<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Remainders: Senate amendments won&#8217;t get a Bloomberg signoff</title>
	<atom:link href="http://gothamschools.org/2009/07/16/remainders-senate-amendments-wont-get-a-bloomberg-signoff/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://gothamschools.org/2009/07/16/remainders-senate-amendments-wont-get-a-bloomberg-signoff/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 10 Feb 2012 05:27:00 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: ceolaf</title>
		<link>http://gothamschools.org/2009/07/16/remainders-senate-amendments-wont-get-a-bloomberg-signoff/comment-page-1/#comment-154032</link>
		<dc:creator>ceolaf</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 17 Jul 2009 17:56:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://gothamschools.org/?p=18891#comment-154032</guid>
		<description>Philissa,

I have to take issue with your use of the phrase &quot;faith-based private schools.&quot; Just because the story you link to uses the phrase, that does not excuse your use of a euphamism for what we already have well understood terms for. These are &quot;religous schools&quot; or &quot;religiously affiliated schools.&quot; (You know, catholic schools, espicopal schools, jewish day schools.)

Words and phrases matter. When proponents or opponents seek new phrases for old term, they have a reason. Usually, they either are trying to hide something or to highlight something. Which is going on here? 

The blog&#039;s term &quot;faith-based private schools&quot; does not make its story or your or your squib more clear than using &quot;religiosly affiliate schools&quot; or some other phrase that included the work &quot;religion&quot;. It&#039;s too bad that you adopted it.

I am honestly quite surprised that you have made this mistake. I do not think that it is typical of your work here on Gotham Schools.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Philissa,</p>
<p>I have to take issue with your use of the phrase &#8220;faith-based private schools.&#8221; Just because the story you link to uses the phrase, that does not excuse your use of a euphamism for what we already have well understood terms for. These are &#8220;religous schools&#8221; or &#8220;religiously affiliated schools.&#8221; (You know, catholic schools, espicopal schools, jewish day schools.)</p>
<p>Words and phrases matter. When proponents or opponents seek new phrases for old term, they have a reason. Usually, they either are trying to hide something or to highlight something. Which is going on here? </p>
<p>The blog&#8217;s term &#8220;faith-based private schools&#8221; does not make its story or your or your squib more clear than using &#8220;religiosly affiliate schools&#8221; or some other phrase that included the work &#8220;religion&#8221;. It&#8217;s too bad that you adopted it.</p>
<p>I am honestly quite surprised that you have made this mistake. I do not think that it is typical of your work here on Gotham Schools.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

