Literacy Not A Right For Detroit School Kids According To State
76 replies, posted
[url]http://detroit.cbslocal.com/2016/11/21/literacy-not-a-right-for-detroit-school-kids-says-state/[/url]
[QUOTE]Detroit school children have no fundamental right to literacy, according to Gov. Rick Snyder’s attorneys, in the midst of a suit claiming the poor reading skills of Detroit students at five schools, deplorable building conditions, and lack of basic classroom necessities are the fault of the state.
A California public interest law firm is representing seven Detroit public school students who believe the education they are getting is substandard and essentially want the courts to rule that literacy is a fundamental constitutional right reports WWJ legal analyst Charlie Langton.[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE]The lawsuit says the schools are in “slum-like conditions” and “functionally incapable of delivering access to literacy.” The case, filed in federal court, directly accuses Gov. Rick Snyder, the state school board and others of violating the civil rights of low-income students.
The lawsuit could face some challenges says Langton, adding that while there are some difficulties with Detroit public schools, the judge could say that the solution may be better addressed by the elected school board, or through the political process.
In January, a review of Detroit school buildings uncovered mold, water damage and rodents – this after teacher sick-outs in protest of working conditions within the deteriorating school buildings.
A 2011 report showed 47 percent of Detroiters were functionally illiterate — meaning nearly half of they were not able to fill out basic forms for getting a job or having a command over basic understanding for such things as reading a prescription bottle.[/QUOTE]
To be fair, it isn't actually written down anywhere as a right. You got life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness, plus a few amendments. The closest thing might be some law that requires children to go to school, and that isn't a right per-se.
[QUOTE=Zenreon117;51417151]To be fair, it isn't actually written down anywhere as a right. You got life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness, plus a few amendments. The closest thing might be some law that requires children to go to school, and that isn't a right per-se.[/QUOTE]
State constitutions have their own bill of rights (most reaffirm the federal one, but some supplement it), it's perfectly okay for the state of Michigan to declare literacy a right, as it should be, without it being a federal amendment.
[QUOTE=Zenreon117;51417151]To be fair, it isn't actually written down anywhere as a right. You got life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness, plus a few amendments. The closest thing might be some law that requires children to go to school, and that isn't a right per-se.[/QUOTE]
To be fair, you can't persue any of those things without knowing how to read
[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;51417157]State constitutions have their own bill of rights (most reaffirm the federal one, but some supplement it), it's perfectly okay for the state of Michigan to declare literacy a right, as it should be, without it being a federal amendment.[/QUOTE]
plus the Bill of Rights wasn't meant to be a list of the only rights given -- that's why we have the blurry and often ignored 9th Amendment
[QUOTE=Luni;51417390]plus the Bill of Rights wasn't meant to be a list of the only rights given -- that's why we have the blurry and often ignored 9th Amendment[/QUOTE]
Hell, one of the reasons the federalists at the time were terrified of doing the bill of rights that the anti-feds wanted was that they thought people would see it as a conclusive list.
[QUOTE=Zenreon117;51417151]To be fair, it isn't actually written down anywhere as a right. You got life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness, plus a few amendments. The closest thing might be some law that requires children to go to school, and that isn't a right per-se.[/QUOTE]
time to amend the amendments
[QUOTE=Zenreon117;51417151]To be fair, it isn't actually written down anywhere as a right. You got life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness, plus a few amendments. The closest thing might be some law that requires children to go to school, and that isn't a right per-se.[/QUOTE]
And job applications don't have literacy requirement written down because it's such a given
You can't function in society without literacy
[QUOTE=Dantz Bolrew;51417334]To be fair, you can't persue any of those things without knowing how to read[/QUOTE]
I'm all for kids being taught literacy but what you said is not true and you didn't spell pursue correctly.
[QUOTE=Mr. Magoolachub;51421250]I'm all for kids being taught literacy but what you said is not true and you didn't spell pursue correctly.[/QUOTE]
forced-poverty is happiness?
[QUOTE=bitches;51421305]forced-poverty is happiness?[/QUOTE]
Come on dude, I replied to someone saying that you can't pursue 'life, liberty or happiness' if you're illiterate which is blatantly untrue, literacy is not a requirement for being alive, enjoying freedoms or experiencing happiness. How the fuck do you extrapolate that to me saying that forced poverty is happiness?
