Obama says students with disabilities have a right to play sports

This topic is locked from further discussion.

#101 Posted by Laihendi (5810 posts) -
[QUOTE="Laihendi"][QUOTE="dave123321"]Lai, how is the campaign for Wood going?dave123321
I am not planning on starting until this summer.

Ah. Any plans in how you will get started?

I will use social networking sites to make people aware of the cause, make a blog and youtube channel, and stuff like that.
#102 Posted by MetalDogGear (806 posts) -
and when i say tru, i mean t.r.u.Abbeten
Read his "Love Song of J. Alfred Prulaihendi"
#103 Posted by Ace6301 (21389 posts) -

Anyone who thinks this is a good idea obviously hasn't read Harrison Bergeron.

THE YEAR WAS 2081, and everybody was finally equal. They weren't only equal before God and the law. They were equal every which way. Nobody was smarter than anybody else. Nobody was better looking than anybody else. Nobody was stronger or quicker than anybody else. All this equality was due to the 211th, 212th, and 213th Amendments to the Constitution, and to the unceasing vigilance of agents of the United States Handicapper General.

Some things about living still weren't quite right, though. April for instance, still drove people crazy by not being springtime. And it was in that clammy month that the H-G men took George and Hazel Bergeron's fourteenyear-old son, Harrison, away.

It was tragic, all right, but George and Hazel couldn't think about it very hard. Hazel had a perfectly average intelligence, which meant she couldn't think about anything except in short bursts. And George, while his intelligence was way above normal, had a little mental handicap radio in his ear. He was required by law to wear it at all times. It was tuned to a government transmitter. Every twenty seconds or so, the transmitter would send out some sharp noise to keep people like George from taking unfair advantage of their brains.Laihendi

That is the world Obama is creating.

Is that the story where the Randian super human guy declares himself emperor of mankind only to be shot in the face by the Minister of handicaps? F*ck that story is a hilarious satire of Rand fans.
#104 Posted by Laihendi (5810 posts) -
[QUOTE="Laihendi"]

Anyone who thinks this is a good idea obviously hasn't read Harrison Bergeron.

THE YEAR WAS 2081, and everybody was finally equal. They weren't only equal before God and the law. They were equal every which way. Nobody was smarter than anybody else. Nobody was better looking than anybody else. Nobody was stronger or quicker than anybody else. All this equality was due to the 211th, 212th, and 213th Amendments to the Constitution, and to the unceasing vigilance of agents of the United States Handicapper General.

Some things about living still weren't quite right, though. April for instance, still drove people crazy by not being springtime. And it was in that clammy month that the H-G men took George and Hazel Bergeron's fourteenyear-old son, Harrison, away.

It was tragic, all right, but George and Hazel couldn't think about it very hard. Hazel had a perfectly average intelligence, which meant she couldn't think about anything except in short bursts. And George, while his intelligence was way above normal, had a little mental handicap radio in his ear. He was required by law to wear it at all times. It was tuned to a government transmitter. Every twenty seconds or so, the transmitter would send out some sharp noise to keep people like George from taking unfair advantage of their brains.Ace6301

That is the world Obama is creating.

Is that the story where the Randian super human guy declares himself emperor of mankind only to be shot in the face by the Minister of handicaps? F*ck that story is a hilarious satire of Rand fans.

That's the story where the government forces equality on the entire country in the only way possible: handicapping everyone who is better than someone else and killing anyone whose greatness cannot be contained. It does not surprise me that you would completely miss the point of the story.
#105 Posted by MetalDogGear (806 posts) -
[QUOTE="Ace6301"][QUOTE="Laihendi"]

Anyone who thinks this is a good idea obviously hasn't read Harrison Bergeron.

THE YEAR WAS 2081, and everybody was finally equal. They weren't only equal before God and the law. They were equal every which way. Nobody was smarter than anybody else. Nobody was better looking than anybody else. Nobody was stronger or quicker than anybody else. All this equality was due to the 211th, 212th, and 213th Amendments to the Constitution, and to the unceasing vigilance of agents of the United States Handicapper General.

Some things about living still weren't quite right, though. April for instance, still drove people crazy by not being springtime. And it was in that clammy month that the H-G men took George and Hazel Bergeron's fourteenyear-old son, Harrison, away.

It was tragic, all right, but George and Hazel couldn't think about it very hard. Hazel had a perfectly average intelligence, which meant she couldn't think about anything except in short bursts. And George, while his intelligence was way above normal, had a little mental handicap radio in his ear. He was required by law to wear it at all times. It was tuned to a government transmitter. Every twenty seconds or so, the transmitter would send out some sharp noise to keep people like George from taking unfair advantage of their brains.Laihendi

That is the world Obama is creating.

