The debate "Individuals growing up without both the mother and father have a tendency to commit crimes" was started by
April 8, 2018, 1:16 am.
7 people are on the agree side of this discussion, while 10 people are on the disagree side.
People are starting to choose their side.
It looks like most people are against to this statement.
Matthew354 posted 5 arguments to the agreers part.
MajorGeneralX posted 1 argument to the disagreers part.
Matthew354 and 6 visitors agree.
MajorGeneralX, Ash, Foxxhole, devindel and 6 visitors disagree.
it doesn't specify education but it does say that services in general have to be provided equally. education is a service, therefore it applies
If you are talking about the US Constitution, you are clearly not reading it; because there is nothing in the constitution that says anything about education.
I disagree with your definition of the word "right" but I think that your use of the word requirement fits exactly with how I used right. however, this required education is a public service which according to the constitution, must be provided equally to all citizens, which it is not.
as for whose fault for the poverty? certainly the individual should be the master of his own future, however the impoverished community as a whole can be blamed on the gov and other external factors as a matter of external fact: redlining and policies like those around levittown which reserved the newly built suburbs as low income homes for whites only with subsidized ownership and plenty of investment, meanwhile blacks got subsidized rent in communities which were blocked any form of investment. the individual had little power to affect these restrictions.
its like exercising near a coal plant. the individual has to put in effort, but the environment has to be conducive as well. otherwise the individuals efforts are meaningless, and why many just surrender.
There is a serious problem in treating education as a right like you so argue: it would allow kids to have an education only to their pace and study only when they feel like it. The government cannot force their parents' kids not to study the material, this information is not easy to learn and the kids have to grow up ready with such information in adulthood.
Treating education like a right is not government making schools accessible to everyone, that is a common misconception what a right really is. Therefore, education should remain as a requirement.
And who's fault is that for the kids growing up in poverty? It's not the kids nor the government's intervention or "help" to provide enough public services for them, rather, its the adults (out of poor parenting) who procreated that child out of the wed-lock and not having a stable job before having the child.
Education in question? That is actually not a right, but a requirement in many states in the United States. In fact, it is a crime in California in the parents' burden not to put their child in some program of education.
Because the importance of family unity is heavily under appreciated, it worries me. After all, parenting is not easy and I feel too many take it for granted.
correlation does not always equal causation
how about kids who grow up in poverty with shit schools, fewer opportunities, and 0 after school activities, and their parent/parents working long hours with long commutes tend to seek family in gang culture.
I dont see how conservatives who love talking about opportunity equality wont invest in schools and some little league for poorer neighborhoods? schools are expensive but a right, little league is dirt cheap and easy to do.
if we treat the actual cause then just react to the symptoms, we might find success. instead of spending 3x as much on more police, more courts, more jail. and 100x as much on lost productivity from our society.
why do you think that?
Kids in a foster home are a special case