0
Airman1270

Compulsory Attendance Laws

Recommended Posts

Quote

I didn't say eliminate child labor laws, I said relax them.

When I was 14 I worked bailing hay over the summer.
I didn't loose too many limbs and I got good exercise.
I had friends that washed dishes year round PART TIME.



Kids still hold such jobs. They might have to wait until their sixteen to wash dishes, but there are a few jobs young teenagers can hold, although there are more restrictions than if an eighteen year old held the job.
Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

My son's eleven, and he's a great little farm hand. He loves driving the bush hog. He's working in the garden tomorrow afternoon. Does a lot of fence-fixin' and has had a hand in calf-birthing.

I agree that some hard work is good for kids, as long as it's not at the expense of education. If kids don't make the most of the opportunity, that's one thing. But to not have the opportunity at all is quite another. An 11 y/o or a 14 y/o are not mature enough to make decisions about whether they should be in school or not, imho.

Don't let the gubmint find out. They might run you in for child abuse.

Speaking from my own experience, a day long, summer job where a 12 yr. old kid can come home at the end of the week with his own paycheck, is one of the greatest formative experiences they can have.
By not allowing children to work, legally, until they are 16, we remove 4 yrs. in which a can do attitude can be taught.
By that time, many have already developed a welfare attitude. If a physical task is too hard or too heavy or too boring they think that it is beneath them.
We now have kids who refuse a job because they think it's unfair to be paid an entry level wage.

Where I am from, in Southern Colorado, our school, which served a farming community, closed down for two weeks in mid September for potato harvest. It was literally a do or die situation. Everyone hit the fields. I spent two seasons picking potatos by hand, right along side the migrant Mexicans and Navajoes.
Then, they developed the potato harvesters and things got much easier and faster, but we all still took the break to help get the job done.

Great memories, great experience.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Great memories, great experience.


Yep. Jay decided not to play baseball this spring because he enjoys working on the farm with his grandfather, and he likes a little cash in his pocket. He can choose whether or not to play baseball, and giving that up for the kind of work he's doing is a fine choice, imho.
--
A conservative is just a liberal who's been mugged. A liberal is just a conservative who's been to jail

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Rather hyperbolic OP. Dismal Failure? I think saying the system has it's fair share of problems would be more accurate. Like any large bureacracy trying to be so many things for so many people, they are challenged to stay on track. They shoot for a common denominator, which they must do as a matter of cost; but I'll admit it is lower than I think it should be.

As mentioned, if it were not compulsory far too many kids would get totally left behind. I'd be more in favor of a middle ground where there were more realistic and affordable choices; but it definitely needs to stay mandatory.

Agree very heartily with the comments about problems being grounded in a child's home life. By the time they get to school age, the die is cast. You need not look any further than the parents to discover the roots of most children's problems. In fact, I'd say the schools have gotten into their current financial and performance predicaments by trying to correct the problems usually grounded in the home - - a role that is too expansive and expensive for the resources they have.

If they stuck to the 3 R's, they get way more money than they need. But trying to be the super-provider of comprehensive social needs; which appears to be the track they have taken; then there isn't enough money in the world - - because you can not buy your way into playing the role of parents.
" . . . the lust for power can be just as completely satisfied by suggesting people into loving their servitude as by flogging them and kicking them into obedience." -- Aldous Huxley

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

If they stuck to the 3 R's, they get way more money than they need.



The problem with sticking to the "3 R's" (Reading, wRiting, and aRithmetic) is that, in today's world, they don't prepare students for anything except middle school. (Admittedly, the writing does, all too often, get underemphasized, even through high school.)

We need to expand the required curriculum, not pare it down. The five C's (Communications, Computers, Calculus, Civics, Critical thinking), plus a healthy dose of science (Biology, Physics, Chemistry, Geology) and social studies (history, geography and economics) are needed if we are going to "promote the general welfare" of the nation into the next century.

A high school diploma is no longer generally sufficient to obtain the employment necessary to provide workers with enough income potential to provide for a small family and retirement. Well paying unskilled jobs are rapidly disappearing, being obsoleted by technology, or outsourced, as we adjust to a global economy. As more nations develop economically, this trend is likely to continue.

I believe we owe it to tomorrow's workforce to adequately prepare them for the conditions they will likely encounter. Today's Associate of Arts standards (with more stringent mathematics requirements) should be the new standard for completion of compulsory education.
Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
My 3 R's wasn't meant to specifically call out just those 3 subjects. My intention was academics in general - to include all of the natural sciences, social sciences, even vocational classes.

