in the united states, and in my opinions, forcing kids to work is pretty close to the end of any sort of constitutionaly asserted rights -- regardless of any benefit provided.
But kids are being forced to work as it is anyway. How is "you have to go home and help out a charity" different from "you have to go home and write this paper"? Both are work and both are being forced, is homework infringing on anyones constitutional rights?
But kids are being forced to work all ready. How is "you have to go home and help some poor people" different from "you have to go home and write this paper"? Both are work and both are being forced, is homework infringing on anyones constitutional rights?
the very notion of public school is,
if you want to push the issue.
this is a case of "just because its bad, doesn't mean you should make it worse".
If I was to smile and I held out my hand
If I opened it now would you not understand?
are they lawsuit happy down under?
because over here, a kid spraining his little toe can send a school in to financial ruin.
either way, i don't like this.
perhaps, living in australia, you don't really understand what the basic rights and liberties written in to our constitution mean, or how allowing transgressions against it can mean the death of it. it's not a knock against you, i'm just saying perhaps, given your location, that you aren't aware of how fragile the fabric of our "supreme law of the land" already is.
in the united states, and in my opinions, forcing kids to work is pretty close to the end of any sort of constitutionaly asserted rights -- regardless of any benefit provided.
i don't think they are as lawsuit happy in australia drifting
i was born and raised in Australia yes, but now my heart and life lies with the US. this is my home now.
but i get what you are saying, about not living my whole life here, but i don't have a problem with obamas vision. i see positives in it.
there were positives all over the place with JFK too,
but at the end of the day he still seemed to think subjugating us to absolute control under the United Nations was somehow healthy.
My point here is that people must divorce themselves of the logic that says ANY perceived benefit is worthy of a constitutional infringement.
It is the very reason we are in the current mess to begin with!
[and i didn't know you'd "joined us". welcome.]
If I was to smile and I held out my hand
If I opened it now would you not understand?
the very notion of public school is,
if you want to push the issue.
this is a case of "just because its bad, doesn't mean you should make it worse".
Making kids go to school is against their constitutional rights? I suppose government run highways are against people’s constitutional rights because they don’t give you the freedom to choose the route you take to get from town to town. You are forced to use the routes the government chooses and builds highways on. What about government food inspectors, are they infringing on your constitutional right to buy and eat bad meat?
Or you can actually read what he said instead of how some op-ed portrayed his remarks.
But it's Jonah Goldberg. There's no way Jonah Goldberg would purposefully misrepresent anything Barack Obama would say. I mean, it's not like Jonah Goldberg is a partisian hack or anything.
But it's Jonah Goldberg. There's no way Jonah Goldberg would purposefully misrepresent anything Barack Obama would say. I mean, it's not like Jonah Goldberg is a partisian hack or anything.
That's what annoys me... The only thing that this article is, is a fear-mongering, political hit job. You take a few sentences of a 40+ paragraph speech, mis-represent it, and add words/phrases like "slavery" or "forced servitude" to scare people.
My whole life
was like a picture
of a sunny day
“We can complain because rose bushes have thorns, or rejoice because thorn bushes have roses.”
― Abraham Lincoln
Tying compulsory community service to federal education grants or loans is not slavery. It's the willful exchange of service for value, and there's nothing fundamentally wrong with that. So long as people have the ability to willingly opt out of these systems without being criminally liable, it's not slavery or even akin to slavery.
I have no issue with people serving. More people should serve whether it's in the military, Ameri-Corps or non profit. Comparing Barack's comments to slavery only fuels the flame for conservatives calling leftists whack jobs. Clearly you have no concept of term or what it entailed.
“Don't cry because it's over. Smile because it happened.”
It's important to note that slavery begins with one person or body assuming upon another a default obligation to work for the former's betterment, regardless of the latter's will. The enslavement of blacks in America, for instance, began with whites assuming that blacks had no rights and therefore could be assigned to their nature an obligation to work against their will for the betterment of white America.
We see many other instances of slavery in modern America, though few are as severe. Forced prostitution, forced labor (particularly of immigrants), the military drafts up to the 70s, assumed citizenship, japanese internment in the 40s, jury duty, imprisonment and taxation are all arguable forms of slavery, among others. Tying public service to public benefits that are not required and revolve around willful participants, however, is certainly not one of them.
