Parental Influence on Political/Religious Choices of A2Kers

I think this is good.
I suspect that such discussions as this
r the reason for the existence of such fora as this one.

Quote:

David: I am not going to recapture your words
because I hate to read those endless little boxes.

OK.
I hope u don 't begrudge me availing myself
of this feature of the site.

Quote:

However, there is a contradiction in your statement.

I don 't believe that is true,
but I am willing to examine anything with an open mind.

Quote:

You said that your mother taught you the value of education
and yet you feel the teacher has no right to bring a child above level one literacy.

Yes.
I said that.

Quote:

So, it follows that your mother taught you education has no value.

That is a non sequitur.
Your reasoning is flawed.

Your argument includes the clandestine implication
that if something is of value,
then one person has the right to force it upon another person;
for example,
if an automotive mechanic goes for a walk,
and discovers a parked car whose tires shud be rotated,
that he is within his rights to get to work and do the job,
without the owner 's permission,
or
if a dentist finds a fellow citizen
whose teeth shud be cleaned,
then the dentist has the right to
drag him to his office,
hurl him down into his chair,
pry his mouth open with a crowbar,
and start scraping.

I deny that either the mechanic or the dentist, or the teacher
morally have such rights.

The teacher does not have the moral right
to force an education upon anyone,
the same way that a salesman of the Encyclopedia Britannica
has no right to coerce anyone to accept his product.

Let me put it this way, Mr. Me:
I can tell u where the teacher got the right
to go to church, and where he got the right to vote,
and where he got the right to keep and bear arms:

can YOU tell ME where the teacher acquired the RIGHT
to bring a child above level one literacy ??
If u answer " the compulsory education law "
then I respond that the child can reject its validity,
asserting that this act of government is without his consent,
and TURN HIS BACK upon it.
U can lead a horse to water,
but u can ' t make him drink,
regardless of how valuable the water is.

The person who has a right ( like the right to vote )
is the person who is entitled to make the decision
as to whether or not to exercise that right;
for instance,
I have the right to go jogging in the public street,
and I also have the right to decide whether or not to actually do so.

One of my tenants
is an English professor.
He has taught inter alia English as a second language.
Do u think that he has the right to grab aliens
off the street ( like the I.N.S. ? ) and MAKE THEM LISTEN
to his instructions n explanations of English, Mr. Me ?

If thay challenge him
for kidnapping them n making them listen to
his explanations of English, is it a SUFFICIENT JUSTIFICATION
for him to assert that learning English is VALUABLE ??

Do u get my point ?

I pointed out hereinabove, Mr. Me,
that IF the teacher were PREVENTED from voting
by his students, then thay wud thereby violate
the teacher 's rights,
but if thay merely IGNORED the teacher,
wud thay also violate the teacher 's rights ?

Such that he is entitled to COMPENSATION for violation of his rights ?

Will u tell me that ??



I remember reading a case in law school,
from the Court of the King 's Bench in England,
a few centuries ago,
wherein the court gave an example of a teacher 's rights,
saying that a teacher had no right to lie in wait for the scholars,
( on their way to a competing school )
with his pistols, to force them to attend HIS school.
I got a few chuckles out of that.

Quote:

-------------

You perhaps do not know that a person in the singular may be referred
to as "they" if that person is a stand in for many people (that is, a model)
and/or if the writer wishes to avoid s/he or (s)he.

Yes.
I do not know that.

It tramples upon logic, violates grammar, and is politically correct.
Therefore, I like to point out its fallacy.

I enjoy stomping ALL OVER violations of logic and of political correctnesses.

Quote:

Why would you question that?

Because:
I enjoy stomping ALL OVER violations of logic and of political correctnesses.
( I can 't say that enuf. )

Quote:

Don't you believe in freedom?

No, I believe in freedom,
but whenever anyone violates sound reasoning
( as with error in co-ordinating numbers )
or
is politically correct, he shud be challenged and embarassed for it.
Therefore, I DO it.

Quote:

If you do, then nothing need be questioned, right?

Right,
but I am not confined to addressing NEEDS.

I don 't NEED to wear VESTED suits,
nor did NEED buy a giant HDTV, but I did both of them anyway.

Do U do only those things which u NEED to do, Mr. Me ?

Quote:

Or is your literacy level such that you are unfamiliar with this practice?

