Just Say No - To States Rights

[NoleSoup4U]

Yep

You realize that duty is basically the polar opposite of freedom, right?

 

[NoleSoup4U]

Yep

Just making sure.

 

[naturalmwa]

You realize that duty is basically the polar opposite of freedom, right?

No, it's the polar opposite of licence. License is the right to do anything without restraint. Liberty is the balance of license with duty or the right to act in a responsible manner. You consistently mis define liberty as licence, but they are very different. Liberty has an ethical component and takes into account consequences and outcome.

So if anyone gets to call themselves a teacher and hand out diplomas, that is licence. If only those who attained a professional degree and teach to a curriculum get to call themselves teacher, that is liberty. Furthermore, they aren't just points on a continuum. If you allow licence for anyone to claim the title of teacher, you are necessarily hurting the liberty of all the actual professional teachers. An easy way to remember is liberty requires regulation. No regulation, no liberty.

 

[NoleSoup4U]

No, it's the polar opposite of licence. License is the right to do anything without restraint. Liberty is the balance of license with duty or the right to act in a responsible manner. You consistently mis define liberty as licence, but they are very different. Liberty has a request ethical component and takes into account consequences and outcome.

So if anyone gets to call themselves a teacher and hand out diplomas, that is licence. If only those who attained a professional degree and teach to a curriculum get to call themselves teacher, that is liberty. Furthermore, they aren't just points on a continuum. If you allow licence for anyone to claim the title of teacher, you are necessarily hurting the liberty of all the actual professional teachers. An easy way to remember is liberty requires regulation. No regulation, no liberty.

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/duty

 

[What Would Jesus Do?]

You can't have it both ways. Either you're against politicization of education or you're not. If you give the state too much power, schools can devolve into state indoctrination camps.

I'm FOR a high quality education being available to ALL. Whether it's politicized or not.

I have a whole lot more faith in that happening when there is democratic oversight than when religions or parochial groups control it or when the primary objective is to cut taxes rather than educate children.

I'm a big fan of local groups being involved in the educational agenda and curriculum issues - but ONLY to make things better. Not when they water down or disregard the minimum standards deemed desirable for the nation. I prefer historians setting standards for history, scientists for science and so on. If locals say they want even better science education, that's great. But if they want to substitute good science with creationism, or good history with religious revisionism, that's bad.

 

[What Would Jesus Do?]

Because those actions would end up at the federal level, which why GM doesn't bother with Delaware and goes straight to the federal government.

Huh?

 

[iammrhawkeyes]

I agree with some of that.

The problem is that most people who whine about states' rights are actually trying to circumvent individual liberties. They want states to be able to make it harder for blacks, poor folks and the elderly to vote. They want to degrade education. They want states to be able to deny a woman's right to choose. They want states to be able to end run separation of church and state. And so on.

That's funny. I do like the delivery. Very Newhart-ish.

 

[The Tradition]

I'm FOR a high quality education being available to ALL. Whether it's politicized or not.

I have a whole lot more faith in that happening when there is democratic oversight than when religions or parochial groups control it or when the primary objective is to cut taxes rather than educate children.

I'm a big fan of local groups being involved in the educational agenda and curriculum issues - but ONLY to make things better. Not when they water down or disregard the minimum standards deemed desirable for the nation. I prefer historians setting standards for history, scientists for science and so on. If locals say they want even better science education, that's great. But if they want to substitute good science with creationism, or good history with religious revisionism, that's bad.

But that could happen with liberal dogma, too. Why can't you see that?

And there are many fine religious schools that seriously outperform most government offerings.