Or you can actually read what he said instead of how some op-ed portrayed his remarks.
i dont even bother anymore... thats the new way of the anti obama MT crowd... surf the net until you find an op ed pice that is total crap or find a speech and just cherry pick some quotes and use them totally out of context
anti obama folks around here are desperate... mostly because i think the majority of them have a general distaste for all politicians and try to be cool by perpetuating the "politicians are all evil" rhetoric... so they are trying everyday to find any little shred of anything on Obama and run with it for miles
i mean i agree that there should be some volunteerism to middle and high school students but the amount of hours is unnecessary...college students 100 hours?
this is the bullshit that happens in a soundbyte society when the biased OP doesnt put out the whole story, and posts op-ed articles with a clear bias
his proposal is simple, and fully voluntary. if you provide 100 hours of community service, then the federal government will provide a $4,000 credit towards your college tuition. as a man that paid his own way through college i think it is a great idea and i would have done it in a heartbeat. $4000 in exchange for 100 hours is more then generous and a tremendous idea.
maybe i just look at things differently. when i was at school in australia, i was forced to study italian for 4 years. 4 lessons a week of an hour. absolutely hated it. what did it teach me? how did it help me become a better person? it didn't. i would much rather have spent those 600 odd hours on something community based like obama is proposing. i guarantee i would have learnt a whole lot more.
The point of learning a new language is also to learn more about a different culture and customs, etc. The issue perhaps is that you were forced and you were not interested to start with, and that's why you hated it in the end.
But how would that work for other students forced to volunteer and not being interested? You might have the same results, right?
Then again, you might get some people who even if initially hated to learn a new language actually fell in love with it (me with French, e.g.) or discover new things.
That's what annoys me... The only thing that this article is, is a fear-mongering, political hit job. You take a few sentences of a 40+ paragraph speech, mis-represent it, and add words/phrases like "slavery" or "forced servitude" to scare people.
Comparing forcing someone to do homework and forcing them to volunteer is sort of an irrelevant comparison.
But how are they different if both are forced requirements you need to pass on to the next grade? I mean is spending 4 hours on a weekend writing a paper any different than spending 4 hours on a weekend working in the office of a charity, if both were assigned by your school? Hell working at a charity you might be put to work writing letters to people to solicit donations, so it is kind of exactly like doing writing for homework. I am curious how you see the comparison as not working. It is not like the only form of volunteering is hard physical labour.
Comparing forcing someone to do homework and forcing them to volunteer is sort of an irrelevant comparison.
Again, probably why Obama never used the term "volunteer" in the speech talking about these programs. They are referred to as service programs.
I guess the op-ed hit job worked by inserting terms like "compulsory volunteerism" when they were never in the speech.
My whole life
was like a picture
of a sunny day
“We can complain because rose bushes have thorns, or rejoice because thorn bushes have roses.”
― Abraham Lincoln
his proposal is simple, and fully voluntary. if you provide 100 hours of community service, then the federal government will provide a $4,000 credit towards your college tuition. as a man that paid his own way through college i think it is a great idea and i would have done it in a heartbeat. $4000 in exchange for 100 hours is more then generous and a tremendous idea.
wtf is wrong with that?
Maybe FFG can jump in here and explain where such an arrangement is provided for in the grant of federal powers within the constitution. I mean, since he seems to be so convinced that this is an exchange of labor for benefit, and is all hunky-dorey.
Also, like i said, it is specifically in contradiction with the principle of GENERAL welfare. You have now moved to a society which provides for the SELECTED welfare of a "voluntary" few.
I maintain that this is above the mandates provided for federal government, and therefore not okay.
again, regardless of any benefit.
and accuse me of biased partisan bullshit all you want.
no one in this thread has addressed the fundamental concernt that such an act is not within the constitutional limits of government authority.
:(
If I was to smile and I held out my hand
If I opened it now would you not understand?
Again, probably why Obama never used the term "volunteer" in the speech talking about these programs. They are referred to as service programs.
I guess the op-ed hit job worked by inserting terms like "compulsory volunteerism" when they were never in the speech.