1. I am excessively familiar with it.
2. I reject it, on logical grounds.-------------

Quote:

I have often thought that you pretend to rebel
against standardized English because you do not know how to spell.

For a good 90% of my life,
I spelled YOUR way ( i.e., the rong way, the illogical way ).
In my youth, I memorized how to spell your way, the rong way.
I had no trouble with it.

For many years,
I corrected the spelling of my legal secretaries,
b4 signing my name. In retrospect,
I feel guilty for my complicity in perpetuating the defective paradigm,
insofar as it is inefficient, illogical n wasteful.

If that paradigm is to be dragged down
n thrown in the trash, insofar as it is inconsistent with logic,
then SOMEONE has to do the job.

I lead by example.

Quote:

-------------

Imagine, then, a world in which every parent subscribes to your belief
that a teacher has no right to lead a child above level one literacy. Describe same.

-----------

OK, it is the world that existed up until the late 1800s,
when educating children was like dressing them.



Parents either did it themselves,
or hired someone to deliver the information for them,
but the same way that their tailor
did not have the RIGHT to dress the children
( but he had the contractual DUTY to do so,
if he accepted money in exchange for his goods n services ),
so also their hired teacher had the contractual duty to convey
the information to the students; he did not have the RIGHT
to do so, and if he were well educated,
then he KNEW that he had no RIGHT to do so,
but cud do so only by permission.

Quote:

I was recently in a store and a rather fat, older woman parked her cart
across a narrow aisle diagonally,
completely preventing me from moving forward.

I 'd have said " excuse me " in a loud voice.

That is occassionally necessary.

Quote:

To one side of her was a display of salsas and corn chips while there were
low shelves of baked goods immediately to her other side. An Asian child
of about five was bouncing up and down in front of the salsa and chips
while the woman examined a package of cinnamon buns.
The woman told the little girl to wait until her mother arrived and
she passed judgment on the buns.

Was the child endeavoring to pass by ?
Did u have the impression that thay knew one another ?

Quote:

I was behind my cart and had no access to either the chips or the baked goods
or to the cheese that was immediately behind the woman.
The woman finally looked up and saw that I was waiting to pass and moved the child.
I noticed there was a package of chips on the floor
and I asked the child to pick it up,
as I had to either come from behind the cart or simply run over the package.

The a rather loud woman of European descent came up screaming,
"Who is telling my daughter to do something. My daughter did not knock over those chips."

Well, of course, the woman could not have seen her daughter's feet
but no one else had access to that space.

I looked her square in the face and said,
"I'm glad that you are raising your daughter to be a pig."

I might have answered
that I was only courteously asking for a favor
and that there is nothing rong with that.

I am reminded of an incident
that occurred when I was 13.
I was on a NYC bus, on my way to school,
in company with a mixture of people
some of whom appeared to be of the same age,
with similar destinations.

Let me say that during my boyhood n my adulthood,
I have LIKED girls n women,
and LIKED to see them comfortable and happy.
Therefore, on many occasions, I gave my seat
to girls or to women, out of good will for them.

HOWEVER, I was witness to an offense that outraged me,
on that bus, to wit: the seats were all taken,
one of them by a boy who looked about my age of 13.
I was standing 6 ft away, half asleep.

A well dressed woman appearing to be in her 50s,
approached him, and demanded in an angry voice
that he surrender his seat to her, and offered him
an insulting remark about his manners.
She was at least a foot taller than he was.
His face betrayed terror,
and he fled from his seat like a scalded kitten.

I walked over to her.
I was no bigger than the other boy.

I bent down looking closely into her eyes,
and informed her in a firm voice,
that she was very lucky to have done that
to a coward who 'd not stand up for his rights,
but that if she had done that to me,
it wud have been a big mistake.

I informed her in a stern voice
that she was a BULLY,
and questioned whether her mother had ever taught her any manners.
I did not touch her, but I believe that I effectively expressed
my disapproval. I never liked bullies much.

Quote:

Sounds like she subscribes to your parental theories.

Well, my mother DID suggest that I defend myself,
if it became necessary ( is that what u had in mind ? ),
but in your example,
I don't see that defense was necessary.

Any person of any age, can freely and morally ask any other person,
of any age, politely, for a favor.

Hopefully, u did not issue a COMMAND.


I am very glad that I have no children,
but if I had a son,
I 'd consider it imperative
to help him to understand that knowledge is power,
such that it behooves him to get as much of it as he can.