I'd say that for illiterate people it may be significantly harder to pursue happiness, you are less likely to fully understand your rights and life in general will just be more difficult. I would not say it's impossible to pursue those things, which was the point of my post. I think that to say that would be making a bullshit exaggeration about as big as saying that my post suggested I was of the opinion forced poverty is happiness.
Rights are not hand outs. Rights are things the government has no business interfering with.
It would be better if they just got their state legislators to make some new laws about education and preferably overhaul their education system.
[QUOTE=SebiWarrior;51421150]And job applications don't have literacy requirement written down because it's such a given
You can't function in society without literacy[/QUOTE]
you can't even write your congressmen or local government official to complain about it without litteracy, today being unable to read and write on a functional level is just basically economic suicide
[QUOTE=Mr. Magoolachub;51421353]Come on dude, I replied to someone saying that you can't pursue 'life, liberty or happiness' if you're illiterate which is blatantly untrue, literacy is not a requirement for being alive, enjoying freedoms or experiencing happiness. How the fuck do you extrapolate that to me saying that forced poverty is happiness?
I'd say that for illiterate people it may be significantly harder to pursue happiness, you are less likely to fully understand your rights and life in general will just be more difficult. I would not say it's impossible to pursue those things, which was the point of my post. I think that to say that would be making a bullshit exaggeration about as big as saying that my post suggested I was of the opinion forced poverty is happiness.[/QUOTE]
okay, so how do you exactly get to enjoy them?
Someone tells you what you're doing is illegal, and tries to blackmail you. You can't very well check if it's illegal for yourself, you can't read the laws.
Literally no situation comes up where an illiterate person isn't easily abused
[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;51422718]okay, so how do you exactly get to enjoy them?
Someone tells you what you're doing is illegal, and tries to blackmail you. You can't very well check if it's illegal for yourself, you can't read the laws.
Literally no situation comes up where an illiterate person isn't easily abused[/QUOTE]
Just imagine having your worker rights abused in the work place because you can't read the labor laws posted in literally every work place on a wall.
[editline]24th November 2016[/editline]
[QUOTE=Mr. Magoolachub;51421353]Come on dude, I replied to someone saying that you can't pursue 'life, liberty or happiness' if you're illiterate which is blatantly untrue, literacy is not a requirement for being alive, enjoying freedoms or experiencing happiness. How the fuck do you extrapolate that to me saying that forced poverty is happiness?
I'd say that for illiterate people it may be significantly harder to pursue happiness, you are less likely to fully understand your rights and life in general will just be more difficult. I would not say it's impossible to pursue those things, which was the point of my post. I think that to say that would be making a bullshit exaggeration about as big as saying that my post suggested I was of the opinion forced poverty is happiness.[/QUOTE]
Explain how you can sucessfully live a healthy, stable life without being able to read and doesn't involve extreme poverty, please.
[QUOTE=Kigen;51421944]Rights are not hand outs. Rights are things the government has no business interfering with.
It would be better if they just got their state legislators to make some new laws about education and preferably overhaul their education system.[/QUOTE]
Private property is a government hand out since you won't have it if the government isn't violently backing you.
Fuck there's quite a few rights the government has to interfere to protect lol. We consider not being discriminated based on race and whatnot a right and that needs to be enforced by the government
[QUOTE=Kigen;51421944]Rights are not hand outs. Rights are things the government has no business interfering with.
It would be better if they just got their state legislators to make some new laws about education and preferably overhaul their education system.[/QUOTE]
I had no idea Americans could read anything but the menu at McDonalds.
On another note, it's almost ironic when you think about stuff like this. If someone can't even read a peice of paper explaining to him what his rights are then it makes it a whole lot easier for the government to take advantage of people. It would be funny to see people using un-education as a weapon.
[QUOTE=ultra_bright;51423948]I had no idea Americans could read anything but the menu at McDonalds.