I wasn't exactly referring to whatever Obama did/didn't say. I was referring to the people in this thread that would be okay with "compulsory volunteerism".
this is the bullshit that happens in a soundbyte society when the biased OP doesnt put out the whole story, and posts op-ed articles with a clear bias
his proposal is simple, and fully voluntary. if you provide 100 hours of community service, then the federal government will provide a $4,000 credit towards your college tuition. as a man that paid his own way through college i think it is a great idea and i would have done it in a heartbeat. $4000 in exchange for 100 hours is more then generous and a tremendous idea.
wtf is wrong with that?
Absolutely nothing.
“Don't cry because it's over. Smile because it happened.”
But how are they different if both are forced requirements you need to pass on to the next grade? I mean is spending 4 hours on a weekend writing a paper any different than spending 4 hours on a weekend working in the office of a charity, if both were assigned by your school? Hell working at a charity you might be put to work writing letters to people to solicit donations, so it is kind of exactly like doing writing for homework. I am curious how you see the comparison as not working. It is not like the only form of volunteering is hard physical labour.
But they are different. The very definition of volunteer displays that. You can't force someone to do something that is defined as "performing a service voluntarily" and then label it volunteer work; that is more like forced servitude.
You start forcing people to volunteer as a requirement to pass to the next grade and then it becomes something else; it is no longer volunteer work.
Maybe FFG can jump in here and explain where such an arrangement is provided for in the grant of federal powers within the constitution. I mean, since he seems to be so convinced that this is an exchange of labor for benefit, and is all hunky-dorey.
There's nothing constitutional about direct federal education grants, which is why they're typically routed through the states.
I don't think this plan is constitutional, nor do I think this is even a very good idea. I simply disagree with your classifications of "compulsory volunteerism" or "slavery".
Also, like i said, it is specifically in contradiction with the principle of GENERAL welfare. You have now moved to a society which provides for the SELECTED welfare of a "voluntary" few.
I maintain that this is above the mandates provided for federal government, and therefore not okay.
again, regardless of any benefit.
and accuse me of biased partisan bullshit all you want.
no one in this thread has addressed the fundamental concernt that such an act is not within the constitutional limits of government authority.
:(
:rolleyes:
If your beef here is constitutional, cherry-picking this plan to complain about is pretty silly. It's like attacking those state-themed quarters on the grounds that the Federal Mint shouldn't exist.
Getting rid of the voluntary tax credit isn't going to stop the federal government from meddling in education financing. If you have constitutional beefs with federal education spending, then attack 65's Higher Education Act or the Department of Education. Attacking this kind of plan as "unconstitutional" makes no sense when it simply stems from existing departments and laws that would, based on your argument, also be unconstitutional.
In all honesty, what's wrong with making kids voluteer for a small portion of time? Wouldn't it give them a sense of duty to the society and nation around them? Wouldn't it get them to recognize how much better off they are compared to living in poverty or having the variety of other issues and problems those they'd be helping? I don't think this is a bad idea at all, depending on that the person volunteering can decide which organization or issue they can help.
CONservative governMENt
Our government is the potent, the omnipresent teacher. For good or for ill, it teaches the whole people by its example. Crime is contagious. If the government becomes a law-breaker, it breeds contempt for law; it invites every man to become a law unto himself; it invites anarchy. - Louis Brandeis
In all honesty, what's wrong with making kids voluteer for a small portion of time? Wouldn't it give them a sense of duty to the society and nation around them? Wouldn't it get them to recognize how much better off they are compared to living in poverty or having the variety of other issues and problems those they'd be helping? I don't think this is a bad idea at all, depending on that the person volunteering can decide which organization or issue they can help.
It's not volunteering if you have to make someone do it.
I don't think this plan is constitutional, nor do I think this is even a very good idea.
well, i'd like to just say "no further questions" and leave it at that.
however, this whole notion of "cherry picking" and accusing me of being focused on issues that are sub-issues of sub-issues is infuriating!
with this attitude, it seems like you are saying that we the people should just lay down and take every transgression that is threatened against our constitution.
I mean, fuck it, right?
Yes. Of COURSE the DOE is unconstitutional and all of public education is fundamentaly a farce.