Is that the story where the Randian super human guy declares himself emperor of mankind only to be shot in the face by the Minister of handicaps? F*ck that story is a hilarious satire of Rand fans.

That's the story where the government forces equality on the entire country in the only way possible: handicapping everyone who is better than someone else and killing anyone whose greatness cannot be contained. It does not surprise me that you would completely miss the point of the story.

The kettle doesn't remember giving the pot her phone number.
#106 Posted by Ace6301 (21389 posts) -
[QUOTE="Ace6301"][QUOTE="Laihendi"]

Anyone who thinks this is a good idea obviously hasn't read Harrison Bergeron.

THE YEAR WAS 2081, and everybody was finally equal. They weren't only equal before God and the law. They were equal every which way. Nobody was smarter than anybody else. Nobody was better looking than anybody else. Nobody was stronger or quicker than anybody else. All this equality was due to the 211th, 212th, and 213th Amendments to the Constitution, and to the unceasing vigilance of agents of the United States Handicapper General.

Some things about living still weren't quite right, though. April for instance, still drove people crazy by not being springtime. And it was in that clammy month that the H-G men took George and Hazel Bergeron's fourteenyear-old son, Harrison, away.

It was tragic, all right, but George and Hazel couldn't think about it very hard. Hazel had a perfectly average intelligence, which meant she couldn't think about anything except in short bursts. And George, while his intelligence was way above normal, had a little mental handicap radio in his ear. He was required by law to wear it at all times. It was tuned to a government transmitter. Every twenty seconds or so, the transmitter would send out some sharp noise to keep people like George from taking unfair advantage of their brains.Laihendi

That is the world Obama is creating.

Is that the story where the Randian super human guy declares himself emperor of mankind only to be shot in the face by the Minister of handicaps? F*ck that story is a hilarious satire of Rand fans.

That's the story where the government forces equality on the entire country in the only way possible: handicapping everyone who is better than someone else and killing anyone whose greatness cannot be contained. It does not surprise me that you would completely miss the point of the story.

iirc the author was a socialist mocking how Rand fans view the world and their opposition as well as mocking how ludicrous Rand's protagonists are.
#107 Posted by Laihendi (5810 posts) -
[QUOTE="Ace6301"][QUOTE="Laihendi"][QUOTE="Ace6301"] Is that the story where the Randian super human guy declares himself emperor of mankind only to be shot in the face by the Minister of handicaps? F*ck that story is a hilarious satire of Rand fans.

That's the story where the government forces equality on the entire country in the only way possible: handicapping everyone who is better than someone else and killing anyone whose greatness cannot be contained. It does not surprise me that you would completely miss the point of the story.

iirc the author was a socialist mocking how Rand fans view the world and their opposition as well as mocking how ludicrous Rand's protagonists are.

Are you being serious? It is a satire of the communist/socialist ideal of equality and their efforts to implement it.
#108 Posted by Ace6301 (21389 posts) -
[QUOTE="Laihendi"][QUOTE="Ace6301"][QUOTE="Laihendi"] That's the story where the government forces equality on the entire country in the only way possible: handicapping everyone who is better than someone else and killing anyone whose greatness cannot be contained. It does not surprise me that you would completely miss the point of the story.

iirc the author was a socialist mocking how Rand fans view the world and their opposition as well as mocking how ludicrous Rand's protagonists are.

Are you being serious? It is a satire of the communist/socialist ideal of equality and their efforts to implement it.

Say Lai what do you think of the ACLU?
#109 Posted by Abbeten (2803 posts) -
i have never heard of this fanfiction thing but it would not surprise me at all if laihendi completely and glouriously missed the point of a satire
#110 Posted by dave123321 (33774 posts) -
i have never heard of this fanfiction thing but it would not surprise me at all if laihendi completely and glouriously missed the point of a satireAbbeten
It's from a short story by Vonnegut
#111 Posted by Ace6301 (21389 posts) -
i have never heard of this fanfiction thing but it would not surprise me at all if laihendi completely and glouriously missed the point of a satireAbbeten
http://www.tnellen.com/cybereng/harrison.html See for yourself. While naturally everyone with half a brain is going to find what is going on in the story is wrong the subject of it's satire is somewhat debatable. It's quite obvious who the titular character is meant to be satirical of though. The writer was quite the humanist, a life long member of the ACLU and seemed to be quite liberal.
#112 Posted by Laihendi (5810 posts) -
[QUOTE="Abbeten"]i have never heard of this fanfiction thing but it would not surprise me at all if laihendi completely and glouriously missed the point of a satireAce6301
http://www.tnellen.com/cybereng/harrison.html See for yourself. While naturally everyone with half a brain is going to find what is going on in the story is wrong the subject of it's satire is somewhat debatable. It's quite obvious who the titular character is meant to be satirical of though. The writer was quite the humanist, a life long member of the ACLU and seemed to be quite liberal.