On another note, it's almost ironic when you think about stuff like this. If someone can't even read a peice of paper explaining to him what his rights are then it makes it a whole lot easier for the government to take advantage of people. It would be funny to see people using un-education as a weapon.[/QUOTE]
replace government with corporation/company and youve basically got the history of the US right there. 1800s businesses exploited it to prevent unions, labor rules and even decent business practices, banks used ignorance of legalese to sell people shitty mortgages that ballooned and blew up in their faces, the government doesnt usually exploit uneducated illiterate people but companies sure do
I'm sorry, have I just come into a thread where some people are arguing that being able to read and write shouldn't be a right? Have I just come into a thread where people are arguing that, in a modern society, it's absolutely fine that people don't know how to read and write? Have I just come into a fucking thread where actual, living, breathing people are trying to somehow argue that [I]not[/I] being able to read and write is [I]totally fine[/I]? That, because it isn't *technically* written down in a centuries-old document, that it [I]shouldn't[/I] be firmly lodged in the constitution of their country that people living in that aforementioned country should be able to read and write? In the United fucking States of America, of all fucking places? Could someone [I]please[/I] tell me that I'm misreading some of the comments here, because what the fucking fuck?
[QUOTE=evlbzltyr;51424639]I'm sorry, have I just come into a thread where some people are arguing that being able to read and write shouldn't be a right? Have I just come into a thread where people are arguing that, in a modern society, it's absolutely fine that people don't know how to read and write? Have I just come into a fucking thread where actual, living, breathing people are trying to somehow argue that [I]not[/I] being able to read and write is [I]totally fine[/I]? That, because it isn't *technically* written down in a centuries-old document, that it [I]shouldn't[/I] be firmly lodged in the constitution of their country that people living in that aforementioned country should be able to read and write? In the United fucking States of America, of all fucking places? Could someone [I]please[/I] tell me that I'm misreading some of the comments here, because what the fucking fuck?[/QUOTE]
What's stopping anyone from learning to read or write? If you look at it in a broader sense, a school is nothing more than a learning aid, and that since one can learn to read and write (gain literacy) without a school, then the quality of the school has nothing to do whatsoever in denying people their "right" to literacy, and it's only they that hinder themselves. I have a feeling this will be the defense, since when you bring the term "right" into an argument, you have to show how you are denying said right, and technically, they aren't denying the right, but they aren't helping advance it either.
[QUOTE=Zenreon117;51417151]To be fair, it isn't actually written down anywhere as a right. You got life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness, plus a few amendments. The closest thing might be some law that requires children to go to school, and that isn't a right per-se.[/QUOTE]
Pursuit of happiness is extremely nebulous and can easily be extended to pretty much anything.
[editline]25th November 2016[/editline]
[QUOTE=ultra_bright;51423948]I had no idea Americans could read anything but the menu at McDonalds.
On another note, it's almost ironic when you think about stuff like this. If someone can't even read a peice of paper explaining to him what his rights are then it makes it a whole lot easier for the government to take advantage of people. It would be funny to see people using un-education as a weapon.[/QUOTE]
Ignorance has been a weapon in politics forever.
[QUOTE=Silence I Kill You;51424711]What's stopping anyone from learning to read or write? If you look at it in a broader sense, a school is nothing more than a learning aid, and that since one can learn to read and write (gain literacy) without a school, then the quality of the school has nothing to do whatsoever in denying people their "right" to literacy, and it's only they that hinder themselves. I have a feeling this will be the defense, since when you bring the term "right" into an argument, you have to show how you are denying said right, and technically, they aren't denying the right, but they aren't helping advance it either.[/QUOTE]
So if left to their own devices, a child would teach themselves to read and therefore no rights have been denied?
How the fuck would you teach yourself to read and write.
How would you afford to pay a tutor to teach you to read and write if getting a job requires you to read and write to apply for it, or for the actual duties of said job.
What if you're some impoverished kid, or orphaned and have no one to help pay for a tutor?
School is a lot more than some "learning aid" it's a fucking necessity to survive in our world. Without a K-12 education you're just some caveman living in the future.
[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;51424748]So if left to their own devices, a child would teach themselves to read and therefore no rights have been denied?[/QUOTE]
The question isn't will they, it's are you stopping them, or denying them the right, which the answer would be no.
Once again, this is just the defense they will most likely use.
I don't understand how you can have a right to "literacy" in a legal sense, I don't understand how you can functionally enforce that or what the repercussions should be for failure.
The state has a duty to provide adequate schooling to their residents and students attending should have the right to pursue knowledge and education, which would inherently include literacy, but I don't see how you can define that as a "right". Literacy isn't something the government can give you, it takes effort from both the teacher and the student, if a student refuses to learn is the state at fault for your lack of literacy?
