AS THEY SAY, you cannot make this shit up.
We have never invested as much in public education as we should have because we’ve always had kind of a private notion of children: Your kid is yours and totally your responsibility. We haven’t had a very collective notion of these are our children. So part of it is we have to break through our kind of private idea that kids belong to their parents, or kids belong to their families, and recognize that kids belong to whole communities. Once it’s everybody’s responsibility, and not just the household’s, then we start making better investments.
— Melissa Harris-Perry, MSNBC anchor.
Words cannot convey just exactly how terribly despicable this is.
Not only that, but the really steep decline in American public education began almost exactly when the per-pupil expenditures began to balloon.
HERE’S YOUR TAKEAWAY FROM THAT ::SPIT:: DESPICABLE statist nanny wannabe who started out saying, “We never have invested enough in education…” and went on to claim ownership of children for the state.
First off, fuck her with a chain saw. She is despicable. Worse, she’s dangerous. And, frankly, hanging’s too good for her sort.
First principle: in a free country nobody owns anybody. All individuals own themselves. And good free people recognize that and respect the sovereignty of the individual.
Children are a special case. They must be civilized and made fit for society. They need to be educated to certain minimum standards. And, within very narrow moral strictures, they must be protected from the dire results of their own innocence.
That’s it. And, once a child is capable of making decisions for himself — and thus capable of making and absorbing the consequences of hard decisions, (and it’s generally earlier than parents like to admit), the only proper strictures a parent may or should lay on him are those which fall under the rubric of “house rules” — limits which protect the safety of parental property and those other people living in the house, and those things which might bring unearned consequences down on the owners of the house — such as drug trafficking or other illegal activities. Not that such things are necessarily approved or disapproved of, but that they put the owner (parent) unwilling at risk.
From birth, up to that point, children are the responsibility — not the property — of their parents, and it is despicable, reprehensible, and downright evil for any other person or group or the state to meddle in or interfere with that primary, fiduciary duty.
And if the children end up fucked up, all the state can or should do is shrug and remember that the sins of the fathers are visited upon the children. And those sins are myriad and manifold and extend far, far beyond the proper brief of the state.
I would add that those who would vitiate liberty using children as a stalking horse are a clear and present danger to public safety and should be — not opposed, but destroyed. As you would destroy a rabid dog, with as much dispatch and as dispassionately. And for the same reasons.