...oh and I meant in my post I'm more skeptical than a debunker. I don't attack. At least I hope I don't.... eeek. Anyway, yeah. Jody

re read the post start with yours first, then mine... I am addressing something you have great issue with since he isn't here and i'm his freind i feel in this case i can speak for him..if you want i can e-mail him for his POV..

wow thats a first i have no chooneys, ask my hubby who wears the pants and my friends...lol just a joke.. my firends are gonna love this someone sees me as a demure flower......ah
true as much as you are fighting it free thinking involves letting go of limits, and I can see you are trying, you have come a long way...

OMG, that is the MOST condesending crap I've ever read. What do you personally get out of making a statement like that?

What I think is funny is that I've actually become more religious in the months of my absence so her comments that I've somehow changed for the better flies in the face of everything she's said about religion.

Exactly what proof do you have that says religion does not belong in politics, government, public schooling... etc? Religious people are citizens with the same rights as any other citizen, so why would you assume it is incorrect for them to participate in those actions, institutions and activities that are open to all citizens? Do you realize that by that statement you are actually reflecting the thinking you seem to blame the religious of having?
So, everyone has this right... except the religious?

How would you do that? Why would you do that?



You said it better than I was going to.

Presumably the one using the method?



You exam the physical world, argue with other people, and measure what they believe against what the natural world says, and everyone runs everything through the filter of critical examination and evidence-based reasoning. Evolution is a good example of this; it was introduced by two men (Charles Darwin and Alfred Wallace) who found their way to it separately of each other, was attacked mercilessly and criticized endlessly to grind out any falsehoods and weaknesses in the original theory, until it has been examined and proven (i.e. stood up through countless falsifiable tests) so many times that it might as well be called the Law of Evolution.



I'm not exactly sure what you mean when you say "drawing the line". Are you talking about accepting what other people say? Obviously, skepticism wouldn't rely solely on what other people say, or take it as a given fact to build conclusions on.

I might add that skepticism is ultimately a communal activity. Usually even the best skeptic, without outside input, can be constrained by prejudices they don't even think about. However, in an environment where people can bounce ideas off of each other, and (more importantly) cut opponents' arguments and beliefs to shred through examination of the natural world, then you can filter your way to a more accurate view of the world.

Keep in mind that I'm saying "more" accurate. Skepticism makes no claims to understand the "absolute truth" of the world, assuming such a thing exists.

truethat!!!! Great post Guardsman

Sorry true, I meant the non-sexual type. (I meant rape of the status -quo.)
I've escaped attempted rapes on five different occasions and it's no laughing matter.
My apologies

I agree and we all carry some form of predjudice in us whether consciously or not.

IAS,he means seperation of church & state.

If anyone has an agenda-it is christianity (Religion)!!

Religion is like love & sex,it's a personal matter ! Keep your toys at home.

Sure you can vote-go to school-run for office.

But seperation of church and state is necessary to protect everyone-including you.

If you want to teach creationism as a fact then send your kids to Christian school-but not with my tax dollars .

Not heard of seperation of church and state? It was pretty much set up by King Henry VIII To keep the pope out of the kings business - Rather trivial reason, he wanted devorce.
Religion should not belong in the gov't - look at the middle east. Fancy living there? No, because you being a christian would be stoned if you preached the bible. Seperation of church and state means there is religious tolerance. Or would you perfer religious intolerance - ironically by hardlined religious parties.
I'd rather public schools not have religious study, math and english as the main priorities. I'd rather have science math and english, as the main priorities of public schoolings. With the added lesson of religious-education (No idea if you have that in America, but we have that in the UK, it's took by year 7's to year 10's. If you want to continue and get a whole gcse level, you can drop PSE and take RE. Or visa versa. If not, you can get two half-GCSE's which can be combined.) - PSE = "Personal, Social and Health Education"


Didn't read the part where I stated "I think everyone has the right to..."?

Of course, my personal stance is that religion in public schools is the LEAST of the problems in American public schools. Religion (except comparative) isn't taught in public schools here. Unfortunately, neither is math, science, and English.

It was no secret to me that you were searching maybe just to you or not, in all fairness how coudl i really know??I can't.... .....what I observe is one who is honoring her truth..what does religion have to do with it ??? many folks use UM to find themselves..

hey MW, not to worry i will have something nice to say to you too hon...

genuinely true, good for you hon...

It takes great courage to honor ones truth and as far as I'm concerned i tip my hat too you...

Ummm ya darlin' don't bother m'kay?

You are joking right?? There are public schools that dont teach math science or English??........Maths and English are the top two most important subjects in schools..well so I thought.

In the UK and Ireland, if you are applying for a job...the top qualifications required are Math and English...if you don't have them, you are screwed!!

