Debate: Should students be allowed to choose to be taught creationism?
Side: No

"They are wiling to sacrifice some of their own individual wealth and some of someone else's individual wealth to preserve that group right." Absolutely. Keep in mind that the middle class majority feels much more pain paying 15% than the wealthy does when paying 30% so the feedback mechanism to keep taxes low is pushing down on the majority very hard.Saying that another isn't burdened by a policy, is all well and good, IF you are not one of those others. People are people, and have equal rights to keep the property they earn. Need, or relative wealth is irrelevant. The only proper role of government is to protect rights. Additionally, the most productive individuals pay more absolutely, even if the percentage of tax is the same. What is the rationale that says that they must pay both absolutely more, and more of a percentage? What of justice?Keep in mind that the individual has already produced more wealth for society's use, than he has accumulated (Say's Law)"Only a small percentage of the population sees taxes as involuntary.And a great proportion of the people who do not see it as involuntary, do not pay net taxes.Secondly, coercion is not by definition a bad thing.Yes, it is.Almost any action humans make in a society is because of coercion if varying degrees.Name a coercive action one takes, that is not directly related to government grant of special privilege.Seems like NOT a lot of work to make sure your kids are going to be able compete with the rest of the kids in society. Who is one person to judge, for another, what amount of jumping through hoops is "not a lot".I could as easily say that those who recieve welfare should have to do 4 hours of job training per day, have to pass a drug test, and be barred from purchasing alcohol or cigarettes, even with their own money. I don't see that as "too much work" to receive free support, but I daresay you might disagree.The point is that the parent should have say, not the state. But notice the language 'equivalent" not "to the same level". It can be used to impose particular ideas and curriculum.What about this one?http://www.sfgate.com/education/article/ Homeschoolers-setback-in-appeals-court-ruling-3225235.php Homeschoolers and private school students tend to do no worse, and more often do better than their publilc school counterparts, even students from the same households where one was able to get into a private charter school, by random draw.but they failed miserably at basic math reading and writing.citation?I (literally) have no good way of finding a good mechanic in the market we have.The best will, generally, be the most successful. He will get the most word of mouth advertizing, and the most repeat business.How does one shop for schools? You cant just move kids around until you find the best one?Why not? if there are more in your area (not shut out by monopoly) then you wouldn't even have to change address. It is better than HAVING to move, because the government tells you that your kid HAS to go to this school if you live where you do.I would much rather have a group of experts just tell me which auto mechanic or butcher or school was the best. Just because you wish not to have to do research, does not give you the right to restrict the choices of others who would rather do the research themselves. With schools, supporting the education monopoly is doing just that.You have to rely on experts or "consensus" from the community (basically a group of experts).Who decides that an expert is an expert?What makes the "consensus" of people who have not "put their money where their mouth is" better than those who have risked their own resources in the search for good advice?Democracy is a form of free market. They do choose the best class designer (as good as any other form of choosing) as far as I can tell.No, because the choosing in a democracy is done by risking the resources of others, not yourself. If I had access to your money, It would be much easier for me to choose to gamble it away, than if I only had access to my own.I don't know many public schools that don't recognize and tread ADD. Hey are forced to by law. What is the treatment?What is the effect on the individual child?What is the effect on the rest of the class?What is the cost? (note: cost is related to the effect on the other students, taking resources away from them, in favor of the ADD child. More sacrificing the interests of some students for the sake of others?)However, there are many private schools who don't have to and wont accept students with ADD ("Billy is too frigidity for our school."). I will take your word for it, but I'm sure there are some who would like to harness the ADD potential. If harnessed correctly, ADD can be used to drive students to very high achievements in fields in which the student is interested. Having a high achieving student as an alumnus is a good selling point for a private school.Outside of school.I'm fine with this. Schools should concentrate on the "3 'R's", and leave sensitivity training, Watermelon environmentalism and sex ed (beyond the biology), to the parents.