Civil Rights Act + Private Education

[0zzy]

In Ron Paul's world, private schools would be used throughout America and students could attend using a voucher-system.

In Ron Paul's world, the Civil Rights Act of 1967 would be repealed for the respect of private property.

So, wouldn't this lead to some sort of contradiction? What if some type of minority were not able to attend school because they didn't accept his "kind"?

And also, if Ron Paul was in Congress back in the 60s, would he have had voted for forced integration in public facilities? (buses, schools, government buildings, etc.)

 

[Corydoras]

I don't think he's said anything about public schools being put out of business, just that private schools could use vouchers.

As for forced integration:
http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul188.html

 

[0zzy]

I don't think he's said anything about public schools being put out of business, just that private schools could use vouchers.

As for forced integration:
http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul188.html

I'm talking about would he have wanted forced integration on public property. (buses, schools, government buildings, etc.)

 

[Abobo]

In Ron Paul's world, private schools would be used throughout America and students could attend using a voucher-system.

In Ron Paul's world, the Civil Rights Act of 1967 would be repealed for the respect of private property.

So, wouldn't this lead to some sort of contradiction? What if some type of minority were not able to attend school because they didn't accept his "kind"?

And also, if Ron Paul was in Congress back in the 60s, would he have had voted for forced integration in public facilities? (buses, schools, government buildings, etc.)

a) I don't think Ron Paul has called for the elimination of socialized schools. Although I would like it. He wants to eliminate the federal government within education, something totally different from the elimination of the socialized education systems within the states.

b) If socialized schools were removed it would not be a contradiction to allow people to discriminate based on any requirement they want. As long as the minority is free to open their own school, or teach their own children no one has violated anyones rights. There is no such thing as a right to an education.

 

[Syren123]

I don't think he's said anything about public schools being put out of business, just that private schools could use vouchers.

As for forced integration:
http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul188.html

Those mouth breathers in Congress probably looked at him after that and said "Uh...WHA?"
Way, way over their little collectivist pinheads.

 

[0zzy]

a) I don't think Ron Paul has called for the elimination of socialized schools. Although I would like it. He wants to eliminate the federal government within education, something totally different from the elimination of the socialized education systems within the states.

b) If socialized schools were removed it would not be a contradiction to allow people to discriminate based on any requirement they want. As long as the minority is free to open their own school, or teach their own children no one has violated anyones rights. There is no such thing as a right to an education.

Anyone going to answer my forced public segregation ? :[

a) Ron Paul wants to allow tax cuts/vouchers for students so they can go to whichever school they want to go to (public, private, religious, home). He wants to end the Department of Education and, I guess, allow states to create their own department of education-type thing cause it'd be much more manageable and vocal to it's locals?

b) Don't you think every child has the right to access education? If private schools accepted voucher-students, which people paid taxes for, would it be wrong to force schools to allow all people of color, religion (unless a religious-specified school), etc? Would that really hinder the free-market?

 

[Corydoras]

Anyone going to answer my forced public segregation ? :[

Don't know, sorry. But public segregation is a real waste of money in terms of multiplication of resources, and he is nothing if not thrifty.

 

[Ron Paul Fan]

Are you asking whether or not he would allow minorities to go to schools? Of course he would allow them to go to school! First of all, I believe that's a violation of the 14th Amendment and Brown v. Topeka BOE to not let them. Ron Paul always talks about individual liberty and treat everybody the same way. Be assured, minorities and non-minorites would all get a better education under the Ron Paul Administration. Ron Paul only works for one special interest and that is our liberty.

 

[yoshimaroka]

So, wouldn't this lead to some sort of contradiction? What if some type of minority were not able to attend school because they didn't accept his "kind"?

If all individuals are equal, why wouldn't they accept a minority? It'd be against his/her right as an individual.

 

[Abobo]

b) Don't you think every child has the right to access education? If private schools accepted voucher-students, which people paid taxes for, would it be wrong to force schools to allow all people of color, religion (unless a religious-specified school), etc? Would that really hinder the free-market?