What she means I think is that they don't teach them effectively. The idea that religion in our public school system is what is wrong with it, is ridiculous. There is no religion taught in public schools here. And interestingly the alternative schools (especially here in NY) that generally have a better reputation for a good education ARE the religious schools.

Catholic schools for example are where most affluent parents will send their children to get a better education, no matter if the child is Catholic or not.

Precisely TrueThat.

I attended an all girls catholic school in my 1st couple of years as a high school student...then moved accross the country and had to attend a comprehencive school...however it was still a catholic school also..only this time we wernt taught by nuns, like i was once in St Marys high school

Anyhoo...I guess since were I come from - N.Ireland, it is mainly based on christianity, so we don't have many people claiming to be atheist...or Jewish for that matter... As you and MW live in the USA...it's a different cattle of fish...for the only atheists I have ever really spoken to are the ones on UM....so I guess sinse in your part of the world, since there are so many non religious people, they must have put a stop to teaching RE in school?? (we call it RE short for religious Studies)

Is that the situation? Im just trying to understand it all

Yep,all my husbands family's kids go to catholic School allthough they don't practice.
They are good

In the USA we have a concept of the Separation of Church and State.

Public schools are run by the government, therefore, the only thing the public schools have the authority to teach is comparative religions. In other words, they can only teach about all religions, how they impact society, but they can't be focused on or biased toward a specific religion. Most public schools, for fear of getting into trouble have actually stopped teaching comparative religions in recent years.

Unfortunately, in the USA, schools are WAY underfunded, even the best public schools are and teachers are paid abysmally low wages in a lot of places (teachers in my state don't even make enough to live on really). Naturally good teachers don't stay teaching for long because there's no incentive for them to keep teaching. Not to mention the horrors they deal with every day including red tape, unruly kids, bad parents, and the entire system itself is antiquated in regards to cirriculum, attitude and goals.

I don't know if that answers the question... but the public schools are in bad shape in the USA. It's the proverbial elephant in the closet.

I've heard of separation of church and state. Do you know what it actually means? It means the government cannot restrict me (a citizen) from practicing whatever religion I want to practice, it does not mean that I as a religious person am not allowed to participate in government WHILE using my religious beliefs to guide my morals and decisions.

It's not much better in Germany except teachers are paid well as far as I know.

Our schools get some funding from the catholic and protestant churches so they have to teach religion in exchange.
But it's taught as semi-history and as a story.
Some of the teachers are pastors and teachers (such as art/math/german) all wrapped up in one.
It's taught in a neutral manner and the rest is up to the parents and church.

Goodness I never knew it was like that!!!...I have had to do finiance for many schools teachers and I have to ask them their gross annual income...on avarage they earn - £36,000 a year thats approx - $60,000

Over here it is beginning to become more and more intergraded with school, what that means is every school was either - Catholic or Protestant.. (well if you know anything about the troubles in N.Ireland, then you can just imagine)....so now more schools are becoming intergraded...mixing both catholic and protestants into the one school....it's safer that way. It means that a child can walk home from school and not get jumped on due to the uniform they are wearing.
It used to be you can tell if a person is catholic or Protestant by their school uniform...but with the schools now being mixed, you cant tell who is what any more.. I think its a good thing, for safety reasons....however they still have the big catholic grammar schools..and after high school, you go to a university, which is all mixed..and no uniform lol...but the students are not allowed to wear football tops though, for that does cause harm....IE - If a guy wears a Celtic skip to school...it says he is a Catholic...for he supports the Scottish team - CELTIC...and can be a victim to any loyalist ...some lads have been beaten to death for just wearing a Celtic top!...........Same with protestants...If they wear a RANGERS top...that means they are supporters of the Scottish team - that are only supported by protestants.....and it leaves them wide open to get attacked also...so the schools dont allow any football tops in their universities

Wow I had no idea you were so different over there. BM its pretty much ILLEGAL to teach anything religious in public schools.

For example you can't say Merry Christmas any more, you can only say "Happy Holidays" that sort of thing.

Teachers make about 1/2 of what your teachers make. On top of that when you live where I live the diversity weighs heavily on the ability of the school to function.

In my old neighborhood for example 272 different languages were spoken in the local highschool.

Classes are overcrowded. Example my kids have 32 kids in their classrooms.

Each of my children go to different schools. Two of them required me to pay someone to allow me to put my gas and electric bill at their location and pay them $200 bucks for letting me do it just to get my kids into a school that is decent.

My second son went to a Catholic School for a while and tested in the top 97% of the country. So I'm seeing that religion doesn't really do any harm at all.

I believe in school uniforms for many reasons. I wish they'd do it in the States and Germany

Is there any legal reference to this? I've heard many people say how it is illegal. I always assumed it to be a bunch of hype from non-christian parents who detested their child to have marry christmas said to them and blew it out of proportion.

