Is education a right?

[fantome profane]

I agree, arguing as a "right" was a poor tactic, arguing over equal quality would have been a much wiser tactic. Often it only takes a cursory examination of schools to determine that equality is lacking across school districts.

But equal treatment is a right. It is guaranteed under the 14th amendment.

 

[osgart]

Capitalism does not serve the rights of its citizens. Perhaps we should institute new forms of economy alongside capitalism. New economies and new currencies strictly for the purpose of providing people a right to exist, and a right to education. I would call it a Sanctuary economy; money printed out of necessity, and distributed equally to people in need of basic rights and dignities. Maybe something like that would incentivize people to serve their fellow humans without burdening them with taxation.

Im at a loss for seeing practical ways to include everybody in the rights of a democracy under the current systems, and economy. Experimentation is needed.

 

[Estro Felino]

Why? This is one aspect of American politics I have never understood. Why should people living on one side of an imaginary line have decent education, or healthcare and other people, in the same country, living on the other side of an arbitrary imaginary line don’t. And this is not only tolerated but defended as if it were virtuous. I don’t understand.

Because the US were created as multiethnic country from the very first...so there is no unifying principle other than economic liberism, that creates economic diversity as result of resourcefulness.

Most European countries were created upon the principle of the national identity as only unifying factor.
Socialism is used by the state because, a ethnically homogeneous society is supposed to be as egalitarian as possible, and this is achieved through granting everyone the same education.

Education is only needed if humans want to survive with all the technology we now have. Going back to some ideal uneducated mass controlled by literate clerics and powerful hereditary nobilities, merchant classes is the dream of many, but it would only end in a planet dying even quicker.

The Finnish system is one of the best in the world because of this principle.

 

[Quintessence]

I don't believe in rights, but what others have said about supporting the need for literacy in a democracy (or any technology-dependent culture for that matter) is fundamentally correct. It is some sort of stupidity to not make providing literacy (in more things than just reading) a basic requirement in a country like the United States. A lawsuit is the wrong way to go about enforcing that need. Unless, of course, one means suing Republican lawmakers who have made it their mission to gut the public education system over the last while.

 

[Twilight Hue]

Education is essential for the (metaphorical) evolution of man.

Depends upon what kind of education you're given.

 

[Rational Agnostic]

District Court Judge ruled that literacy is not a fundamental right.

https://detroit.cbslocal.com/2018/07/02/judge-dismisses-detroit-schools-literacy-lawsuit/

https://m.metrotimes.com/news-hits/...-students-have-no-right-to-access-to-literacy

Before the civil rights movement the segregated school system was described with the words “separate but equal”. Now in the U.S. there is still de facto segregation, but according to this ruling there is no legal requirement to make these schools equal. (not to imply they ever were equal)

There are schools in the United States with broken windows, leaking rooves, black mold, rats, lack of textbooks, no paper or pens. There are classrooms that are over 90 degrees in the summer and freezing in the winter. There are schools with contaminated drinking water. There are classes that even lack a teacher.

Compare these conditions to public schools in more affluent neighbourhoods and it is obviously there is no equality. And apparently no right to equal treatment.

The Judge who ruled that there was no right to literacy also said “when a child who could be taught to read goes untaught, the child suffers a lasting injury — and so does society.”. “But students enjoy no right to access to being taught literacy. All the state has to do is make sure schools run. If they are unable to educate their students, that's a shame, but court rulings have not established that "access to literacy" is "a fundamental right."

Shame sounds like a good word to describe the situation.

I would say yes. All children have a right to get a good education through high school. After all, children don't choose their parents, and all children deserve a chance to get a high school diploma, and potentially improve their lives.

 

[bobhikes]

Why? This is one aspect of American politics I have never understood. Why should people living on one side of an imaginary line have decent education, or healthcare and other people, in the same country, living on the other side of an arbitrary imaginary line don’t. And this is not only tolerated but defended as if it were virtuous. I don’t understand.

Because of American Politics. The ciriculum would be a political motivator. Schools could change every election.

 

[Sunstone]

I would say that a healthy society ought to place an extremely high VALUE on literacy, but I think it would be wrong to turn it into a RIGHT.

Why? It seems most or all other rights eventually depend on a literate public in a representational democracy.

 

[ChristineM]

District Court Judge ruled that literacy is not a fundamental right.

https://detroit.cbslocal.com/2018/07/02/judge-dismisses-detroit-schools-literacy-lawsuit/

https://m.metrotimes.com/news-hits/...-students-have-no-right-to-access-to-literacy

Before the civil rights movement the segregated school system was described with the words “separate but equal”. Now in the U.S. there is still de facto segregation, but according to this ruling there is no legal requirement to make these schools equal. (not to imply they ever were equal)

There are schools in the United States with broken windows, leaking rooves, black mold, rats, lack of textbooks, no paper or pens. There are classrooms that are over 90 degrees in the summer and freezing in the winter. There are schools with contaminated drinking water. There are classes that even lack a teacher.