You will try to put a revisionist liberal spin on anything. The titular character is meant to starkly contrast with the society of people who believe everyone should blindly conform to the government's rules, people who believe it is wrong to be better than anyone at anything and will even apologize if even their voice sounds a little too pretty. Everyone is a mindless idiot except for him. He is the hero and the victim in the story. You are just making stuff up.
#113 Posted by jimkabrhel (15417 posts) -
[QUOTE="Laihendi"][QUOTE="jimkabrhel"][QUOTE="Laihendi"] Yes, there are broad standards that they share, and they do so freely without regulation from the government. You are proving me right without even realizing it. There is no good reason for the government to regulate education.

There are many state institutions that are held in as high a regard as the private institutions, most notably the California state system schools and the Big Ten schools. Both public and private schools are held to standards often set by the government because both types of schools received funding from the government in the form of NIH and NSF grants. Find a Nobel Prize - winning chemist in the US who didn't get a significant amount of funding from the NIH or NSF. Your ignorance of the educational system is quite impressive.

Please tell me which government imposed educational standards private universities are held to. Also the Nobel committee has no credibility. That is just a political organization.

All colleges and universities in the US must meet institutional standards if they want to be eligible for government grants, or in a similar way, accreditation from other groups or institutions. Most major research in this country cannot be done with at least some government funding. The Nobel committee recognizes ground breaking science. That isn't the same as the Nobel Peace Prize, which I don't give credibility too. If you look at Nobel chemists, they also have won major government grants, American and international chemical prizes, and other accolades. You obviously don't know how the research system works, and every important large college and university in the country does research these days.
#114 Posted by Rich3232 (2754 posts) -

Anyone who thinks this is a good idea obviously hasn't read Harrison Bergeron.

THE YEAR WAS 2081, and everybody was finally equal. They weren't only equal before God and the law. They were equal every which way. Nobody was smarter than anybody else. Nobody was better looking than anybody else. Nobody was stronger or quicker than anybody else. All this equality was due to the 211th, 212th, and 213th Amendments to the Constitution, and to the unceasing vigilance of agents of the United States Handicapper General.

Some things about living still weren't quite right, though. April for instance, still drove people crazy by not being springtime. And it was in that clammy month that the H-G men took George and Hazel Bergeron's fourteenyear-old son, Harrison, away.

It was tragic, all right, but George and Hazel couldn't think about it very hard. Hazel had a perfectly average intelligence, which meant she couldn't think about anything except in short bursts. And George, while his intelligence was way above normal, had a little mental handicap radio in his ear. He was required by law to wear it at all times. It was tuned to a government transmitter. Every twenty seconds or so, the transmitter would send out some sharp noise to keep people like George from taking unfair advantage of their brains.Laihendi

That is the world Obama is creating.

Goddamn, that has got be one of the biggest slippery slope fallacies I have ever seen.
#115 Posted by sSubZerOo (43072 posts) -

[QUOTE="Laihendi"]

Anyone who thinks this is a good idea obviously hasn't read Harrison Bergeron.

THE YEAR WAS 2081, and everybody was finally equal. They weren't only equal before God and the law. They were equal every which way. Nobody was smarter than anybody else. Nobody was better looking than anybody else. Nobody was stronger or quicker than anybody else. All this equality was due to the 211th, 212th, and 213th Amendments to the Constitution, and to the unceasing vigilance of agents of the United States Handicapper General.

Some things about living still weren't quite right, though. April for instance, still drove people crazy by not being springtime. And it was in that clammy month that the H-G men took George and Hazel Bergeron's fourteenyear-old son, Harrison, away.

It was tragic, all right, but George and Hazel couldn't think about it very hard. Hazel had a perfectly average intelligence, which meant she couldn't think about anything except in short bursts. And George, while his intelligence was way above normal, had a little mental handicap radio in his ear. He was required by law to wear it at all times. It was tuned to a government transmitter. Every twenty seconds or so, the transmitter would send out some sharp noise to keep people like George from taking unfair advantage of their brains.Rich3232

That is the world Obama is creating.

Goddamn, that has got be one of the biggest slippery slope fallacies I have ever seen.

I am waiting for that fateful day when Laihendi leaves society for being too oppressive to live in the mountains..

