Libertarian ping! To be added or removed from my ping list freepmail me or post a message here.
Posted on 03/06/2008 7:32:18 AM PST by edcoil
As I said: "Whackadoodlery." Seriously, sir -- how can you even make such ridiculous statements and accusations, and hold yourself out as an honest and responsible adult?
Now I really am finished with you.
>>Yes, it is. The state has a legitimate and obvious interest in ensuring that its citizenry be well-educated.
I disagree. The state has an interest in the populace having a pretense of education. It desires a malleable, permanently adolescent polity. You assume the ideal case, in which the state is a guardian of liberty. But it hasn’t been one in quite some time.
Despite the democratic dogma to the contrary, most people are not educable in the true sense. True education exists in a handful of places, but there is much training going under the name of education. For the few who desire a true education, it is necessary to “homeschool” oneself.
“Seriously, sir — how can you even make such ridiculous statements and accusations, and hold yourself out as an honest and responsible adult?”
It's real easy. Thomas Jefferson wrote and said a lot of things. Some of what he wrote and said was good, and some of it was crap. The Declaration was good stuff. What he did and said about the Bible was crap.
Thus, stating that Thomas Jefferson said something is irrelevant. It's turned around. If he said something, then it should be scrutinized for its value rather than used as a support for an otherwise bald assertion.
If you want to make an argument WHY what Mr. Jefferson said is worthy, then make it. But saying it's worthy BECAUSE Mr. Jefferson said it is an appeal to authority, and not a legitimate one, and that's a logical fallacy.
You're just making two unsupported assertions, and using one as “evidence” of the first. You're saying, the state should be the final arbiter of the education of children, and then you're saying that it's so because, after all THOMAS JEFFERSON SAID SO!
Well, I don't care. Thomas Jefferson also said Jesus performed no miracles.
sitetest
It already has, when parents realized that the schools were deliberately defiling their children. The only question is when the blood literally starts to flow.
The John Birch Society, in june of 1958. They've never been wrong, either.
Hear hear, well said. I joined the Navy and served 20.5 years, I have defended our country and stand by its principles, but, when the attach comes from our own government, our own country what then? I am not antigovernment, regardless of who is in the whitehouse, Im not antiestablishment for it is through the establishment that our country became the greatest on earth. Now with the economy in a slump, prices soaring through the roof, they want to take our children away from us? They will have to pry my children from my cold dead fingers.
Ah, I see you prefer the pragmatic arguments against state control of education.
Of course, why not? They're so much easier! The examples abound! LOL.
sitetest
As I said, the examples abound!
According to Pacific Justice Institute, Sunland Christian School WAS in compliance re registering as a private school for over 20 years. This case is the real deal.
It depends, of course. The trial court said that the kids in this case were getting a lousy education, even as it ruled in favor of the home-schoolers. And those kids may well have turned out as burdens on society. OTOH, it's quite obvious that many of the products of California public schools are of questionable worth ... though it's difficult to determine whether the fault lies with the teachers, or the parents in many of those cases. Based on second-hand information from teachers I know, the "average" home environment of the student body determines much of the educational environment within a school.
Ah ... but that brings up the "parent" word again. What say you about parents who don't much care about their kids' education?
And in any case, I've made no comments on how a good education should be provided; only that we have an obvious interest in kids being well-educated. You cannot deny that, surely?
As it happens, I don't have anything against home-schooling per se, having home-schooled my own daughter at one time. I know a number of folks who do a very good job at it. On the other hand, I've seen some home-schooling products who have gotten a seriously bum deal from their parents.
As for the quality of public education in California -- I agree that California public schools are pretty poor, as a general rule.
However, California LAW says what it says, and thus the quality of California public education is actually irrelevant to the case at hand ... unless (again) you're an advocate of judicial activism.
Are you suggesting, perhaps, that these judges should undertake to reform California public schools? I'd think Kansas City's experience would argue against such ideas.
At any rate, California's education problems are not a matter for the 2nd Appellate Court to decide.
Cut and run works for Murtha too.
You may be right. The more I review the opinion, the more it seems to ignore the plain language of the law.
It appears that these “justices” were bent on a certain result with this family, and didn't let the actual law get in the way.
sitetest
A wee bit one sided aren't we?
Well, I can only hope the next tornado storm in Arkansas wipes out most of the state, causing epic chaos and hardship to the residence...Ya think I'm kidding?
Ya see when some moron posts this kind of sh*t, so might have a tendency to take notice...Are "we" on the same page here?
ping
I'm going to have to say "No"...
I just don't waste my time getting bent over hyperbole.
Libertarian ping! To be added or removed from my ping list freepmail me or post a message here.
nice one. :)
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.