But this assumption that because the system is broken already, we should therefore allow policy makers to come along and absolutely SHATTER it, is simply absurd.
Why is it silly to attempt to stand up against, and more importantly explain to and warn others against, such bad and unconstitutinal policies?
Shit, most people here have NO idea waht the fuck i am saying.
They have ZERO understanding of the constitutionality of this issue, or how it simply serves to further degrade their supreme law, and set bad precedent.
And here you stand, accusing me of "cherry picking" and being asinine for it.
All i want is for people to think criticaly about their options; to understand what the supreme law of the land IS; and to hopefuly be motivated to defend it -- regardless of how fluffly and lovely some new legislation sounds.
If I was to smile and I held out my hand
If I opened it now would you not understand?
The sentence makes no sense. If they're being coerced, it isn't volunteering, is it?
My kids have both done service hours to fill requirements of the school and the national honor society. They understand that it is a required service. They have also volunteered to do things, and understand the difference.
If we call it compulsory service or required service in exchange for additional benefits, then it might at least make sense as far as the language goes.
"I'll use the magic word - let's just shut the fuck up, please." EV, 04/13/08
well, i'd like to just say "no further questions" and leave it at that.
however, this whole notion of "cherry picking" and accusing me of being focused on issues that are sub-issues of sub-issues is infuriating!
with this attitude, it seems like you are saying that we the people should just lay down and take every transgression that is threatened against our constitution.
I mean, fuck it, right?
Yes. Of COURSE the DOE is unconstitutional and all of public education is fundamentaly a farce.
But this assumption that because the system is broken already, we should therefore allow policy makers to come along and absolutely SHATTER it, is simply absurd.
Why is it silly to attempt to stand up against, and more importantly explain to and warn others against, such bad and unconstitutinal policies?
Shit, most people here have NO idea waht the fuck i am saying.
They have ZERO understanding of the constitutionality of this issue, or how it simply serves to further degrade their supreme law, and set bad precedent.
And here you stand, accusing me of "cherry picking" and being asinine for it.
All i want is for people to think criticaly about their options; to understand what the supreme law of the land IS; and to hopefuly be motivated to defend it -- regardless of how fluffly and lovely some new legislation sounds.
Personally I don't think you understand or believe half of the stuff your saying.
“Don't cry because it's over. Smile because it happened.”
Firstly, if you honestly believe that "forced" volunteerism is comparable to slavery, you seriously need your head examined. Get a grip and come back to reality.
Secondly, however you want to designate such a program - whether forced or a new way to help society by acclimating kids to help those around them in some manner. Do you not recognize all the good things that an come from this? Is our society that "on track" where instituting such a program, where teenagers put down video game controllers, turn off their ipods, tvs, computers, and similar to help less fortunate people and issues in our nation? Consider it an internship into the reality of our society in which they'll gain experience and have their eyes opened to the larger world around them through a particular issue, cause, belief while become more socially responsible citizens. Isn't that the kind of nation we want to become? So why wouldn't we embrace something that promotes such core values and morals?
CONservative governMENt
Our government is the potent, the omnipresent teacher. For good or for ill, it teaches the whole people by its example. Crime is contagious. If the government becomes a law-breaker, it breeds contempt for law; it invites every man to become a law unto himself; it invites anarchy. - Louis Brandeis
What's wrong with making black people pick your cotton?
Not really worth a response because it's like comparing apples and platypuses...
Requiring high school kids to do some sort of community service (this plan says 50 hours, so like an hour a week) as part of their education isn't even remotely comparable to buying and forcing people into grueling labor based on race.
My whole life
was like a picture
of a sunny day
“We can complain because rose bushes have thorns, or rejoice because thorn bushes have roses.”
― Abraham Lincoln
Comments
But kids are being forced to work as it is anyway. How is "you have to go home and help out a charity" different from "you have to go home and write this paper"? Both are work and both are being forced, is homework infringing on anyones constitutional rights?
the very notion of public school is,
if you want to push the issue.
this is a case of "just because its bad, doesn't mean you should make it worse".
If I opened it now would you not understand?
i was born and raised in Australia yes, but now my heart and life lies with the US. this is my home now.
but i get what you are saying, about not living my whole life here, but i don't have a problem with obamas vision. i see positives in it.
there were positives all over the place with JFK too,
but at the end of the day he still seemed to think subjugating us to absolute control under the United Nations was somehow healthy.
