[I simply don't believe that it's morally acceptable that having money entitles your children (or mine-if I had any money!) to a better standard of education than the family down the block who are struggling to get by]

I don't see private schools as necessarily better. I do see them as offering alternatives to the mono-culture of public education. In my experience public schools offer an assembly line that works pretty well for most kids. But there's a subgroup of kids who need different styles of education. Is it morally acceptable to tell them to shut up and try to fit in with the group?

I can go to the corner store and have a choice of 15 kinds of toothpaste. Why should my kid have no choice but between one public school that doesn't know what to do with her and another public school that follows the same educational philosophy? Does that make sense?

After one year in public school, my 6-year old transformed from a happy, cooperative, popular, eager-learner to a surly, disobedient, socially-inept problem child. Why? She's a fast learner and the school refused to accelerate the curriculum. Why couldn't they let her skip a grade? 'We don't believe in that in this district.'

So for 6 hours a day, she was stuck in a classroom being bored silly with material she mastered years ago. She cried every day for months and begged us not to send her back to school. There's nothing sadder than a depressed 6-year old. Especially when she was previously so happy.

Public schools kill off the market for innovative private schools or those than can serve small subsets of special-needs learners. For the most part, only more expensive private schools can survive. That hurts the middle-class and lower-class kids who need more options.

To me, that's morally unacceptable.