Compare these conditions to public schools in more affluent neighbourhoods and it is obviously there is no equality. And apparently no right to equal treatment.

The Judge who ruled that there was no right to literacy also said “when a child who could be taught to read goes untaught, the child suffers a lasting injury — and so does society.”. “But students enjoy no right to access to being taught literacy. All the state has to do is make sure schools run. If they are unable to educate their students, that's a shame, but court rulings have not established that "access to literacy" is "a fundamental right."

Shame sounds like a good word to describe the situation.

Hasn't America ratified the Universal Declaration of Human Rights? article 26 .... Everyone has the right to education.

 

[icehorse]

Why? It seems most or all other rights eventually depend on a literate public in a representational democracy.

I can't remember where I heard this idea, but I think it has some merit as an orientation: We should think of "rights" as being zero sum, so we want to create new "rights" carefully. So, for example, if we decide that literacy is a "right", that will come with certain bureaucratic and/or government overhead / baggage / corruption.

Again, I think that we should VALUE literacy very highly.

 

[fantome profane]

Because of American Politics. The ciriculum would be a political motivator. Schools could change every election.

And is black mold in the classroom part of a politically motivated ciriculum?

 

[bobhikes]

And is black mold in the classroom part of a politically motivated ciriculum?

Currently education is the realm of local boards and as a person with 2 family members on boards in different school systems, it is a real possibility. The boards will spend money on making cheerleaders and football teams look good and not repair bathrooms and classrooms because no one see's them.

 

[Sunstone]

I can't remember where I heard this idea, but I think it has some merit as an orientation: We should think of "rights" as being zero sum, so we want to create new "rights" carefully. So, for example, if we decide that literacy is a "right", that will come with certain bureaucratic and/or government overhead / baggage / corruption.

Again, I think that we should VALUE literacy very highly.

Granted, but I cannot see a representative democracy surviving without creating a right to an education -- either in fact or in fact and in principle.

 

[icehorse]

Granted, but I cannot see a representative democracy surviving without creating a right to an education -- either in fact or in fact and in principle.

I would say that such a democracy won't survive if its citizens are not well educated, but that turning it into a "right" is bound to create less than optimal solutions.

In no way does this mean that I'm a fan of the US's current education system.

 

[esmith]

Not according to the Constitution. And no the 14th Amendment does not come into play. There are those that think the Constitution is a living document and try to interpret it as it applies to modern society and they are wrong .

 

[Mister Emu]

No, and I don't see value in labeling everything we like, find advantageous, and view as a societal obligation as rights. Government ought to provide an education, but if the government was too poor to provide one it shouldn't force some people to educate others.

Rights can be demanded; every person I see I can demand my valid rights from. I cannot point to anyone and demand an education, ipso facto it isn't a right.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

It's not a right, but it should be regarded as such.

Hasn't America ratified the Universal Declaration of Human Rights? article 26 .... Everyone has the right to education.

UN resolutions are non-binding.

There are those that think the Constitution is a living document

Could it be that people think that because it was intended to be left open and amended, altered and adjusted over time, and that people like Jefferson strongly urged it to be updated for every generation so the current generation can address their own issues and so the living are not governed by the dead.

 

[Estro Felino]

but if the government was too poor to provide one

A government cannot be "poor" otherwise its existence would be useless. The resources of a country are limited, so it's the task of the state to control and manage them...hence the government must be "rich".

I cannot point to anyone and demand an education, ipso facto it isn't a right.

some article of the It.constitution:

Article 4 The Republic shall recognize the right of all citizens to work and shall promote such conditions as shall render this right effective. Every citizen shall have the duty, according to personal potential and individual choice, to perform any activity or function contributing to the material or spiritual progress of society.

This means that the government must give gratuitously the citizen the instruments to reach a professional competence according to their capabilities.

hence the compulsory education:

Article 34 Education shall be open to everyone. Primary education, given for at least eight years, shall be compulsory and free. Capable and deserving pupils, including those lacking financial resources, shall have the right to attain the highest levels of education. The Republic shall render this right effective through scholarships, allowances to families and other benefits, which shall be assigned through competitive examinations.

Too socialistic Europe...we know

 

[Subduction Zone]

But equal treatment is a right. It is guaranteed under the 14th amendment.

Yes, but they did not appear to emphasize that this was a 14th amendment problem. Instead they simply declared education to be a right. One can't expect to always find a sympathetic judge. Sometimes one needs to do one's homework.

 

[fantome profane]

Yes, but they did not appear to emphasize that this was a 14th amendment problem. Instead they simply declared education to be a right. One can't expect to always find a sympathetic judge. Sometimes one needs to do one's homework.

In the second link I posted in the OP there is a reference to the 14th,

Last year, the state moved for dismissal, arguing that the 14th Amendment contains no reference to literacy.

It seems the argument was raised, and rejected (for what seems a very silly reason)