slipping mandatory service under the radar?

christiefan915 said:
Where I live kids have to amass a certain number of community service hours before they can graduate from HS. It's a requirement. I see absolutely nothing wrong with a policy that works for the common good.
Click to expand...
Yeah, because there's nothing like enforced patriotism to ensure they think and act just like you want them to. Teach them to "express" their patriotism, force them to say the pledge, maybe pray... But heck that isn't what you were thinking of right? You want to teach them to "express" it your way.

It doesn't matter which side this crap comes from it's the wrong way to go. It makes a mockery of the idea of teaching people to think.

This kind of crap makes me sick. This was a very good reason not to vote for Obama.
 
Community service in our school districts has been around long before Obama was, and I'm talking decades. That would take it back to the reagan-bush 41 years. Back then nobody would have criticized it with the excuse of "forced patriotism". Community service decisions here are local, have nothing to do with the federal or state governments, and it's absurd to criticize them on that basis. Nothing is more suggestive of "forced patriotism" as the ritual of pledging allegiance to a flag, a a practice that's unheard-of outside the U.S. except in countries with totalitarian governments or dictatorships. Children shouldn't be forced to slavishly memorize and chant a promise to something they can't even comprehend.

Obama's not forcing people to volunteer, he's asking them to. The bill's intent is to expand on the AmeriCorps. program which has been around for 15 years. Apparently gwb didn't think it was "forced" enough to call for termination of the program. Furthermore, McCain specifically said he would have called people to serve after 9/11, unlike bu$h, who told them to go shopping.

Neocons need something, anything to use against Obama but 74% of the House voted for the bill, so I guess some of those repubs can look at the Americorps action without their party blinders on.

Damocles said:
Yeah, because there's nothing like enforced patriotism to ensure they think and act just like you want them to. Teach them to "express" their patriotism, force them to say the pledge, maybe pray... But heck that isn't what you were thinking of right? You want to teach them to "express" it your way.

It doesn't matter which side this crap comes from it's the wrong way to go. It makes a mockery of the idea of teaching people to think.

This kind of crap makes me sick. This was a very good reason not to vote for Obama.
Click to expand...
 
ZappasGuitar said:
Big whoop!

Hundreds of thousands of words in our language and the guy can't make his point without using one of a few dozen vile vulgarities?

He's free to use whatever words he wants of course, but an inability to make his point without pitiful schoolyard namecalling speaks volumes.
Click to expand...

On second thought, you're right. :thup: I should have hyperlinked him to an online dictionary/thesaurus.
 
christiefan915 said:
Community service in our school districts has been around long before Obama was, and I'm talking decades. That would take it back to the reagan-bush 41 years. Back then nobody would have criticized it with the excuse of "forced patriotism". Community service decisions here are local, have nothing to do with the federal or state governments, and it's absurd to criticize them on that basis. Nothing is more suggestive of "forced patriotism" as the ritual of pledging allegiance to a flag, a a practice that's unheard-of outside the U.S. except in countries with totalitarian governments or dictatorships. Children shouldn't be forced to slavishly memorize and chant a promise to something they can't even comprehend.
Click to expand...

Rubbish, many people would criticize it, and have. And my point with the pledge points exactly to that. Not only have people criticized it, they brought it to courts. Forcing children to act as you wish in order to imprint upon them your political agenda is wrong whichever direction it takes. Teach them to think, give them information, let them decide.

Obama's not forcing people to volunteer, he's asking them to. The bill's intent is to expand on the AmeriCorps. program which has been around for 15 years. Apparently gwb didn't think it was "forced" enough to call for termination of the program. Furthermore, McCain specifically said he would have called people to serve after 9/11, unlike bu$h, who told them to go shopping.
Click to expand...

Except for the part about "requirement" I might have agreed.

Neocons need something, anything to use against Obama but 74% of the House voted for the bill, so I guess some of those repubs can look at the Americorps action without their party blinders on.
Click to expand...

Or they are the last vestiges of the "Compassionate Conservative" who believe that they can use this required service (you know, to graduate and stuff) to teach them how to think the way that THEY want them to.

The very stark reality is, if this was proposed by Bush you would have nearly had an aneurysm in your rush to discredit and point out the very disconcerting areas of such a "program". Instead, because it comes from somebody on your side, you promote it wholeheartedly and without reservation. A bit of that supposed "famous" introspection from the left should be used in this arena.
 
Damocles said:
Rubbish, many people would criticize it, and have. And my point with the pledge points exactly to that. Not only have people criticized it, they brought it to courts. Forcing children to act as you wish in order to imprint upon them your political agenda is wrong whichever direction it takes. Teach them to think, give them information, let them decide.



Except for the part about "requirement" I might have agreed.



Or they are the last vestiges of the "Compassionate Conservative" who believe that they can use this required service (you know, to graduate and stuff) to teach them how to think the way that THEY want them to.

The very stark reality is, if this was proposed by Bush you would have nearly had an aneurysm in your rush to discredit and point out the very disconcerting areas of such a "program". Instead, because it comes from somebody on your side, you promote it wholeheartedly and without reservation. A bit of that supposed "famous" introspection from the left should be used in this arena.
Click to expand...