#116 Posted by Guybrush_3 (8308 posts) -

As long as they don't hinder the game useless I'm all for it. Example. If some kid in a wheel chair wants to do wrestling, and I'm his opponent what am I suppose to do?Fightingfan

Chances are if a kid in a wheel chair wants to wrestle he probably doesn't have legs and would crush his opponent

#117 Posted by Guybrush_3 (8308 posts) -

Anyone who thinks this is a good idea obviously hasn't read Harrison Bergeron.

THE YEAR WAS 2081, and everybody was finally equal. They weren't only equal before God and the law. They were equal every which way. Nobody was smarter than anybody else. Nobody was better looking than anybody else. Nobody was stronger or quicker than anybody else. All this equality was due to the 211th, 212th, and 213th Amendments to the Constitution, and to the unceasing vigilance of agents of the United States Handicapper General.

Some things about living still weren't quite right, though. April for instance, still drove people crazy by not being springtime. And it was in that clammy month that the H-G men took George and Hazel Bergeron's fourteenyear-old son, Harrison, away.

It was tragic, all right, but George and Hazel couldn't think about it very hard. Hazel had a perfectly average intelligence, which meant she couldn't think about anything except in short bursts. And George, while his intelligence was way above normal, had a little mental handicap radio in his ear. He was required by law to wear it at all times. It was tuned to a government transmitter. Every twenty seconds or so, the transmitter would send out some sharp noise to keep people like George from taking unfair advantage of their brains.Laihendi

That is the world Obama is creating.

You're a special kind of stupid, aren't you?

#118 Posted by Guybrush_3 (8308 posts) -

[QUOTE="Ace6301"][QUOTE="Abbeten"]i have never heard of this fanfiction thing but it would not surprise me at all if laihendi completely and glouriously missed the point of a satireLaihendi
http://www.tnellen.com/cybereng/harrison.html See for yourself. While naturally everyone with half a brain is going to find what is going on in the story is wrong the subject of it's satire is somewhat debatable. It's quite obvious who the titular character is meant to be satirical of though. The writer was quite the humanist, a life long member of the ACLU and seemed to be quite liberal.

You will try to put a revisionist liberal spin on anything. The titular character is meant to starkly contrast with the society of people who believe everyone should blindly conform to the government's rules, people who believe it is wrong to be better than anyone at anything and will even apologize if even their voice sounds a little too pretty. Everyone is a mindless idiot except for him. He is the hero and the victim in the story. You are just making stuff up.

Having read literaly everything that Vonegut ever published and many of his interviews, I promise he would hate you.

#119 Posted by TacticalDesire (10713 posts) -

I don't really see what the problem is. Have separate leagues for disabled kids, and if there happen to be disabled kids good enough to compete in the normal sport then allow them to do that too - kind of like that Olympic runner without both of his legs who was good enough to make the normal Olympics.

#120 Posted by mrbojangles25 (31985 posts) -

This of course completely contradicts the concept of sports being a display of competitive physical athleticism, because the physically disabled are by definition uncompetitive with regards to physical athleticism. Next Obama will likely be saying that the mentally disabled have a right to participate in math and debate teams.

Laihendi

I thought the point of sports was to have fun and be active?

As for "rights", the disabled (mentally, physically, etc) have a right to do anything the non-disabled have a right to do.

#121 Posted by sSubZerOo (43072 posts) -

[QUOTE="Laihendi"]

This of course completely contradicts the concept of sports being a display of competitive physical athleticism, because the physically disabled are by definition uncompetitive with regards to physical athleticism. Next Obama will likely be saying that the mentally disabled have a right to participate in math and debate teams.

mrbojangles25

I thought the point of sports was to have fun and be active?

As for "rights", the disabled (mentally, physically, etc) have a right to do anything the non-disabled have a right to do.

Furthermore there are gifted people out there that have disabilities, such as being deaf or mute, that given the right support they could go all the way to professional level.. But are barred from the beginning due to needing that support.

#122 Posted by worlock77 (22547 posts) -

[QUOTE="jimkabrhel"][QUOTE="Laihendi"] Yes, there are broad standards that they share, and they do so freely without regulation from the government. You are proving me right without even realizing it. There is no good reason for the government to regulate education.Laihendi
There are many state institutions that are held in as high a regard as the private institutions, most notably the California state system schools and the Big Ten schools. Both public and private schools are held to standards often set by the government because both types of schools received funding from the government in the form of NIH and NSF grants. Find a Nobel Prize - winning chemist in the US who didn't get a significant amount of funding from the NIH or NSF. Your ignorance of the educational system is quite impressive.

