New "Hug-a-Thug" program proposed by State Senator

Pages:
1
2
3
4

New "Hug-a-Thug" program proposed by State Senator; The Eve Carson/Abhijit Mahato Bill
Topic Started: May 30 2008, 12:48 PM (1,025 Views)
Deleted User	Jun 5 2008, 03:45 PM Post #46
Deleted User	DukeEgr93 you present some great arguments against this volunteer bill. Would you agree that this bill is fundamentally flawed, by ordering involutary servitude in violation of the 13 amendment of the Constitution?
Deleted User


DukeEgr93	Jun 5 2008, 04:37 PM Post #47
Posts: 89 Group: Members Member #37 Joined: Apr 28, 2008	It's a tough call as to whether this violates the 13th. Two things that might take this out of a constitutional setting are (a) private schools can choose not to comply, thus losing a certain portion of their funding but still being able to conduct business as schools and (b) going to college is not compelled by the state, so since the prerequisite condition of being a college student is not mandatory, neither would this service - you only have to comply if you choose to go to college... It makes for a very interesting argument, though - the many sides of which I believe I would enjoy reading from folks whose experience is in the field. I also think, as is often the case, starting with the constitutionality of a bill such as this is critical, and questioning the bill based on the 13th has definite merits. It goes, in part, to the question of whether a college education itself is a right to which all citizens must be given access - if it is a right, then requiring community service would have to be legitimately proven as a fundamental principle of a college education for it not be a violation of the 13th. On the other hand, if college is electable, then requiring community service might not be in violation of the Constitution as written. The former case would be similar to requiring community service to vote, for example - something just about everyone would see as a violation of their rights. The interesting part of that, for me, is that it is members of the same party that has generally said college is a right that are promoting this bill, so given their thoughts on college, this would absolutely be in violation. I think this is a case of taking something that would be positive - more interaction between college students and communities, and having college students who have talents for tutoring and mentoring but maybe haven't done any to do some - and legislating it in such a way that is disastrous and, as you've said, potentially unconstitutional.
Posts: 89 Group: Members Member #37 Joined: Apr 28, 2008


Baldo	Jun 5 2008, 05:07 PM Post #48
Posts: 8,504 Group: Tier2 Member #45 Joined: Apr 28, 2008	Truth Detector Jun 5 2008, 12:12 PM My daughter who just graduated from Duke spent many hours volunteering in the local schools and after school programs. The one thing she noticed is the difference between the abilities of children with an involved parent/parents and those children who did not have involved parents. You can send in an army of college students well prepared to tackle educational issues, but they are not equipped nor should they be expected to be equipped to handle the social implications of children from families where education is not valued. We should be asking why the state is turning out teachers who may not be equipped to teach these children. Maybe we should be looking at under performance and the issues of discipline in the schools. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out the major problem facing these kids. They don't have a live in mentor, a Mom & Dad living in the same house taking care of their children. You wouldn't need a mentor if you had one at home. College kids volunteering won't and can't replace them. Not all families are perfect, I understand some break up, many single Moms do a hell of a job, but having a mom & dad who watch over you, demand you go to school, and stay out of trouble is the best way to guide children into adulthood and is just plain common sense. There used to be a time when it was shameful to have kids out of wedlock, when parents toughed it out for the kid's sake( I understand some should separate), when the raising of children was more important that personal fulfillment. I understand there are exceptions and life deals tough blows, but our standards are reaching new lows. That is what Rand should be working on if he wants to help those kids. How about passing a law that parents have to volunteer at school? Naw, we can't do that, let's make kids do the work of parents.



Deleted User	Jun 5 2008, 05:09 PM Post #49
Deleted User	DukeEgr93 Jun 5 2008, 04:37 PM It's a tough call as to whether this violates the 13th. Two things that might take this out of a constitutional setting are (a) private schools can choose not to comply, thus losing a certain portion of their funding but still being able to conduct business as schools and (b) going to college is not compelled by the state, so since the prerequisite condition of being a college student is not mandatory, neither would this service - you only have to comply if you choose to go to college... It makes for a very interesting argument, though - the many sides of which I believe I would enjoy reading from folks whose experience is in the field. I also think, as is often the case, starting with the constitutionality of a bill such as this is critical, and questioning the bill based on the 13th has definite merits. It goes, in part, to the question of whether a college education itself is a right to which all citizens must be given access - if it is a right, then requiring community service would have to be legitimately proven as a fundamental principle of a college education for it not be a violation of the 13th. On the other hand, if college is electable, then requiring community service might not be in violation of the Constitution as written. The former case would be similar to requiring community service to vote, for example - something just about everyone would see as a violation of their rights. The interesting part of that, for me, is that it is members of the same party that has generally said college is a right that are promoting this bill, so given their thoughts on college, this would absolutely be in violation. I think this is a case of taking something that would be positive - more interaction between college students and communities, and having college students who have talents for tutoring and mentoring but maybe haven't done any to do some - and legislating it in such a way that is disastrous and, as you've said, potentially unconstitutional. I would pose this question about the constitution and the NC bill. What if California had a shortage of labor to pick their fruit, could they require college students to pick crops, in order to get that degree. Under your theory of college not being a right, then how many more abuses will the state legislatures put college students? My biggest problem with this bill is, that it is almost like the draft that we had in the military, many draftees were unhappy campers and since they didn't want to be in the military were non performing soldiers. My idea would be to encourage the school to have a 1 credit per semester for the students that volunteer for this program, it would be offered as a course credit toward your degree. This way you get a volunteers, not involuntary servants. I thought we fought a war over this and involuntary servitude, we seem to be going backwards.
Deleted User


abb	Jun 5 2008, 05:37 PM Post #50
Posts: 8,430 Group: Tier1 Member #4 Joined: Apr 28, 2008	And the hell of it is, there are so many folks - and we all know who they are - who are doing their damnedest to destroy the two-parent nuclear family.
Posts: 8,430 Group: Tier1 Member #4 Joined: Apr 28, 2008