All my teachers said Marry Christmas to me..every single one of them.

Then again, I live in a Christian dominate area; so I highly doubt there would be protest.

sis, the truth is due to the stndardized testing implemented by the no child left behind act, the teachers teach to the test (mainly language arts and math) they do learn these things here but they are using a 6o's based curriculum so htat is hwt MW s saying i left the school sstem due to a prison like enviorment which doesn't mimic real life at all and I felt i could provide better, esepcailly socialization it is a joke... and the homework that is given even after th huge study that was done and as all parents know it is ineffective for what it claims to do , jsut amoung other things it woudln't be until I left and talked with teacher friends that i evn knew the curriculum was so bad on top of it..............now in my state the public schools are really bad ,the private are a bit better, yet they still do the testing and the area has alot to do with the education.. .... the best schools in the nation are the palos verdes schools and the college prep schools as far as curriculum goes... till now ' Charters' and thats what we are in its an offshoot of the public school payed for by the system and the curriculim is innovative and all the best ideas in teaching..... they do not teach to the test because they don't need to but in order to get funding we are required to do the star testing and meet the states standards...... . in a charter since there is no brick and mortar (maintance costs) the money goes directly to the child's education... including tons of classes for me by lead teachers (experts in their chosen field) this is new it started last year..again the kdis are getting one on one education with every imaginable help possible, ...new york has jsut such a curriculum, the same innovator in Ca also put together new yorks curriculum.. any child in a charter there would be getting an education that dreams are made of.. it doesnt' get any better so far, yet in the charters ...that is the mission....and they are saying it is the wave of the future for us....i hope it beceoms the standard it greatly bugs me taht our kids get sort changed and our parents, who place thier trust in them......

Note that the word Private school, 9 times out of 10 means a Christian or religious school.

There are non religious private schools but most of them are religious. And so the argument that teaching religion in school in some ways is damaging to the students, doesn't add up to the numbers.

I think it depends how religion is taught.

In the U.S. I have no idea. I went to public schools.

All I knew is ALL my nephews and nieces (8) went to private Christian school (U.S.) and 2 are christian and the rest are not.

The two that are Christian were raised in a Christian home.

Oh I did go to Catholic school(Germany ) shortly and they were very mean-beat us kids so my grandparents immediately pulled me out.
This doesn't happen anymore.

just a bit of update MW, our teachers are actually payed very well the publivc school ones due to the teachers union, also the ones taking cut in pay in my state are the charter teachers they take a huge cut so many want to see a better system... We still teach comparative religion, and elementary kids say god bless america everyday first thing.....

now the Hs movement is predominately christian no one will dispute that, as i blelong to two christian HS groups and my charter is all christian, except for moi ....this is not an exaggeration... they carry bibles the whole nine yards..
but, the curriculim is awesome and so are the folks they are no different then me wanting what is best for thier kids and they have a huge voice and due to them it is because they stood as one they got the ear of a pres.. Bush he approved the funding for the charters....

also the curriculum isn't all god and fear of evolution, as a matter of fact its the newest understandings in sceince which is we are all interdependent, global warming is taken seriously. maybe few mention this but they are teaching to tommorows concerns ... .. bible storys are taught as literature and music is a study in the classics as is art all is included all the history of religion as it has influenced art is also included...., i feel its the only way to go and that was one of my complaints in the sytem too much is left out, give all the data all sides, and let the child decide....a contrary to popular myth they aren't all trying to segregate their kids from the main populatiion either, ......and as a NB i am embraced, its actaully ironic, and a hilarious twist for me its a blast a hoot i am having the time of my life and so is matty......who would of thought .....

Gee that is mad init?? I would feel strange living over there ...having to watch what I say lol...well when it comes to christmas....although only recently the muslim and Hindu population are now looking to have christmas banned over here...if not, changed to Winter Fest..and christmas trees are offencive, so is Santa, so now the goverment are having to look at Santa's in malls, whether to ban them completely or not....

What ever happened to - Freedom of speach?? the land of the free??


Thats not fair on them, for they have had to study hard and work their backsides off to become teachers ...and for what? ...To become a school teacher over here is a job with a lot of pride...which is why so many over here remain teachers till they reach retirement...some even extend their time and dont want to retire untill at least 65. I have 3 friends who are teachers in high schools and 2 uncles that teach...they love it...it pays well and I doubt they would change it for anything else. I always had respect for school teachers...they put up with some crap but they still enjoy their job.

At present they are now advertising for teachers to teach at colleges and universities here in the UK/Ireland...it's never off the TV!!...
I only wish i had of stuck to my 1st plan and went on to become a geography teacher...I was told thats what I was suited for...but no not me, money was too important for BM lol..but ohh well!



