I am not advocating heroin addicts going "cold turkey," though. To be fair, that analogy is highly incongruous. I am simply stating that parents and children should have a choice, and that how they choose to be educated is nobody's business but theirs.
And no, you are incorrect. I do not have to "wait on society" for it to be my moral right to live free. This is the same as saying " We can end black slavery as soon as we figure out how the cotton will be picked without slaves! Until then, we need slavery!"
Nope. Nope. Nope.
Completely wrong.
If you wish to wait in that fashion, you are free to do so. Those of us who wish to exercise our natural law human rights are also free to do so, RIGHT NOW.
You have no right to tell me I must wait.
I don't think I'm the one drawing incongruous analogies, here. Having to pay for public schools regardless of whether you send your child there is not just or moral. But it is something that a lot of people are depending on right now, and yes, cutting all funding for public education right now is something that would be analogous to quitting heroin cold turkey. With society being the way it is right now, a lot of children just would not get any education of any kind, and that would be a disaster. We still have to do something about the injustice of redistributing money to pay for "free" public education, but that's something we have to do intelligently and methodically.
On the other hand, comparing public education to forcing vast swathes of the population to do hard labor for free, and to treat them like chattel is really kind of a stretch, by comparison.
Well, this is easy to address, because I did not suggest people should not be able to continue going to school where they wish. I did not suggest they should be “cut off” from their choice. As long as I am allowed to be free, that is fine with me. See? The problem is on the side of the initiator of aggression.
At what percentage of someone’s stolen time does something become slavery, in to your view?
I never suggested that we should be against private or home schooling. Obviously, that's a massive step in the wrong direction. In principle, having your earnings confiscated by the state is not different from chattel slavery. In practice, however, the two are extremely different in terms of degree, and the former creates dependency through collectivization, rather than personal enrichment through direct tyranny. Therefore, while one requires an immediate, even violent, response, the latter requires a measured, methodical response that takes into account the fact that collectivization, while wrong, is more complicated than direct tyranny of one man over another, and creates dependency that should be dissolved in a transitional way in order to avoid the disastrous consequences of pulling the rug out from under people who have come to depend on it.
Posted using Partiko Android
So at what percentage does it become slavery? And you seem to miss that I have not suggested pulling any rugs out from under anyone. Simply that I should not be coerced.
You mean at what percentage is income confiscation literally equivalent to total chattel slavery? At no point. They aren't actually the same thing. They may operate according to a common principle, but they are not literal equivalents. Now are you going to keep asking me "gotcha" questions, or are you going to respond to my argument?
Posted using Partiko Android
That’s just it. I’m not sure what you are trying to say here. Where did I suggest “pulling the rug out” from under anyone?
And second, what is a congruous analogy then, for forcing individuals under threat of violence to stay in a building all day? I’ll leave it to you.
You suggest that standardized education is fatally flawed. I posit that while that's the case in a lot of ways, basic literacy and mathematics are so essential, that one is functionally debilitated without them, and while public education, in principle, is problematic, it is necessary for some people for now, but that we can get rid of it eventually if we start moving in the right direction. You then compare public education to chattel slavery, and suggest that we should get rid of it immediately. I point out that that's not a good comparison, and that that's not a response that makes sense - that it pulls the rug out from under people who presently depend on it. Then you pretended not to understand the line of discourse we've been engaging in, and glibly asked where you were suggesting that we pull out the rug from under people.
If I'm wrong about any of that, feel free to clarify.
Posted using Partiko Android