Legatus wrote:
On Wed, Mar 19, 2008 at 5:16 PM, Andrew Lentvorski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
RB W wrote:
Which by defining the whole by the faction and assigning greater value
to the secular would lead to the same definition/redefinition of what
is acceptably private.
Education of your children, by definition, has a public result.
For example, an entire state that decided to teach "creation science"
would do irreparable harm to the futures of those children.
Why should individuals be allowed to do something which agree would be
harmful if the state did it?
And of course we all use biological evolutionary theory so often, that we
couldn't survive in the modern world if neither idea were taught. I hate
that debate, it never changes, and no is the better for it. We will all know
when we die. On point though, the vast majority of people don't need to know
anything about biology, beyond which hole the stick goes in to make babies,
and food and water is good for you ( yes I know, over simplified ).
Reading, writing, math ( good stuff that trains some logical thinking ), the
scientific method, and simple finance. The rest can be built on that solid
foundation.
Well, we all use Shakespeare so often in the modern world that we
couldn't survive in the modern world if it weren't taught.
Well, we all use algebra so often in the modern world that we couldn't
survive in the modern world if it weren't taught.
And, we don't really need reading past a fifth grade level, so we could
dispense with that. Right?
And these computer-thingies, didn't need them in the last 100 years, why
start now?
School is not supposed to merely be vocational training in spite of what
the corporations would have you believe.
-a
--
[email protected]
http://www.kernel-panic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/kplug-list