The first order of public schools should be academics. I know of at least one elementary school principal who did not agree. Based on the state of our schools, my guess is there are a lot of them out there.
" . . . the lust for power can be just as completely satisfied by suggesting people into loving their servitude as by flogging them and kicking them into obedience." -- Aldous Huxley

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
...The students should receive a secular education from the public schools....
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

AHA! This is the crux of the matter. You admit that the purpose of the school system is to indoctrinate young people into a religious world view that contradicts that of a large majority of their parents. (Both secular humanism and Judeo-Christian tradition are "religious" viewpoints. Please don't quibble about this.)

You are wrong. This was never the intention of the Founders or of the people who created the public school system. Liberal judges have "interpreted" the current version into existence, but the original intent and practice of the schools (which included education regarding Biblical principles) never was unconstitutional.

In short, you think the power of the state should be used to teach my kids what you believe, while at the same time you think it should be a crime to expose your kids to what I believe.

You are a tyrant. You are the one who is imposing your narrow views. You are ramming your religious values down my kids' throats. You are the one who is prosyletizing, while I simple ask that both sides be presented.

I am calling for fairness and choice. Meanwhile you think I should be dragged in front of a judge if I choose not to follow your advice.

Hitler would proud.

Cheers,
Jon

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
>You admit that the purpose of the school system is to indoctrinate
>young people into a religious world view that contradicts that of a large
>majority of their parents.

?? No. No more than a secular DMV "indoctrinates drivers into a religious worldview."

The purpose of schools is to teach kids how to read, write, do arithmetic, and understand science and history. The purpose of the DMV is to deal with the administration of the various registrations, licenses and permits needed to deal with motor vehicles. The purpose of parents is to raise their kids with what they consider to be a valid worldview.

People often forget those.

>while at the same time you think it should be a crime to expose your
>kids to what I believe.

If "what you believe" is that the Sabbath should be kept holy, then yes, such things should not be taught in public schools. That's a better topic for a church to cover.

Likewise, if a secular guy thinks "God is dead" that should not be taught either.

Once again - education in schools, religious teaching in churches, raising kids by parents.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You are narrow-minded. I am open-minded.

You are calling for censorship. I am calling for freedom & choice.

Furthermore, you continue to ignore the fact that secular-humanism not only IS a religious viewpoint, but one which has led to the murder of millions of people in the 20th century alone. Soviet Russia, Nazi Germany, China, Cuba, Cambodia, North Korea were/are among the more popular tourist destinations controlled by secularists. In addition, you think it should be a crime for me to refuse to submit my kids to that influence.

The fact that an idea finds its basis in Judeo-Christian Scripture does not, in and of itself, mean that such an idea should automatically be withheld from the education experience. There is nothing wrong with students graduating from the system having learned to have some respect for what is not only a classic piece of literature, but is the very foundation of western civilization.

You so caually dismiss "religious" ideas, yet I'm sure you'd be pretty upset if you entered into a business relationship with someone and he failed to treat you according to the standards of Scripture.

You cannot identify a single problem that has ever been caused by someone putting Biblical principles into practice, yet you think the school system should censor the single most influential piece of literature ever written.

Amazing.

Jon

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
> You are narrow-minded. I am open-minded.

Well, there ya go! Sounds like your mind is made up.

>You are calling for censorship. I am calling for freedom & choice.

Nope, no censorship. Families who send their kids to school should have the freedom and choice to teach their kids whatever they choose about religion, without the school trying to indoctrinate their kids with any religious philosophy.

>Furthermore, you continue to ignore the fact that secular-humanism
>not only IS a religious viewpoint . . .

It is a pseudo religious viewpoint. (It is not a religious viewpoint by definition.) And I am not advocating teaching that in schools any more than I am advocating teaching Christianity, Wiccan or Islam in schools.

>There is nothing wrong with students graduating from the system having
>learned to have some respect for what is not only a classic piece of
>literature, but is the very foundation of western civilization.

If you lived in an area that was predominantly Muslim - and your kids went to school there - would you have any problem with Islam being taught in schools? (Seeing how the Koran is both a classic piece of literature and a big part of the foundation of civilization.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote


You cannot identify a single problem that has ever been caused by someone putting Biblical principles into practice, yet you think the school system should censor the single most influential piece of literature ever written.

Amazing.

Jon



Perhaps your challenge was only for BillVon but,,,

I'd argue that the Puritans in 1692 believed they were applying Biblical principals into practice.

Correct me if I am mistaken but are there more Christians on Earth than Moslems.
Last I checked the Moslems have more influence globally.
Are you arguing that the koran is the most influential piece of literature?

Do you want your kids to attend a madrassa?

The appeal to popularity of ANY position is fallacious.
Argumentum ad populum
I suggest studying logical fallacy and avoiding them if you seek to convert others to your position.
http://www.csun.edu/~dgw61315/fallacies.html
http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/mathew/logic.html

You were doing OK when it was about vouchers.
(your OP)
I think your arguement is weak when the recent comments are included.

