• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Is education a right?

Is literacy education a right?


  • Total voters
    28

fantome profane

Anti-Woke = Anti-Justice
Premium Member
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.
 

Estro Felino

Believer in free will
Premium Member
Since 1877 education is strictly compulsory in my country.
In the early 20th century few people could speak Italian; most of them could only speak dialects.
Now anyone speaks Italian and dialects are disappearing.

My country has always invested lots of money on education and research. I think it was worth it.
 

Mox

Dr Green Fingers
If a publically funded educational establishment cannot guarantee a basic level of literacy attainment for it's students, then it isn't fit for purpose and should be closed down without delay.

Access to education should indeed be a fundamental human right, this would naturally include literacy, since without literacy, there cannot be any meaningful education.
 

Jumi

Well-Known Member
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.
 

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
I would not say that literacy is a right, but it is the right thing to do. If one wants to end the cycle of poverty a well educated populace is the first step. The students may have taken a poor approach in their lawsuit. Funding is supposed to be equitable at the least. It is more than likely that their schools were underfunded compared to others in wealthier areas. That could have been the basis of a lawsuit.
 

Earthling

David Henson
In America education isn't a right, it's a joke. The reason for that is the same reason that medical care is a joke, and the government, and the media. The military, now that's not a joke, but freedom and equality is. Follow the money. Thank the bankers and the robber barons.

There is, without question, a deliberate dumbing down of America. Look around you and you can see how effective it has been.

 

bobhikes

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

.

I found this interesting when I picked it up on my new feed and checked the constitution and it is true there is no requirement for education at all. The only requirement in one of the amendments is that if the states decide to provide public education it must be equal and inclusive to all.

I really don't know where I stand on it. I understand the benefits of education but how do we decide what education is proper. While I am not religious, I have major problems with the education system of my state. I rather keep the system my state has then have nothing. On the same point I am against a Federal Government sponsored education program. Ideally I'd like to keep control locally with perhaps a minimum requirement Nationally. Anything put into the constitution, I am sure would be problematic.
 

icehorse

......unaffiliated...... anti-dogmatist
Premium Member
I would argue that literacy is essential to representative democracy and therefore should be regarded by anyone who favors such a system as a foundational right to all their other rights.

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.
 

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
I voted <no>, but with the disclaimer that it's nonetheless worth universal provision.
Of course, it will eventually become a recognized right.
 

tytlyf

Not Religious
In America, our education system is a mess. Mostly red states due to cutting wages and deplorable school/supply conditions.

Red states have this notion of 'lower income taxes.' Which is mostly true. But they'll getcha to pay even more through other taxes. (property). Look at Florida, our governor Rick Scott continues to allow dumping of chemicals into Lake Okeechobee. And because the republicans don't want to fix the problem of the levies, they drain Lake Okeechobee through the waterways and into the Gulf of Mexico.

You can't go in the water at the beaches. I do see conservatives complaining about the issue and that it hurts tourism business, etc. I bet they voted for Rick Scott, that's the problem right there. Maybe Rick can put on his NAVY hat and win the conservative vote again..?
 

Vouthon

Dominus Deus tuus ignis consumens est
Premium Member
The right to education is a prerequisite for the meaningful enjoyment of nearly every other right one can licitly exercise in a liberal democracy.

Without it, how is a person expected to mature into an informed and free citizen: with the ability to take control over their life and contribute to wider society?

A hypothetical political system which didn't enshrine access to primary and secondary education, at the least (although I think tertiary education, while it must always remain a choice alongside apprenticeships, should be publicly funded), as a basic privilege granted to everyone (irrespective of gender race, religion or socio-economic status), cannot possibly hope to an inculcate an environment in which human flourishing can take place.

Bizarrely enough, the pioneers of liberal philosophy in the 18th and 19th centuries did not prioritize or even see cause to promote the universal right to education as a natural prerogative of the state.

To my knowledge, there's no mention of it in the American Declaration of Independence or the 1789 Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen in revolutionary France. I don't believe the idea really caught on until the Kaiserreich era of Imperial Germany in the late 19th century, under Bismarck (1871-1890).

In 1871 the "May Laws" were passed by Falk in Prussia, whereby the state was given control over education. From 1883 - 1884, Bismarck went on to transform Imperial Germany into the world's first welfare state, with compensation packages for injured labourers and pension schemes.

So, in point of fact, it wasn't liberals who pioneered universal education or social welfare but a conservative, authoritarian state. The liberals in the Western "democracies" (relatively) were then aghast that the militaristic Prussians had taken the wind out of their sails and subsequently rushed to implement similar policies. And thus left-wing Social Liberalism was born out of the ashes of classical laissez-faire liberalism.

What this overlooked history proves is that liberal democrats do not have all the answers to humanity's problems, and I say that as a staunch social liberal (in European political terms). We can learn from (and assimilate ideas from) other political philosophies, just like we derived the concept of meritocracy from Imperial China.