Deleted User	Jun 5 2008, 06:20 PM Post #51
Deleted User	DukeEgr93 Jun 5 2008, 04:37 PM It's a tough call as to whether this violates the 13th. Two things that might take this out of a constitutional setting are (a) private schools can choose not to comply, thus losing a certain portion of their funding but still being able to conduct business as schools and (b) going to college is not compelled by the state, so since the prerequisite condition of being a college student is not mandatory, neither would this service - you only have to comply if you choose to go to college... It makes for a very interesting argument, though - the many sides of which I believe I would enjoy reading from folks whose experience is in the field. I also think, as is often the case, starting with the constitutionality of a bill such as this is critical, and questioning the bill based on the 13th has definite merits. It goes, in part, to the question of whether a college education itself is a right to which all citizens must be given access - if it is a right, then requiring community service would have to be legitimately proven as a fundamental principle of a college education for it not be a violation of the 13th. On the other hand, if college is electable, then requiring community service might not be in violation of the Constitution as written. The former case would be similar to requiring community service to vote, for example - something just about everyone would see as a violation of their rights. The interesting part of that, for me, is that it is members of the same party that has generally said college is a right that are promoting this bill, so given their thoughts on college, this would absolutely be in violation. I think this is a case of taking something that would be positive - more interaction between college students and communities, and having college students who have talents for tutoring and mentoring but maybe haven't done any to do some - and legislating it in such a way that is disastrous and, as you've said, potentially unconstitutional. Even giving students credits for doing volunteer work might not be a good idea. Do you know how college students treat the classes they do not like - especially those students who do not insist on making straight A's? Would you want them to tutor other kids - who most probably do not want to be tutored? And then there is the issue of the charming Ms. Mangum tutoring high school boys - think of all the useful things she can teach them - and some girls would benefit from her tutoring also! Our educational system will not benefit from gimmicks like this; it needs more professionalism rather than less.
Deleted User


lec	Jun 5 2008, 07:38 PM Post #52
Posts: 214 Group: Members Member #347 Joined: May 16, 2008	A friend has 3 teen foster daughters staying with her right now. One of them is 15 and pregnant. The girl says it happened in the stairwell at school. The girl skipped school 8 days and the foster mom was not called till the 8th day.



Jezebelle	Jun 5 2008, 07:39 PM Post #53
Posts: 2,554 Group: Members Member #137 Joined: Apr 28, 2008	comelately Jun 5 2008, 06:20 PM DukeEgr93 Jun 5 2008, 04:37 PM It's a tough call as to whether this violates the 13th. Two things that might take this out of a constitutional setting are (a) private schools can choose not to comply, thus losing a certain portion of their funding but still being able to conduct business as schools and (b) going to college is not compelled by the state, so since the prerequisite condition of being a college student is not mandatory, neither would this service - you only have to comply if you choose to go to college... It makes for a very interesting argument, though - the many sides of which I believe I would enjoy reading from folks whose experience is in the field. I also think, as is often the case, starting with the constitutionality of a bill such as this is critical, and questioning the bill based on the 13th has definite merits. It goes, in part, to the question of whether a college education itself is a right to which all citizens must be given access - if it is a right, then requiring community service would have to be legitimately proven as a fundamental principle of a college education for it not be a violation of the 13th. On the other hand, if college is electable, then requiring community service might not be in violation of the Constitution as written. The former case would be similar to requiring community service to vote, for example - something just about everyone would see as a violation of their rights. The interesting part of that, for me, is that it is members of the same party that has generally said college is a right that are promoting this bill, so given their thoughts on college, this would absolutely be in violation. I think this is a case of taking something that would be positive - more interaction between college students and communities, and having college students who have talents for tutoring and mentoring but maybe haven't done any to do some - and legislating it in such a way that is disastrous and, as you've said, potentially unconstitutional. Even giving students credits for doing volunteer work might not be a good idea. Do you know how college students treat the classes they do not like - especially those students who do not insist on making straight A's? Would you want them to tutor other kids - who most probably do not want to be tutored? And then there is the issue of the charming Ms. Mangum tutoring high school boys - think of all the useful things she can teach them - and some girls would benefit from her tutoring also! Our educational system will not benefit from gimmicks like this; it needs more professionalism rather than less. My greatest concern would be that the tutors would be victimized by their charges, probably at some other location and time by surprise/stealth. Through one avenue or another, college kids are already in danger, as we've seen. I would not increase my kid's chance of being victimized physically or through legal abuse by these anti-social thugs by introducing and placing him/her with one of them, male or female. Edited by Jezebelle, Jun 5 2008, 07:42 PM.



1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)


« Previous Topic · DUKE LACROSSE - Liestoppers · Next Topic »

Pages:
1
2
3
4