For the same reason, your argument falls flat.
Someone might. Not me. I see no plausible way to maintain such a system. Better to allow parents individually to find their own definitions of "education".
The State is me no more than McDonald's or the National Football League is me. The government of __A__ (locality) is the largest dealer in interpersonal violence in that locality (definition, after Weber).
Why do strident advocates for redistributive government take far more than their share of offense? How is this uncivil? I seek distance when people routinely use "dodge", "incoherent", "bigot", and other insults in their arguments, as RandFan has done.
Unlike the government, McDonald's cannot bill me for services or products I don't use or which I consider fraudulent or actively destructive. The NFL cannot bill me for services or products I don't use or which I consider fraudulent or actively destructive. Voting is a feedback mechanism. When 500,000 other people dilute my vote, my vote counts for very little. Participation in market processes is a feedback mechanism. When I withhold my custom, I make about as much difference to McDonald's as I make when I vote for City Council. To my own life, I make far more difference using market feedback mechanisms than using political feedback mechanisms. My "candidate" (consumer choice) wins whenever I buy.
No. I ask how the impersonal style qualifies as uncivil. I explain my recourse to that style as a reaction to Randfan's unmoderated and strident incivility ("dodge", "incoherent", "bigot", etc.).
This is true, but I don't have to live with the result. I can eat somewhere else. Consider the outcome of a nation-wide vote on the one size and style of shoes all 14-year-olds must wear. Now ask yourself why we consign curriculum decisions to the political process. Brains vary more than feet.
Take that up with the moderator who named this thread.
Engrish, prease?
A.) I don't have all of my textbooks from 30 years ago. B.) You have never provided a text book definition for slavery. B.) Wikipedia sources the article you reject out of hand. Your request is silly and hypocritical.
Did Malcolm's mother ever teach him manners.
I don't even get his point? Is it a gotcha? And where does he get off demanding that I provide a text book definition when all he can provide for his definition of slavery is... I forget, Thomas Sowell or Walter Williams. I don't care enough to go look. In any event, it's not the dictionary definition but he demands that we all accept it. Odd that there are many, many google hits.
Ummm.....
Those are YOUR words. It was THOSE words that started a sub thread. If you don't want your words taken seriously then don't post them!
Moderators started this thread and named it. Compulsion kills motivation. That's true. Slavery is a matter of degree. All the hostile verbiage that the cartel's defenders pour over these facts do not change the facts.
It was an attempt to get RandFan to moderate his pompous faux superiority.