My point here is that people must divorce themselves of the logic that says ANY perceived benefit is worthy of a constitutional infringement.
It is the very reason we are in the current mess to begin with!
[and i didn't know you'd "joined us".
If I opened it now would you not understand?
Making kids go to school is against their constitutional rights? I suppose government run highways are against people’s constitutional rights because they don’t give you the freedom to choose the route you take to get from town to town. You are forced to use the routes the government chooses and builds highways on. What about government food inspectors, are they infringing on your constitutional right to buy and eat bad meat?
That's what annoys me... The only thing that this article is, is a fear-mongering, political hit job. You take a few sentences of a 40+ paragraph speech, mis-represent it, and add words/phrases like "slavery" or "forced servitude" to scare people.
was like a picture
of a sunny day
“We can complain because rose bushes have thorns, or rejoice because thorn bushes have roses.”
― Abraham Lincoln
We see many other instances of slavery in modern America, though few are as severe. Forced prostitution, forced labor (particularly of immigrants), the military drafts up to the 70s, assumed citizenship, japanese internment in the 40s, jury duty, imprisonment and taxation are all arguable forms of slavery, among others. Tying public service to public benefits that are not required and revolve around willful participants, however, is certainly not one of them.
i dont even bother anymore... thats the new way of the anti obama MT crowd... surf the net until you find an op ed pice that is total crap or find a speech and just cherry pick some quotes and use them totally out of context
anti obama folks around here are desperate... mostly because i think the majority of them have a general distaste for all politicians and try to be cool by perpetuating the "politicians are all evil" rhetoric... so they are trying everyday to find any little shred of anything on Obama and run with it for miles
i think it is hilarious at this point
http://www.tfd.com/volunteer
Comparing forcing someone to do homework and forcing them to volunteer is sort of an irrelevant comparison.
this is the bullshit that happens in a soundbyte society when the biased OP doesnt put out the whole story, and posts op-ed articles with a clear bias
his proposal is simple, and fully voluntary. if you provide 100 hours of community service, then the federal government will provide a $4,000 credit towards your college tuition. as a man that paid his own way through college i think it is a great idea and i would have done it in a heartbeat. $4000 in exchange for 100 hours is more then generous and a tremendous idea.
wtf is wrong with that?
The point of learning a new language is also to learn more about a different culture and customs, etc. The issue perhaps is that you were forced and you were not interested to start with, and that's why you hated it in the end.
But how would that work for other students forced to volunteer and not being interested? You might have the same results, right?
Then again, you might get some people who even if initially hated to learn a new language actually fell in love with it (me with French, e.g.) or discover new things.
like i said, welcome to the MT 2008
But how are they different if both are forced requirements you need to pass on to the next grade? I mean is spending 4 hours on a weekend writing a paper any different than spending 4 hours on a weekend working in the office of a charity, if both were assigned by your school? Hell working at a charity you might be put to work writing letters to people to solicit donations, so it is kind of exactly like doing writing for homework. I am curious how you see the comparison as not working. It is not like the only form of volunteering is hard physical labour.
Again, probably why Obama never used the term "volunteer" in the speech talking about these programs. They are referred to as service programs.
I guess the op-ed hit job worked by inserting terms like "compulsory volunteerism" when they were never in the speech.
was like a picture
of a sunny day
“We can complain because rose bushes have thorns, or rejoice because thorn bushes have roses.”
― Abraham Lincoln
Maybe FFG can jump in here and explain where such an arrangement is provided for in the grant of federal powers within the constitution. I mean, since he seems to be so convinced that this is an exchange of labor for benefit, and is all hunky-dorey.
Also, like i said, it is specifically in contradiction with the principle of GENERAL welfare. You have now moved to a society which provides for the SELECTED welfare of a "voluntary" few.
I maintain that this is above the mandates provided for federal government, and therefore not okay.
again, regardless of any benefit.
and accuse me of biased partisan bullshit all you want.
no one in this thread has addressed the fundamental concernt that such an act is not within the constitutional limits of government authority.
:(
If I opened it now would you not understand?