Just from a technical standpoint it doesn't make sense, I'm not saying I don't think the government should be required to provide you the proper environment and schooling to learn, they should. But I don't understand how a government can enshrine a skill that you must develop for yourself as a "right".
[QUOTE=soulharvester;51424852]Just from a technical standpoint it doesn't make sense, I'm not saying I don't think the government should be required to provide you the proper environment and schooling to learn, they should. But I don't understand how a government can enshrine a skill that you must develop for yourself as a "right".[/QUOTE]
I think Right to Education is more precisely a Right to Access to Basic Education: The access should be available, while participation in actual educational experience is up to the person.
[QUOTE=soulharvester;51424852]I don't understand how you can have a right to "literacy" in a legal sense, I don't understand how you can functionally enforce that or what the repercussions should be for failure.
The state has a duty to provide adequate schooling to their residents and students attending should have the right to pursue knowledge and education, which would inherently include literacy, but I don't see how you can define that as a "right". Literacy isn't something the government can give you, it takes effort from both the teacher and the student, if a student refuses to learn is the state at fault for your lack of literacy?
Just from a technical standpoint it doesn't make sense, I'm not saying I don't think the government should be required to provide you the proper environment and schooling to learn, they should. But I don't understand how a government can enshrine a skill that you must develop for yourself as a "right".[/QUOTE]
Rights don't necessarily have to be used by citizens.
Everyone has a right to bear arms, but not everyone owns a gun - by choice in most, if not all cases.
It's the same thing. Having a right to literacy doesn't mean the government is required to force you to learn how to read, just as it can't force you to own a gun. But, it legally allows you to gain such if you press for it.
I think the government has a duty to adequately provide K-12, if you fail to gain literacy during this period, outside of that I don't believe the state has any duty to provide you the resources necessary to become literate.
To me it sounds like the issue might be that Detroit is either unwilling or incapable of providing adequate schooling, or that a growing number of residents in Detroit feel no responsibility to use the resources provided to them during schooling, which I would fault their parental guardians for.
Claiming that the residents of a state have a "Right" to literacy just seems absurdly off the mark and doesn't sound like it's designed to address anything at all, except to point fingers.
Rights are meant to be be a combination of restrictions upon the state that guarantees you against tyranny. The Government is not allowed to infringe upon your rights. The government is NOT actively prohibiting people from becoming literate, that would probably be deemed a violation of the first amendment, to be honest. The government however has no obligation to guarantee your literacy beyond it's general education duties which seem to be lacking in this case.
[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;51423533]Explain how you can sucessfully live a healthy, stable life without being able to read and doesn't involve extreme poverty, please.[/QUOTE]
Okay I will definitely explain that to you, immediately after you explain to me where I made the case for any of those things. You're all breathing down the back of my neck like I'm Hitler because I made the distinction that it is not impossible to pursue life, liberty or happiness if you are illiterate. I've already said that life as an illiterate would be difficult and have at no point disputed you would almost certainly be poor. As for the whole 'what if someone illegally exploits you as an illiterate' question you've posed to me well shit you got me geniuses I guess that would suck, boy who would have figured it's shit when someone commits a crime against you, not me. That doesn't mean that the laws protecting you don't exist, even as an illiterate you are likely to understand at least some of the basic laws protecting you as well as maybe some of your rights. I'm afraid of receiving another shit reply suggesting I said something I never did so I'm going to address the fact that as an illiterate it is easier to be illegally exploited because you may not know that what is being done to you is illegal. I won't contest that, it's true, but the reason for laws existence is not for people to break them and then be reported, the idea is that people follow them and don't commit crimes at all.
As an illiterate you are likely to be poor and can be more easily exploited than someone who is literate. As an illiterate you are not automatically: dead, oppressed/enslaved or unable to pursue happiness. Is it very clear what my position is now? The very first thing I said was "I'm all for kids being taught literacy" but the only replies I've received suggest I actually said "I HATE education, the illiterate are all poor and happy, I think more people should be illiterate" so could you calm the fuck down and stop trying to bait me in to arguing for something I never said and don't believe in.
i would say at the very least that pursuing life, liberty and happiness as an illiterate is very very hard, but not impossible. it's not that i can't prove that it is possible -- although i've seen many people here who possess little to no knowledge land basic jobs such as construction, but it's more that i can't prove that it's impossible.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.