Posted on 01/29/2002 5:13:49 AM PST by simicyber
So you're saying that public schools are an inherent good, and God wants us to have them (but my atheism just won't let me understand)?
Is that your point?
Who exactly are "the gays"?
Are all gays identical?
Don't believe everything you read.
Particularly when it comes from California.
22. Law is a solemn expression of the will of the supreme power of the State.
22.1. The will of the supreme power is expressed:
(a) By the Constitution.
(b) By statutes.
22.2. The common law of England, so far as it is not repugnant to or inconsistent with the Constitution of the United States, or the Constitution or laws of this State, is the rule of decision in all the courts of this State.
------------------------
Henry, you need to read the above yourself.
-- The underlined portions clearly indicate that the 'will of the supreme power' of the state derives from common law, and from our constitutions, which are empowered by the people.
The state has only delegated power.
Some of the smartest, truly well educated people I've met started from one room country schools of the early/mid 1900's. Granted, they were 'public', in the sense that a group of neighbors got together, built a schoolhouse, and hired a teacher. -- But they were a far cry from the institutions we have now. - And the kids are the worse for it.
In those days, only larger communities had high schools, [many of which were private] and again, the smaller the school, the better educated the children, imo.
The state run, consolidated public school system is an observable failure.
From what I understand HIV/AIDS are quite prevalent among heterosexual populations in Africa; while I don't approve of promoscuous heterosexual anal sex any more than homosexual anal sex, it's not just a "gay" disease.
I would agree with you that it's not really proper for the government to be spending large amounts of taxpayers' money on AIDS research. I would differ, however, in suggesting that the expenditure of such funds justifies government restrictions on private homosexual behavior. If someone contracts HIV/AIDS through their own stupidity, they should face the consequences. Activities put at risk those who do not behave stupidly or immorally [e.g. donation of blood by someone known to be HIV-positive without the 'confidential do-not-use sticker'] should be punished, regardless of the sexual orientation of the person doing them.
I prefer "ambisinistrous," thank you very much...
As for the teacher issue, that's been covered too. Abram Blau's The Master Hand of 1946 describes a school in which 16 of 34 2nd graders wrote with the left hand. Why? Because the first and second grade teachers in the school were left-handed.
Make no mistake, we WILL steal your children. Sleep tight.
Yes, when you talk about the gay movement and aims.
Yes, when you talk about the gay movement and aims.
To say all gays agree with the aims of Act Up et al. would be no more accurate than saying all Blacks agree with the aims of Rainbow/PUSH.
In both cases, the organizations which claim to represent a large group of people act in a manner detrimental to the group they're supposed to help, and rely upon the media to foster the image of widespread support.
Now imagine that idiots like this poster are a majority of voters......oh wait, they already are.
Are you scared yet?
L
When they start asking for help to leave the homosexual lifestyle. You don't judge it for them, you just help them when they ask.
One friend of mine said he had a complete mental and nervous breakdown. That was the thing for him. Of course, it almost destroyed him. It would be far better if the mentally ill could see the need for help, and get it, before things get that bad.
It's a difficult thing. There are the ill and the enablers, but there is also the fact that dealing with mental illness is not as exact as dealing with physical illness. But one thing I do know, it doesn't do anyone any good to tell them they really don't have a problem.
Happy lurking!
Shalom.
Yes, when you talk about the gay movement and aims.
Exceptionally silly response.
Congratulations.
There are many outstanding people educated by the public schools throughout our nation's history.
Most of the attackers of public schools simply don't know what they are talking about. Millions of children are educated every year successfully by them.
Could they be better? Sure. We should strive to make them better not wholesale lies and misconceptions about them. Or pretend there is a private alternative for the masses. There isn't.
Of course, your statement has no bearing on what I said. It is foolish to expect those who do not believe that mankind is primarily spiritual to understand those concepts which point beyond material or physical existence. People for whom faith in a higher being is important don't have to justify doing something for the future generations and can see beyond their individual existence. Whereas the materialist would just ask "Who cares? How will this affect me?"
Thus, spiritually inclined people understand that the establishment of school systems to train the citizens of the future is very important and cannot be entirely done by private endeavors. At one point in human history knowledge was hoarded and restricted to small groups as within the Mysteries. Teaching was thru individual Masters and not for the uninitiated.
Later it was restricted (not on pain of death for dissemination as in the Mysteries) and only spread amidst the wealthy or those sponsored by the wealthy. As the concept of equality (only spiritual equality makes any sense since obviously men are unequal in virtually every other respect), freedom (once again only comprehensible as spiritual freedom) and democracy spread so did the understanding that there would have to be wide public knowledge spread through public schools or our Republic would never succeed.
Those with no belief in a spiritual world have great difficulty in understanding much about how this world has developed. They cannot understand either freedom or equality. How can one explain events such as 9/11 without an understanding of the role of Evil in the affairs of mankind? And one cannot understand Evil unless he understands the concept of God.
I keep trying, but it never seems to happen for me.
Got any pointers?
And God said "let there be public schools, so that the majority may rob the minority of their property, to promote ideas they do not support".
You mean like the freedom to rob your neighbors, to advance ideas your neighbors oppose?
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.