I wasn't exactly referring to whatever Obama did/didn't say. I was referring to the people in this thread that would be okay with "compulsory volunteerism".
Absolutely nothing.
But they are different. The very definition of volunteer displays that. You can't force someone to do something that is defined as "performing a service voluntarily" and then label it volunteer work; that is more like forced servitude.
You start forcing people to volunteer as a requirement to pass to the next grade and then it becomes something else; it is no longer volunteer work.
There's nothing constitutional about direct federal education grants, which is why they're typically routed through the states.
I don't think this plan is constitutional, nor do I think this is even a very good idea. I simply disagree with your classifications of "compulsory volunteerism" or "slavery".
:rolleyes:
If your beef here is constitutional, cherry-picking this plan to complain about is pretty silly. It's like attacking those state-themed quarters on the grounds that the Federal Mint shouldn't exist.
Getting rid of the voluntary tax credit isn't going to stop the federal government from meddling in education financing. If you have constitutional beefs with federal education spending, then attack 65's Higher Education Act or the Department of Education. Attacking this kind of plan as "unconstitutional" makes no sense when it simply stems from existing departments and laws that would, based on your argument, also be unconstitutional.
Our government is the potent, the omnipresent teacher. For good or for ill, it teaches the whole people by its example. Crime is contagious. If the government becomes a law-breaker, it breeds contempt for law; it invites every man to become a law unto himself; it invites anarchy. - Louis Brandeis
It's not volunteering if you have to make someone do it.
What's wrong with making black people pick your cotton?
well, i'd like to just say "no further questions" and leave it at that.
however, this whole notion of "cherry picking" and accusing me of being focused on issues that are sub-issues of sub-issues is infuriating!
with this attitude, it seems like you are saying that we the people should just lay down and take every transgression that is threatened against our constitution.
I mean, fuck it, right?
Yes. Of COURSE the DOE is unconstitutional and all of public education is fundamentaly a farce.
But this assumption that because the system is broken already, we should therefore allow policy makers to come along and absolutely SHATTER it, is simply absurd.
Why is it silly to attempt to stand up against, and more importantly explain to and warn others against, such bad and unconstitutinal policies?
Shit, most people here have NO idea waht the fuck i am saying.
They have ZERO understanding of the constitutionality of this issue, or how it simply serves to further degrade their supreme law, and set bad precedent.
And here you stand, accusing me of "cherry picking" and being asinine for it.
All i want is for people to think criticaly about their options; to understand what the supreme law of the land IS; and to hopefuly be motivated to defend it -- regardless of how fluffly and lovely some new legislation sounds.
If I opened it now would you not understand?
The sentence makes no sense. If they're being coerced, it isn't volunteering, is it?
My kids have both done service hours to fill requirements of the school and the national honor society. They understand that it is a required service. They have also volunteered to do things, and understand the difference.
If we call it compulsory service or required service in exchange for additional benefits, then it might at least make sense as far as the language goes.
Personally I don't think you understand or believe half of the stuff your saying.
Secondly, however you want to designate such a program - whether forced or a new way to help society by acclimating kids to help those around them in some manner. Do you not recognize all the good things that an come from this? Is our society that "on track" where instituting such a program, where teenagers put down video game controllers, turn off their ipods, tvs, computers, and similar to help less fortunate people and issues in our nation? Consider it an internship into the reality of our society in which they'll gain experience and have their eyes opened to the larger world around them through a particular issue, cause, belief while become more socially responsible citizens. Isn't that the kind of nation we want to become? So why wouldn't we embrace something that promotes such core values and morals?
Our government is the potent, the omnipresent teacher. For good or for ill, it teaches the whole people by its example. Crime is contagious. If the government becomes a law-breaker, it breeds contempt for law; it invites every man to become a law unto himself; it invites anarchy. - Louis Brandeis
Not really worth a response because it's like comparing apples and platypuses...
Requiring high school kids to do some sort of community service (this plan says 50 hours, so like an hour a week) as part of their education isn't even remotely comparable to buying and forcing people into grueling labor based on race.
was like a picture
of a sunny day
“We can complain because rose bushes have thorns, or rejoice because thorn bushes have roses.”
― Abraham Lincoln