U know, Mr. Me,
when I was in school, I got hi grades,
but I did not enjoy school, for the most part.
The best part of the school day was the end of it,
and the best day of the school year was the last one.

Now, when no one is grading my learning,
I really LOVE the education that I am getting on HDTV.
I love the Discovery Channel, the Military Science Channel,
the History Channel, the National Geografic Channel,
the Science Channel, as well as Channel 13, public TV.
David

CalamityJane wrote:

Ha, omsigDAVID and logic is an oxymoron in itself.

That is an ad hominem, below the belt,
cheap shot, of which Wild Bill Hickok wud not approve, CJ.

Quote:

I'm going to refer anyone interested back to David's post of 2 January
where he said that teachers have no right to discipline kids
or to bring them out of level one literacy.

OK, if they have no right, then they have no responsibility.

The teacher has a contractual responsibility
to the people who pay him,
to deliver designated information to the student.

Within the context of COMPULSORY education
( wherein the students r there NOT because thay wish to be there,
but rather to comply with external forces of law
[ and of their parents ] )
the first step that a competent teacher needs to do
is to evoke and entrain the students' interest.

IF and only IF thay CARE about what he is telling them,
will thay make an effort to REMEMBER IT.

Quote:

So, why maintain schools at all?

In SOME schools,
the students ardently desire to acquire
the information that is being sold;
e.g., medical schools, law schools, automotive mechanical schools, etc.
These r schools to which students r not dragged
by force of law, enforced by a " truant officer ".

Quote:

Sorry. I am not going to read David's latest post.
The large type face is too much to handle.

I guess u don 't read the headlines of newspapers,
nor any billboards,
nor boldfaced chapter headings in books.

I write as I do
to facilitate the reading thereof
and to add clarity and emphasis.
David

David: I think you need to do some research on level one literacy and then

tell me why you think anyone would want to remain there.

David: I think you need to do some research on level one literacy and then

tell me why you think anyone would want to remain there.

David: I think you need to do some research on level one literacy and then

tell me why you think anyone would want to remain there.

David: I think you need to do some research on level one literacy and then
tell me why you think anyone would want to remain there.

The teacher has a contractual responsibility
to the people who pay him,
to deliver designated information to the student.

I write as I do
to facilitate the reading thereof
and to add clarity and emphasis.
David

CalamityJane wrote:

Yeah, but they're a joke!

Have u tried them all ?

CalamityJane wrote:

Ha, omsigDAVID and logic is an oxymoron in itself.

That is an ad hominem, below the belt,
cheap shot, of which Wild Bill Hickok wud not approve, CJ.

OmSigDAVID wrote:

I write as I do
to facilitate the reading thereof
and to add clarity and emphasis.
David

Quote:

Then you are unaware of the total failure of your method.
You turn people off.
Let's take a poll right now
and ask who likes reading the type face you present?

OK.
If anyone LIKES it, then your allegation
that it is a TOTAL failure is disproven.

Quote:

To add clarity, comment on one subject at a time.

Sounds good.
David

OmSigDAVID wrote:

CalamityJane wrote:

Ha, omsigDAVID and logic is an oxymoron in itself.

That is an ad hominem, below the belt,
cheap shot, of which Wild Bill Hickok wud not approve, CJ.

Of course, David has no right to complain about CJ's comment!

OmSigDAVID wrote:

CalamityJane wrote:

Yeah, but they're a joke!

Have u tried them all ?

Logical fallacy:
One need not try them all to know what a joke they are.

OmSigDAVID wrote:

The teacher has a contractual responsibility
to the people who pay him,
to deliver designated information to the student.

Quote:

Not according to your scenario.
If the student has the right to turn her back on the teacher,
the teacher has the right to chew gum and do nothing.

I BET u r smart enuf
to figure this out, Mr. Me !
( TELL me, if I 'm rong )

I have CONFIDENCE in u:
When the student turns her back
on the teacher, refusing to accept his information,
the teacher
does NOT violate her rights by doing nothing;
( as u correctly set forth hereinabove )

HOWEVER, if he fails to deliver the information to her,
then whoever hired him to do so,
might feel cheated, and demand his money back from the teacher.
( Much depends on what his employment contract requires of him. )

In any case:
u can lead a horse to water,
but u can 't make him drink,
and he might turn his back on u.

David

[quote="plainoldme]

Of course, David has no right to complain about CJ's comment!