Yes, but it's not like you just keep your kid at home and the state doesn't give a shit. In most states you have to demonstrate that you're actually educating your child. Because whether you do it at home or at a public school or at a private school, it's illegal to not educate your child at all. You seem to be saying that parents should legally be allowed to choose whether or not to educate their children.
I have difficulty understanding your point of view here. On one hand, you constantly try refute the idea that teachers can be held accountable for the failures of parents, and yet here you seem to think that the law can prevent that from happening. Is education the responsibility of parents or teachers?
I didn't say that. I can live with some sort of demonstration that you are educating your child in return for a voucher.
I really don't know what you're talking about. I'm just asking MasterShake29 to clarify his position.
Okay, but you said, "No one voluntary asks someone to arrest them and throw them in jail, whereas people do ask others to teach them stuff." You seem to be saying that a school education being voluntary has something to do with whether government should be involved in it, in contrast to prisons which are not entered into voluntarily. But school is not voluntary; parents of minors are legally required to send them to school. An exception is made for those who would prefer to home school, but obviously that is not an option for many families. And simply not providing an education is not an option either. So the idea that people choose to send their kids to school is not correct at all. They are required to by law.
The primary role of a police officer is to enforce the law, which is done under the threat of being handcuffed and brought to jail. No sane person gets themselves arrested voluntarily. The primary role of a teacher is to educate, which is done in a variety of ways. All sane people want some level of education, so they would interact with teachers voluntarily. Surely you see the difference.
They would interact with teachers voluntarily if what? If they weren't legally compelled to do so? I'm not understanding your point at all. Government should run prisons because people don't want to go to prison; government should not run schools because (regardless of whether they're legally required to do so) people do want to go to school. What am I missing here?
Are you saying that privatization wouldn't work with prisons because there would be no profit motive? It occurred to me that you might be assuming that privatization = vouchers, and of course I know you think vouchers = competition. So is that what you're saying, that the recipients of the service can pick and choose among schools, but that wouldn't work with prisons? What if we could find a way to make private companies compete for our states' prison budget dollar. For example, the victims of the crime could use a voucher to choose where they want the perpetrator imprisoned. Or juries could pick. Presto! Competition.
Would there also be a home prison option, where victims could make the defendant live with them, as long as they proved it was a prison-like environment?
I figured you might, but I have a problem with society letting the bottom portion fail, to fall behind. This view, when it comes to education, is very elitist, in the economic sense. How is that measured? Really? You've met every person in jail and know that they are sane AND did not want to be there? (This, while not directly to my point, has similarities.) But what level or what kind of education? One sane person might want only a technical degree (to fix cars, perhaps). How does that sane person go about getting their education? [sarcasm]As long as not maids are allowed, I could live with that.[/sarcasm] This is a great idea. You appear to be of the mold that prisons are for incarceration and punishment. I believe that prisons should be for incarceration and rehabilitation. Rehabilitation meaning something to allow those run foul of the law able to become productive members of society. And that is the goal of education, prior to incarceration. MS29, you seem to be saying in your arguments that the student should be allowed to make their decisions on when/where to get education, but also saying that parents must also be allowed to make decisions. Can you clarify your position on who has responsibility and when they should be allowed to exercise it.
I'm all for trying to help prisoners become productive members of society, but the primary purpose is incarceration and punishment, else it would be called "rehab". Well, if you live with your parents, then they really get to make the decision in the end, but obviously a smart parent will consult with their children as befitting their maturity.
NJ spending $18K per student. $21K in poorer districts. http://www.app.com/article/20110520/NJNEWS10/305200073/Report-NJ-per-pupil-spending-nearly-18-000 http://www.state.nj.us/education/guide/2011/
SCoNJ orders ore funding for poorer/urban schools: http://blogs.app.com/capitolquickie...ate-supreme-court-orders-more-school-funding/ A majority apparently agree that these districts require 50% greater funding than wealthier/suburban districts.
Putting the merit or lack thereof of this particular bill aside, why shouldn't they? The bill only applies to teachers who work for the government, and the Legislature is supposed to represent the people in the government.
Because legislators aren't pedagogy experts. And this is pure culture war crap. I don't care which side you belong on, this kind of propaganda doesn't belong in the schools. It's ok though... we have a solution... [ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dRkIWB3HIEs"]YouTube - George Takei vs. Tennessee's "Don't Say Gay" Bill‏[/ame]
So it's ok for the government should run schools, but not to set policy for them? Is it ok for the government to run a police force, but not set policy for them? Is it ok for the government to build and maintain roads, but not set policy for them? Seems to me you can't have it both ways. Either the government runs something and sets policy for it, or it does neither. And the Legislature is the body that sets policy.