Posted on 07/06/2018 12:03:22 PM PDT by Red Badger
Shouldn't that be "shut the doah" ...?
I'll be sure and tell the Electric, Telephone, Gas and Cable TV companies when they send me a bill...............
Many of these students are already at a genetic disadvantage with respect to IQ (as demonstrated in The Bell Curve). Add in fetal alcohol syndrome and crack head mothers, well it would be miracle if some of them can even write their names. I've read accounts which note that many of these households don't even possess one book.
One, two...buckle my show?
Well, you get what you pay for............
Yep. The Constitution encourages education.
> GASP! < How can you say such a thing!.........IT’S FOR THE CHILDREN!......................
Wrong approach. It’s not a Constitutional issue, it is a fraud issue. The school system purports and promotes itself as a provider of education, which pretty much includes reading, writing and arithmetic. Failure to do so is fraud. And that is a viable legal approach.
Those children need better representation and should contact Jay Sekulow’s organization: https://aclj.org/
they have a point, but they should be suing the teachers’ unions instead ...
People were learning to read from McGuffey's readers over 100 years ago ...
From Wikipedia - "McGuffey Readers were a series of graded primers for grade levels 1-6. They were widely used as textbooks in American schools from the mid-19th century to the mid-20th century, and are still used today in some private schools and in homeschooling."
I recall learning to read from Dr. Seuss books and the "Dick and Jane" series of books mainly without the aid or assistance of teachers. I learned how to read because I wanted to ... there were whole other worlds inside those hard-back covered pieces of paper, and I wanted to visit every one of them.
Exactly!
First the teachers should learn to read and write ,students come later
I don’t think they will agree with my opinion...............
“Murphy’s opinion may be right in a narrow sense, but some legal scholars I talked to said that he could have approached the subject more broadly.”
I.e., he could have interpreted the Constitution as saying something it plainly does not say.
Did any of those students ever bother to show up for class and did they ever do their homework. An education is a two way street.
These are kids from ersatz families, no fathers anywhere to be found. How much does take to learn how to read and write, IF YOU WANT TO?
Wow: Apparently they didn’t drink the water and avoided being zombified.
Ironically, it was just yesterday I saw a rare license plate: Michigan. I was close enough to read the other word: Pure (as in “Pure Michigan”).
Then I thought about Detroit Water & Sewerage (DWSD) vs. Flint. OPE came to mind.
Some here will get the joke...
"A federal judge has concluded that the Constitution doesn't require schools to promote students’ literacy."
"Their class-action suit filed against the state of Michigan asserts that education is a basic right, and that they have been denied it."
The federal judge is right imo. The states have never amended the Constitution to expressly protect education as a right.
In fact, note that President Thomas Jefferson had officially clarified that the states would first need to amend the Constitution to involve the feds in INTRAstate education, something that the states have never done.
"On a few articles of more general and necessary use, the suppression in due season will doubtless be right, but the great mass of the articles on which impost is paid is foreign luxuries, purchased by those only who are rich enough to afford themselves the use of them. Their patriotism would certainly prefer its continuance and application to the great purposes of the public education, roads, rivers, canals, and such other objects of public improvement as it may be thought proper to add to the constitutional enumeration of federal powers [emphases added]"—Thomas Jefferson : Sixth Annual Message to Congress
”From the accepted doctrine that the United States is a government of delegated powers, it follows that those not expressly granted, or reasonably to be implied from such as are conferred, are reserved to the states, or to the people. To forestall any suggestion to the contrary, the Tenth Amendment was adopted. The same proposition, otherwise stated, is that powers not granted are prohibited [emphasis added].” —United States v. Butler, 1936.
Note that if the misguided, institutionally indoctrinated lawyers of the Los Angeles firm fighting on behalf of the students win the case, it would be an unconstitutional expansion of the already unconstitutionally big federal government’s powers imo.
Well, they signed their “X” and it was off to the races.
My guess is that this school system gets more of the state money than any other school system in the state.
They are graduated unable to R&W because to fail them would be considered “racist.”
SHOE! Slow fingers, slower brain.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.