What kind of "right" are you talking about? I'm taking about natural rights. The same kind our constitution was written to enshrine. Every person is born with all their rights -- those rights can never be taken away. People and governments can violate your rights, but they can never take it away from you. For example, in China people still have the right to speak their mind. They will be imprisoned, or even killed for doing so, but that right is still theirs.

People own their rights, it is part of them. My rights don't extent to you, your family, your children, or your neighbor. Rights are personal. Education is not a "right". It involves someone else providing you something. I have no right to an education, I have no right to water, I have no right to food, I have no right to anything but my own person and my property.

To say I have the "right" to an education is to completely change the definition of what a right is.

 

[hard@work]

What kind of "right" are you talking about? I'm taking about natural rights. The same kind our constitution was written to enshrine. Every person is born with all their rights -- those rights can never be taken away. People and governments can violate your rights, but they can never take it away from you. For example, in China people still have the right to speak their mind. They will be imprisoned, or even killed for doing so, but that right is still theirs.

People own their rights, it is part of them. My rights don't extent to you, your family, your children, or your neighbor. Rights are personal. Education is not a "right". It involves someone else providing you something. I have no right to an education, I have no right to water, I have no right to food, I have no right to anything but my own person and my property.

To say I have the "right" to an education is to completely change the definition of what a right is.

I also have a right to willingly cloth, feed, and educate you. Don't forget that.

 

[Abobo]

I also have a right to willingly cloth, feed, and educate you. Don't forget that.

I forgot to mention that

We don't the right to: education, food, water, etc. But we do have the right to trade for them, or to be given them. If hard@work tried giving me food and someone tried to stop him that would be a violation of his rights. If I tried to trade with him and someone tried to stop us, that would be a violation of both of our rights.

But, no one needs to worry about educating me. The MSM and government will do that for me.

 

[hard@work]

I forgot to mention that

We don't the right to: education, food, water, etc. But we do have the right to trade for them, or to be given them. If hard@work tried giving me food and someone tried to stop him that would be a violation of his rights. If I tried to trade with him and someone tried to stop us, that would be a violation of both of our rights.

But, no one needs to worry about educating me. The MSM and government will do that for me.

You cannot resist my garlic olive oil and tomato pasta. It comes with a helping of astrophysics and a free pair of socks.

 

[MicroBalrog]

I'm talking about would he have wanted forced integration on public property. (buses, schools, government buildings, etc.)

Buses are public property? WTF?

 

[0zzy]

Buses are public property? WTF?

Are there no publicly funded buses for transportation?

Don't know, sorry. But public segregation is a real waste of money in terms of multiplication of resources, and he is nothing if not thrifty.

I meant desegregation. But at first I thought you said desegregation, and wrote a response, so I'll just put it here anyways:

Public desegregation is a waste of money? What money is there to "waste" on it? Everyone should be looked upon the same by the law, and everyone should have access to public entities.

For example, if Ron Paul was president in the 60s, he'd say "all public schools, public buildings, etc etc. must be desegregated because everyone is looked upon with the same way in the eyes of the law."

Then black students would be going to high schools. Simple as that, no money wasted.

But there would be white students who threaten, there would be mobs who protest, and there would be violence among it all. The public police departments would handle that, because that is there job. To protect the people from foreign or domestic enemies and uphold the law.

--
But I'm sure we all know that .

What kind of "right" are you talking about? I'm taking about natural rights. The same kind our constitution was written to enshrine. Every person is born with all their rights -- those rights can never be taken away. People and governments can violate your rights, but they can never take it away from you. For example, in China people still have the right to speak their mind. They will be imprisoned, or even killed for doing so, but that right is still theirs.

People own their rights, it is part of them. My rights don't extent to you, your family, your children, or your neighbor. Rights are personal. Education is not a "right". It involves someone else providing you something. I have no right to an education, I have no right to water, I have no right to food, I have no right to anything but my own person and my property.

To say I have the "right" to an education is to completely change the definition of what a right is.

Under the current system where taxes are taken out specifically for education, I do believe people have "the right". Once we take away taxes and only use our budget of essential needs, it might be a different story.