However, the ideal of universal education is older. And again, it's not liberal or humanist in origin. The credit for this must be granted to the early modern Christian theologian Comenius:


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Amos_Comenius


John Amos Comenius (Czech: Jan Amos Komenský; German: Johann Amos Comenius; Latinized: Ioannes Amos Comenius; 28 March 1592 – 15 November 1670)[1] was a Czech philosopher, pedagogue and theologian from the Margraviate of Moravia[2][3] and is considered the father of modern education.[4][5] He served as the last bishop of Unity of the Brethren and became a religious refugeea nd one of the earliest champions of universal education. As an educator and theologian, he led schools and advised governments across Protestant Europe through the middle of the seventeenth century.

[He] supported lifelong learning and development of logical thinking by moving from dull memorization, presented and supported the idea of equal opportunity for impoverished children, opened doors to education for women, and made instruction universal and practical.

He was preceded by Pierre Dubois, a medieval French lawyer, who advocated not so much universal education but selective, egalitarian state-funded education for boys and girls equally; whereby the most talented children of every social class, gender and kingdom in Europe would be trained at internationally-run schools. He did, nonetheless, commend universal education as well, when opining that: "It is especially desirable that every catholic should know written figures, the situation and places of the elements, their magnitude and shapes the thickness of the celestial orbs, their magnitude; the velocity, motion, and influences of sun, moon, and other stars; and how small the earth is compared to them, and how great with respect to man":


Pierre Dubois (c. 1255 – after. 1321), a French publicist in the reign of Philip the Fair, was the author of a series of political pamphlets embodying original and daring views.


See:

https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=DHa7AAAAIAAJ&pg=PA6&lpg=PA6&dq=pierre+dubois+education+international+schools+medieval&source=bl&ots=XbkNpkmOLv&sig=IH3G0rdf29cklAF2NINR0aMcyEg&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwigxdf_54_cAhWKKcAKHZ-PBw8Q6AEIVzAE#v=onepage&q=pierre dubois education international schools medieval&f=false

Dubois was the first propose an international court of arbitration. He urged that a state waging war be boycotted...a recommendation that received notice only six centuries later, in the Covenant of the League of Nations.

He advocated that the money that would be saved through the abolition of wars should be used for the establishment of international schools, and was thus one of the earliest proponents of international education.

Here's a link to his 1309 Scheme of Education:


http://medieval.ucdavis.edu/120B/Dubois.html


In each province, according to the resources of the localities available for this purpose and the size of the population, instead of the priories of the Templars or Hospitalers there located, there should be established what would be more opportune for this purpose two or more schools for boys and about the same number for girls, who should be chosen to be instructed there at the age of four or five years. And let them be selected by some wise philosopher who would recognize the natural disposition likely to make progress in philosophical studies...

These students and their teachers shall live on the goods of the said priories and the funds provided for the Holy Land, or as the trustees of the foundation, selected by the archbishop with the advice of skilled suffragans, may see fit to arrange.

All these children shall be instructed first in the Latin language to the extent that they know it sufficiently, or at first little by little; and after that they shall be instructed more fully, some of them in Greek, others in Arabic, and so with other literary idioms, especially of the catholics in the far east, so that in the end the Roman church and likewise catholic princes may through them, instructed in speaking and writing in all languages, communicate with all men, drawing them to the catholic faith and the unity of its single head.

Now when the youth are instructed in grammar, in which the younger are occupied, if some are instructed in logic, so much the better. Of whom let some be rapidly instructed in the articles of faith and sacraments the Old and New Testaments; so that instructed, as soon as they are prepared, they may be sent to the said land to take charge of souls and may be promoted to the priesthood, and provision be made for the churches and people. Let others be trained in medicine, others in surgery both human and veterinary, by whom the whole army and populace of both sexes may be helped.

Girls should be instructed in medicine and surgery with other subjects prerequisite to these. These girls, thus trained and knowing how to write...

It could hardly help but be the case that they, nobler and richer than other matrons and everywhere having knowledge of medicine and surgery and experimental science, would attract matrons who required their counsels, who admired their prudence and proficiency, and who loved them on these accounts could attract these strongly to communicating with them, delighting and agreeing in the same articles of faith and sacraments.

Also any future pope, at such time as such persons could be instructed in the idioms of oriental catholics, would keep near his court such elegantly lettered persons through whom he could write to the prelates and other magnates of those regions. Greek scholars could easily be procured for this purpose. Moreover, when in the more remote schools many were well founded in Latin and Greek, those who seemed to get on better than the others and were more teachable should be selected to study, hear lectures, and afterwards teach, some in civil and canon law, others in astronomy and in other mathematical and natural sciences, others in theology, others in medicine...

By provision of schools of this sort and transmission of instructors of both sexes to oriental parts we westerners would get trade in precious commodities abounding in those regions, lacking to us and very dear here, and we would import them cheaply once the world were made catholic....

Then let them begin to hear natural science...

Moreover, in mathematical sciences on account of their many utilities, especially touched upon in the little book Super utilitatibus made by brother Roger Bacon of the Order of Minorites, it will be advisable to instruct some disciples of this foundation, as they shall appear to show intelligence, skill, and speed therein, but rather dwelling on those matters which may be of service in taking and keeping the Holy Land.