I think your use of absolutes, or anyones use of absolutes for that matter, invites others to easily find flaws in your position.
Do you really think that there does not exist one documented instance of the Bible principals being applied harmfully?

I predict that you will dispute the Puritans(or others) application of Biblical principals.
(with 20/20 hindsight applied naturally)
The common defense is 'those are not the REAL Bible principals'.

I suggest we apply ourselves to improving the 3R's (or 5C's if you will) and let the kids follow their own path once they have critical thinking skills.

If you are just entertaining yourself in a flame war then nevermind.


PULL!
jumpin_Jan
"Dangerous toys are fun but ya could get hurt" -- Vash The Stampede

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

AHA! This is the crux of the matter. You admit that the purpose of the school system is to indoctrinate young people into a religious world view that contradicts that of a large majority of their parents. (Both secular humanism and Judeo-Christian tradition are "religious" viewpoints. Please don't quibble about this.)



Secular means without religious basis. I certainly do not support public schools indoctrinating students into a religious worldview, nor did I post anything to that effect. :S

Quote

You are wrong. This was never the intention of the Founders or of the people who created the public school system. Liberal judges have "interpreted" the current version into existence, but the original intent and practice of the schools (which included education regarding Biblical principles) never was unconstitutional.



Perhaps you should examine the first amendment before you make such claims.

Quote

In short, you think the power of the state should be used to teach my kids what you believe, while at the same time you think it should be a crime to expose your kids to what I believe.



I think religion should be kept out of the classroom, with the exception of classes that teach about religion (as opposed to classes in which religion is practiced.

Quote

You are a tyrant. You are the one who is imposing your narrow views. You are ramming your religious values down my kids' throats.



Incorrect. I don't want to teach your kids any religious values, nor do I want such values taught by the public schools. If you want to teach them, feel free, but do it on your time and dime.


Quote

You are the one who is prosyletizing, while I simple ask that both sides be presented.



Intelligent Design has ZERO scientific basis. It is not "the other side." If evolution were disproved tomorrow, there would still be ZERO scientific basis for Intelligent Design.

Quote

I am calling for fairness and choice. Meanwhile you think I should be dragged in front of a judge if I choose not to follow your advice.



I never said any such thing. Please read my posts before making such bizarre, unfounded accusations.

Quote

Hitler would proud.



You clearly haven't a clue about history or the public education system if you believe that.
Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Perhaps you should examine the first amendment before you make such claims



You may want to keep in mind that the guiding principle of the amendment is "freedom *OF* religion", not "freedom *FROM* religion".

Quote

Quote

Hitler would be proud.



You clearly haven't a clue about history or the public education system if you believe that.



Not to say that he is right, because I don't agree with all of his points...but perhaps you should research the Prussian model of education.
Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
>You may want to keep in mind that the guiding principle of the
>amendment is "freedom *OF* religion", not "freedom *FROM* religion".

Actually the amendment says nothing about freedom of religion or freedom from religion. It says that the US government cannot pass any laws that respect one version of religion over another. Basically the government cannot get involved. That means no federal money for teaching Christianity, or Islam, or Wiccan. (Does not, of course, apply to private schools; they can teach whatever they like.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

You may want to keep in mind that the guiding principle of the amendment is "freedom *OF* religion", not "freedom *FROM* religion".



I know you hate to acknowledge the Judicial Branch's authority to interpret the Constitution, but you really should try reading some decisions. But first, you should probably start with the applicable portion of the First Amendment.

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; …"

Here are four cases.
Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Furthermore, you continue to ignore the fact that secular-humanism not only IS a religious viewpoint, but one which has led to the murder of millions of people in the 20th century alone.

If you're talking about fascist or communist regimes: They were usually secular, but they were NOT humanist.
Speed Racer
--------------------------------------------------

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Correct me if I am mistaken but are there more Christians on Earth than Moslems.
Last I checked the Moslems have more influence globally.
Are you arguing that the koran is the most influential piece of literature?

Do you want your kids to attend a madrassa?



FYI - Madrassa just means school in Arabic - we get the negative context of the word from our lovely media. So I would say, yes, I would like my kids to attend a madrassa/school.

But, that's not to say that there aren't schools out there teaching fundamentalist ideas, but they are called madrassas just like any other school, regardless of what they teach.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

The purpose of schools is to teach kids how to read, write, do arithmetic, and understand science and history. The purpose of the DMV is to deal with the administration of the various registrations, licenses and permits needed to deal with motor vehicles.



Wow, you used a lot of words to describe both institutions, so they must carry equal weight in terms of how our kids come up in the world. :S

This is an extremely dumb comparison -- makes no point in regards to the thread topic.


. . =(_8^(1)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
>Wow, you used a lot of words to describe both institutions, so they
>must carry equal weight in terms of how our kids come up in the world.

No, they don't. Indeed, your reply has nothing to do with mine - but if it made you happy to make it, then more power to you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

0