Goodness!! that would be so confusing....the schools over here give a selection of languages...you can pick up to 5 or 6 to learn if you require it.....but in the catholic schools..they taught us latin and Irish as well as french and Spanish.....I hated Irish and Latin...I didn't see the use for it...especially the Irish...for its only really used in the free-state in the south of Ireland
The nuns were strict, for in those kind of classes, you wernt allowed to speak in English...it was a nightmare..



That's how it was when I was in primary school (aka elementary school)...we had big classes too..up to 30 pupils per class....my mom told me that in her day there was 50-60 pupils in the classroom in those days........NOW the classes are a lot smaller, the average class has up to 18 pupils some only 10-12 odd per class
I get confused a lil with how the USA run the system in their elementary schools.....we send our kids to a nursery school at the age of 3...then when they reach 4 yrs old, the have to attend a Primary school...and it runs like this - Primary 1 (P!) 4 rys old...Primary 2 (P2)..5 -6 yr olds ...Primary 3 - 6-7 yr olds.....once you reach primary 7 (P7)..thats where it stops...after you finish P7..you then attend a high school..and it runs like 1st yr (ages 11)...2nd year (ages 12-13.. 3rd year (ages 13-14) ...then once you reach 5th year (aged 15) you have to sit a number of final exams called - GSCE's....then depending on your grades...you then see what university you are suited for ...I ended up in Jordans town university at the age of 16 till I was 22 lol

F&&&&K excuse my french...sorry!!...sigh..but see true...when you do want the best for your kids..you will do it I guess...it's a shame you have to pay it..but your kids education matters more to you obviously then anything else...not many would do it...some would just say - sod it and send their kids to the other schools that arent as decent.....I admire you going all out for your kids...education must mean a lot in your book!


You got that right...hammer nail and head lol...because sending your kids to schools like this...pays off in the end....not only do the kids benefit, but you do too

I loved Catholic school...the nuns were not as bad as some of the other catholic schools...but they were vey strict...and there was NO messing around in that kind of school...if you showed signs of not wanting to pay attention in class...you were out on your ear, for they didn't have time for people acting the gimps in class....the nuns took no crap off any student...and not once when i was at that school did I ever fail to do my homework..I was too scared to lol...

EDIT - quick question true - is that $200 every quarter?? or monthly?? we pay our electic bills every quarter (3 months)...I was just curious

or college prep,the catholic schools here are college preps, in Calif that is.. one of my clients is a father (priest) from one of the High schools....

IMo in my state the best school is called chadwicks( the grounds overlook the msot beautiful view you could imagine, i have been there lots of times as my husband contracted the eletrical for the million dollar drama center they added ( with donations from a death of one of the students its named after him.) .........Ah the finest in education.. its not religious but it caters to the very rich, kids get dropped off in limos and bentleys..I also have two clients that teach there and have gotten me lots of information about the curriculum, it has a 100% college rate and you name it they have it, its also very expensive, many kids that attend have parents that work soley to have thier kids there if they aren't rich to begin with....i used them as my model for educating my son ....I'm sure every state has jsut such schools....

We have private schools over here..the avarage cost say IE in a primary school for kids from ages 4 - 11...it costs the parents..approx £2000 per term, that's £6000 per year... (approx $12,000 a year))

So if you are so keen on your kid getting the best, you go private....well so they say....but there arent many private schools over here at least not in my end of the country...for the normal schools run by the goverment..are usually good.....and the teachers do get a good enough wage out of it...which is why you would see a lot of them driving around in their BMW's and flashy cars lol
8-9 weeks holiday a year too

I never told you this sis...but you wont hear of homeschooling where I come from....they dont see the need for it....don't take this the wrong way sis...but over here, if a kid is known not to attend a school...and claims to be taught from home...they get picked on and called dumb name..people think that only kids with learning difficulties are taught from home....the USA is much different

in my early days of learning everything I could about curriculums and great education i spoke with some europeans and australians and looked into the bbc for education and sis, i was impressed..I gotta tell you in comparison we have alot of growing to do.....

i love that they teach a second language right away , and so comprehensive in grammar and math etc....

We do need a Home school movement it is the one good thing we have going...the clients that I have had that were in the Us with jobs for a few years couldn't wait to get out of here because of the school system being so impaired........

now how is socialization where you are sis in the schools???

Ok? Not sure what your point is.

I can tell you that I don't think charters and home schools are the answer though.

Hmm, people rant about that over here, too. Although I know that here, at least, it's completely untrue; just unwarranted hype built up by the "anti-PC brigade".

As for religion in schools, I spent the whole of my education in a public school and only ever spent 3 years learning about Christianity (aged 4 to 7). The absolute majority of the next 9 years were spent on Islam. I thought that was pretty wierd.