It is especially desirable that every catholic should know written figures, the situation and places of the elements, their magnitude and shapes the thickness of the celestial orbs, their magnitude; the velocity, motion, and influences of sun, moon, and other stars; and how small the earth is compared to them, and how great with respect to man; so that admiration of these may swell the praise of their Creator, and that, repelling the lust for things worldly, man may not grow proud because of all these inferior things, which are as nothing in the universe that contains them all, and should be regarded as nothing....

It will be advisable that all the girls of the foundation like the males be instructed in Latin grammar, afterwards in logic, and in one other language, later in the rudiments of natural science, finally in surgery and medicine.

 
Last edited:

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
In America, our education system is a mess. Mostly red states due to cutting wages and deplorable school/supply conditions.

Red states have this notion of 'lower income taxes.' Which is mostly true. But they'll getcha to pay even more through other taxes. (property). Look at Florida, our governor Rick Scott continues to allow dumping of chemicals into Lake Okeechobee. And because the republicans don't want to fix the problem of the levies, they drain Lake Okeechobee through the waterways and into the Gulf of Mexico.

You can't go in the water at the beaches. I do see conservatives complaining about the issue and that it hurts tourism business, etc. I bet they voted for Rick Scott, that's the problem right there. Maybe Rick can put on his NAVY hat and win the conservative vote again..?
Sadly today's conservatives are "pound foolish and penny wise". They are cutting taxes which makes people think that they have more money for the short term but harms future earnings by limiting education and in your environmental examples, harms other businesses as a result of their shortsightedness. Excessive cutting of taxes is not proper conservatism.
 

fantome profane

Anti-Woke = Anti-Justice
Premium Member
On the same point I am against a Federal Government sponsored education program.
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.
 

fantome profane

Anti-Woke = Anti-Justice
Premium Member
I voted <no>, but with the disclaimer that it's nonetheless worth universal provision.
Of course, it will eventually become a recognized right.
What about from a viewpoint of equal treatment under the law?

When the same-sex marriage debate was raging it was questioned whether marriage was a right. The response I gave, and many others gave, was that if this was something the government was going to provide to one group of people it must provide the same thing to all people regardless of race, religion, ethnicity, or gender. I think this is similar. Why should one person receive a quality public education from the government while an other person receives a much inferior education based on nothing more than their zip code?

This is illustrated well by the inspiring life story of the great and powerful Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. She was born in the Bronx where her father had his own business. But at a young age her family purchased a small house upstate so that she could attend the much better public schools there. It is the same country, the same state even, just a 40 minute drive away. So why should there be such a great difference between the quality of public education provided by the same government? (and don’t tell me it is a about property taxes, I understand that part, but why do it that way when it creates and sustains such inequality?)
 
Last edited:

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
What about from a viewpoint of equal treatment under the law?

When the same-sex marriage debate was raging it was questioned whether marriage was a right. The response I gave, and many others gave, was that if this was something the government was going to provide to one group of people it must provide the same thing to all people regardless of race, religion, ethnicity, or gender. I think this is similar. Why should one person receive a quality public education from the government while an other person receives a much inferior education based on nothing more than their zip code?

This is illustrated well by the inspiring life story of the great and powerful Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. She was born in the Bronx where her father had his own business. But at a young age her family purchased a small house upstate so that she could attend the much better public schools there. It is the same country, the same state even, just a 40 minute drive away. So why should there be such a great difference between the quality of public education provide by the same government? (and don’t tell me it is a about property taxes, I understand that part, but why do it that way when it creates and sustains such inequality?)

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.
 

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
What about from a viewpoint of equal treatment under the law?
Equal treatment applies even to things which aren't rights, eg,
Title 9's requirement for equal access to sports within a university.
But there is no requirement that other universities offer equal
programs, or any programs at all.
When the same-sex marriage debate was raging it was questioned whether marriage was a right. The response I gave, and many others gave, was that if this was something the government was going to provide to one group of people it must provide the same thing to all people regardless of race, religion, ethnicity, or gender. I think this is similar. Why should one person receive a quality public education from the government while an other person receives a much inferior education based on nothing more than their zip code?
I saw denial of gay marriage as primarily denial of a
constitutional right, rather than a matter of equal treatment.
But certainly the latter also applied.
This is illustrated well by the inspiring life story of the great and powerful Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. She was born in the Bronx where her father had his own business. But at a young age her family purchased a small house upstate so that she could attend the much better public schools there. It is the same country, the same state even, just a 40 minute drive away. So why should there be such a great difference between the quality of public education provide by the same government? (and don’t tell me it is a about property taxes, I understand that part, but why do it that way when it creates and sustains such inequality?)
There are great differences in quality of education as a
function of location because it's largely a local matter,
eg, financing, administration, physical school location.
I wouldn't have mentioned property taxes anyway.
Does it matter?
It would be better if the minimum standard were higher.
 
Top