There is no mandatory service requirement in the bill.
 
Dungheap said:
There is no mandatory service requirement in the bill.
Click to expand...
(6) Whether a workable, fair, and reasonable mandatory service requirement for all able young people could be developed, and how such a requirement could be implemented in a manner that would strengthen the social fabric of the Nation and overcome civic challenges by bringing together people from diverse economic, ethnic, and educational backgrounds.
Click to expand...

No, it is just planned, and with specific directives to ensure that the implementation would teach the kids exactly what they wanted them to learn. It's all good, it isn't in there "yet" so we should just ignore even the suggestion of it... (Please note that they use "requirement", just as I quoted above).

Do you think that under a different type of Administration such a program could be problematic? Or maybe you are even honest enough to think that under any Administration such a program could be problematic. A propaganda tool to mold the minds of the youth into the cogs of any specific political machine?
 
Damocles said:
No, it is just planned, and with specific directives to ensure that the implementation would teach the kids exactly what they wanted them to learn. It's all good, it isn't in there "yet" so we should just ignore even the suggestion of it... (Please note that they use "requirement", just as I quoted above).

Do you think that under a different type of Administration such a program could be problematic? Or maybe you are even honest enough to think that under any Administration such a program could be problematic. A propaganda tool to mold the minds of the youth into the cogs of any specific political machine?
Click to expand...


That provision was stripped out of the bill. You're being lied to.
 
Dungheap said:
That provision was stripped out of the bill. You're being lied to.
Click to expand...
Link? I have a link that shows the provision there, I do not have one that shows it stripped.

And even if it was stripped from this version, that does not change that we know what the goal is, where they tried to push it now and where it will go in the future. It's like the idiots who say registration isn't the first step towards a gun ban, except we know by the past that everywhere they have had one the next thing was the ban. One must ignore every other instance in the past, to specifically and purposefully not learn from history.

This is what they want to happen, I dislike it, and therefore do not support the legislation in any form.
 
Damocles said:
Link? I have a link that shows the provision there, I do not have one that shows it stripped.

And even if it was stripped from this version, that does not change that we know what the goal is, where they tried to push it now and where it will go in the future. It's like the idiots who say registration isn't the first step towards a gun ban, except we know by the past that everywhere they have had one the next thing was the ban. One must ignore every other instance in the past, to specifically and purposefully not learn from history.

This is what they want to happen, I dislike it, and therefore do not support the legislation in any form.
Click to expand...


OK. Show me the link.

Here is a link to the engrossed version as agreed to by the House and Senate:

http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=111_cong_bills&docid=f:h1388enr.txt.pdf

It's not in there.

As I said before, I don't agree with mandatory service either. But for sake of credibility I find it best not to lie about what is passed by Congress and what is not.
 
Dungheap said:
OK. Show me the link.

Here is a link to the engrossed version as agreed to by the House and Senate:

http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=111_cong_bills&docid=f:h1388enr.txt.pdf

It's not in there.

As I said before, I don't agree with mandatory service either. But for sake of credibility I find it best not to lie about what is passed by Congress and what is not.
Click to expand...

This section alone supports the notion that a mandatory service will be required for elementary and secondary students. Whenever a district/state has dollars dangled before it you can bet they'll require participation!

Subtitle B—Amendments to Subtitle B
(Learn and Serve America)
SEC. 1201. SCHOOL-BASED ALLOTMENTS.
Part I of subtitle B of title I (42 U.S.C. 12521 et seq.) is
amended to read as follows:
‘‘PART I—PROGRAMS FOR ELEMENTARY AND
SECONDARY SCHOOL STUDENTS
 
Ice Dancer said:
This section alone supports the notion that a mandatory service will be required for elementary and secondary students. Whenever a district/state has dollars dangled before it you can bet they'll require participation!

Subtitle B—Amendments to Subtitle B
(Learn and Serve America)
SEC. 1201. SCHOOL-BASED ALLOTMENTS.
Part I of subtitle B of title I (42 U.S.C. 12521 et seq.) is
amended to read as follows:
‘‘PART I—PROGRAMS FOR ELEMENTARY AND
SECONDARY SCHOOL STUDENTS
Click to expand...


You're full of shit.
 
Dungheap said:
You're full of shit.
Click to expand...

WOW! Stellar response...no, no really :eek:

I have worked closely with local school boards and principles for years. I know how irresistible extra dollars are to them and how new programs pop-up overnight that are all of a sudden critical to a well rounded education!
 
Dungheap said:
OK. Show me the link.

Here is a link to the engrossed version as agreed to by the House and Senate:

http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=111_cong_bills&docid=f:h1388enr.txt.pdf

It's not in there.

As I said before, I don't agree with mandatory service either. But for sake of credibility I find it best not to lie about what is passed by Congress and what is not.
Click to expand...
The link is already in this thread.

And as I said, I am not "lying" and think it is silly to ignore what they originally propose and future goals because somebody was successful in getting rid of a small part of a bad bill.

IMO, the reality is they seek a mandatory service, thought they couldn't get it right now, but heck it's only one "crisis" away for the "Never let a good crisis go unused" group we have in the WH now. IMO, they make one up if there isn't already one.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top