Oh geez, Kerry's an idiot

[Boris Godunov]

So is forcing high school students to attend gym class unconstitutional as well? Do tell.

[Jaguar]

Originally posted by Boris Godunov
So is forcing high school students to attend gym class unconstitutional as well? Do tell.

You aren't actually forced to attend gym class, but I digress. Gym class is a learning experience, whereas this is unpaid mandatory labor.

[Boris Godunov]

You don't think this would qualify as a learning experience?

I think you're being arbitrary in the distinction. You may not actually be "forced" to do this service--since it's tied to high school students, it will likely just be a requirement for graduation. How is that different from requiring a kid to attend classes and have a certain grade point average to graduate (to a degree that would make it unconstitutional)?

[civman2000]

whereas this is unpaid mandatory labor.

I interpreted it as paid, just like drafted soldiers are paid. Doesn't make it any less of a violation of the 13th amendment, though.

[Jaguar]

Originally posted by Boris Godunov
You don't think this would qualify as a learning experience?

I think you're being arbitrary in the distinction. You may not actually be "forced" to do this service--since it's tied to high school students, it will likely just be a requirement for graduation. How is that different from requiring a kid to attend classes and have a certain grade point average to graduate (to a degree that would make it unconstitutional)?

If you want to argue that school itself is unconstitutional, go ahead.

I just argue that this is involuntary servitude. That is a point with which you cannot argue.

[Boris Godunov]

If it's a requirement for graduation, then it isn't. If you don't want to do it, then you don't have to--but don't expect to graduate from high school. Same thing with any other mandated curriculum: either do it or don't expect to graduate.

I fail to see why it's a bad idea at all.

[civman2000]

You don't think this would qualify as a learning experience?

I think you're being arbitrary in the distinction. You may not actually be "forced" to do this service--since it's tied to high school students, it will likely just be a requirement for graduation. How is that different from requiring a kid to attend classes and have a certain grade point average to graduate (to a degree that would make it unconstitutional)?

It is somewhat arbitrary, but I think there is a clear distinction: with what Kerry's proposing, people will be forced to do work for another entity (the government), work that would ordinarily be voluntary work done by government employees. On the other hand, things like gym are certainly work but hardly forced employment. I think the very wording of Kerry's plan of "mandatory service" being nearly the same as the 13th amendment's "involuntary servitude" shows that it is different from just forced gym class.

[Boris Godunov]

Once again, you are stretching the meaning of involuntary servitude:

requiring mandatory service for high school students

The implication here is that it's a graduation requirement. That isn't remotely tantamount to slavery or a draft or whatever, no matter how much hyperbole you want to attach to it.

[PLATO]

Originally posted by Boris Godunov
You don't think this would qualify as a learning experience?

I think you're being arbitrary in the distinction. You may not actually be "forced" to do this service--since it's tied to high school students, it will likely just be a requirement for graduation. How is that different from requiring a kid to attend classes and have a certain grade point average to graduate (to a degree that would make it unconstitutional)?

Where do you draw the line? We could make it a "requirement" for graduation to work on a road crew for two years also. There needs to be some relevance to the diploma. Community service is a worthy goal, but who says that you have to contribute to your community to be an American?

[Boris Godunov]

I don't recall the proposal stripping those who decide not to participate of their citizenship, PLATO. Likewise, how is gym class particularly relevant to a scholastic education? Or art? Or music? But they're often required. Why?

[Jaguar]

Originally posted by Boris Godunov
Once again, you are stretching the meaning of involuntary servitude:



The implication here is that it's a graduation requirement. That isn't remotely tantamount to slavery or a draft or whatever, no matter how much hyperbole you want to attach to it.

Why was public education put into place? Because everyone has a right to an education.

Under this plan, you have the right to an education, or the right to go without mandatory servitude, but not both.

[PLATO]

Originally posted by Boris Godunov
I don't recall the proposal stripping those who decide not to participate of their citizenship, PLATO. Likewise, how is gym class particularly relevant to a scholastic education? Or art? Or music? But they're often required. Why?

I guess that it is a matter of degree (as most things are). The goal being a well rounded general secondary education. Like I said, it is a worthy goal. But a requirement? Where do we draw the line? Organizations for service already exist but aren't mandatory. IMO, that is how they should remain.

[civman2000]

Originally posted by Boris Godunov
I don't recall the proposal stripping those who decide not to participate of their citizenship, PLATO. Likewise, how is gym class particularly relevant to a scholastic education? Or art? Or music? But they're often required. Why?

The difference between these and mandatory community service is that community service is a form of (involuntary) servitude ("the condition of being bound to service" according to dictionary.com) and thus violates the 13th Amendment. The others are just as involuntary, but are not servitude.

[Boris Godunov]

There is no "right to education" in the Constitution, so how can you argue that while griping about the supposed unconstitutionality of this idea? Seems inconsistent.

Regardless, public education was put into place because there was a great demand for it and the potential benefits to the nation were enormous. People may have wrapped it in the language of "rights," but such a right certainly isn't stated constitutionally.

Not that I disagree with public education, mind you--I think it's vital. But I also don't mind initiatives such as this that seek to instill a sense of national community through service. Education should be first and foremost about teaching people how to be well-rounded adults. I think service would go a long way towards that, far more so than teaching kids Kipling or Longfellow, for example.

[PLATO]

Constitution 2
Slowwy 0
Boris 0

Stay tuned for more "Stump the Constitution" brought to you by the DNC