Re: Attorney generals trying to shut down usenet?
- From: JosephKK <quiettechblue@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 19 Jun 2008 20:40:59 -0700
On Tue, 17 Jun 2008 06:29:22 -0700 (PDT), MooseFET
<kensmith@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Jun 16, 7:57 pm, James Arthur <bogusabd...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
MooseFET wrote:
On Jun 16, 6:19 pm, James Arthur <bogusabd...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
[...privately or home schooled ...]
You're passing a moral judgement here: you'd decide (or
have government decide) which parents are fit to raise
their own kids. That's monstrous. Can't you see that?
It defies imagination that any parent so motivated could
be worse than the public schools, even if they tried.
You have a *very* weak imagination or you have seen only a very small
section of mankind if you can't imagine parents doing far worse than
the public schools.
You must have much less experience with them than I do, and
much less faith in the basic goodness of the common man.
No, I'd say that you don't understand that the average says nothing of
the range. The common man is good is based on an average. The range
goes from extremely evil to extremely good.
Anyway, it's not for us to judge: when kids reach 18 they
can do as they wish; until then, parents rule.
As I said elsewhere: children are their charge not their possession.
Society have basically always reserved the right to remove children
from the control of a truly bad parent.
As a society, we take children away for seriously
bad parents all the time.
Oh no we don't.
Yes we do. feed "child protective services" complete with quotes into
the google.
O.J. Simpson still has his kids. All manner
of druggies, misfits, teenagers, etc., all have theirs. Why?
Because the courts have decided they have that right.
"Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness" includes "and
oh yes, an idiot government that'll confiscate your kids?"
Sheesh.
The government is us acting collectively. It is only "idiot
government" to the degree that we are idiots.
Can't you imagine parents that are not bad
enough to have their children removed by only a small margin.
We decide these sorts of things all the times as a society. We don't
let bad parents impose their evil will upon their children. Someones
children are their charge not their property.
And it's not in the public interest to deny them. The
home-schoolers I've known have all been _lightyears_
ahead of their public (or private) school counterparts.
How many have you known?
Obviously a small percentage. What's the high-school graduation
rate in your neck of the woods?
Right here it is about 95%. The worst in the bay area is about 75%.
Cheers,
James Arthur
You may find this data interesting:
http://www.epi.org/books/rethinking_hs_grad_rates/rethinking_hs_grad_rates-FULL_TEXT.pdf
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Attorney generals trying to shut down usenet?
- From: James Arthur
- Re: Attorney generals trying to shut down usenet?
- From: Jim Thompson
- Re: Attorney generals trying to shut down usenet?
- References:
- Re: Attorney generals trying to shut down usenet?
- From: MooseFET
- Re: Attorney generals trying to shut down usenet?
- From: James Arthur
- Re: Attorney generals trying to shut down usenet?
- From: MooseFET
- Re: Attorney generals trying to shut down usenet?
- From: James Arthur
- Re: Attorney generals trying to shut down usenet?
- From: JeffM
- Re: Attorney generals trying to shut down usenet?
- From: James Arthur
- Re: Attorney generals trying to shut down usenet?
- From: MooseFET
- Re: Attorney generals trying to shut down usenet?
- From: James Arthur
- Re: Attorney generals trying to shut down usenet?
- From: MooseFET
- Re: Attorney generals trying to shut down usenet?
- Prev by Date: Re: OT: abusive calls penalty
- Next by Date: Re: OT: abusive calls penalty
- Previous by thread: Re: Attorney generals trying to shut down usenet?
- Next by thread: Re: Attorney generals trying to shut down usenet?
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|