Please tell me which government imposed educational standards private universities are held to. Also the Nobel committee has no credibility. That is just a political organization.

The Noble Peace Prize is a seperate award given by a seperate committee than the other Nobel Prizes. Does your ignorance know no bounds?

#123 Posted by worlock77 (22547 posts) -

[QUOTE="Ace6301"][QUOTE="Abbeten"]i have never heard of this fanfiction thing but it would not surprise me at all if laihendi completely and glouriously missed the point of a satireLaihendi
http://www.tnellen.com/cybereng/harrison.html See for yourself. While naturally everyone with half a brain is going to find what is going on in the story is wrong the subject of it's satire is somewhat debatable. It's quite obvious who the titular character is meant to be satirical of though. The writer was quite the humanist, a life long member of the ACLU and seemed to be quite liberal.

You will try to put a revisionist liberal spin on anything. The titular character is meant to starkly contrast with the society of people who believe everyone should blindly conform to the government's rules, people who believe it is wrong to be better than anyone at anything and will even apologize if even their voice sounds a little too pretty. Everyone is a mindless idiot except for him. He is the hero and the victim in the story. You are just making stuff up.

Seriously dude, learn a little bit about the writer you're quoting. Goddamn.

#124 Posted by Abbeten (2803 posts) -
[QUOTE="Abbeten"]i have never heard of this fanfiction thing but it would not surprise me at all if laihendi completely and glouriously missed the point of a satireAce6301
http://www.tnellen.com/cybereng/harrison.html See for yourself. While naturally everyone with half a brain is going to find what is going on in the story is wrong the subject of it's satire is somewhat debatable. It's quite obvious who the titular character is meant to be satirical of though. The writer was quite the humanist, a life long member of the ACLU and seemed to be quite liberal.

i read it and from what i gather, you're both right seems like a satirical dystopian criticism of communist idealism overlayed with a satirical criticism of how libertarians see themselves in opposition to what they see collectivism to be kind of cool actually
#125 Posted by Laihendi (5810 posts) -

[QUOTE="Laihendi"]

Anyone who thinks this is a good idea obviously hasn't read Harrison Bergeron.

THE YEAR WAS 2081, and everybody was finally equal. They weren't only equal before God and the law. They were equal every which way. Nobody was smarter than anybody else. Nobody was better looking than anybody else. Nobody was stronger or quicker than anybody else. All this equality was due to the 211th, 212th, and 213th Amendments to the Constitution, and to the unceasing vigilance of agents of the United States Handicapper General.

Some things about living still weren't quite right, though. April for instance, still drove people crazy by not being springtime. And it was in that clammy month that the H-G men took George and Hazel Bergeron's fourteenyear-old son, Harrison, away.

It was tragic, all right, but George and Hazel couldn't think about it very hard. Hazel had a perfectly average intelligence, which meant she couldn't think about anything except in short bursts. And George, while his intelligence was way above normal, had a little mental handicap radio in his ear. He was required by law to wear it at all times. It was tuned to a government transmitter. Every twenty seconds or so, the transmitter would send out some sharp noise to keep people like George from taking unfair advantage of their brains.Guybrush_3

That is the world Obama is creating.

You're a special kind of stupid, aren't you?

Typical Guybrush - calling anyone who disagrees with him stupid but not making any attempt to substantiate the claim.
#126 Posted by Rich3232 (2754 posts) -
[QUOTE="Guybrush_3"]

[QUOTE="Laihendi"]

Anyone who thinks this is a good idea obviously hasn't read Harrison Bergeron.

THE YEAR WAS 2081, and everybody was finally equal. They weren't only equal before God and the law. They were equal every which way. Nobody was smarter than anybody else. Nobody was better looking than anybody else. Nobody was stronger or quicker than anybody else. All this equality was due to the 211th, 212th, and 213th Amendments to the Constitution, and to the unceasing vigilance of agents of the United States Handicapper General.

Some things about living still weren't quite right, though. April for instance, still drove people crazy by not being springtime. And it was in that clammy month that the H-G men took George and Hazel Bergeron's fourteenyear-old son, Harrison, away.

It was tragic, all right, but George and Hazel couldn't think about it very hard. Hazel had a perfectly average intelligence, which meant she couldn't think about anything except in short bursts. And George, while his intelligence was way above normal, had a little mental handicap radio in his ear. He was required by law to wear it at all times. It was tuned to a government transmitter. Every twenty seconds or so, the transmitter would send out some sharp noise to keep people like George from taking unfair advantage of their brains.Laihendi

That is the world Obama is creating.

You're a special kind of stupid, aren't you?

Typical Guybrush - calling anyone who disagrees with him stupid but not making any attempt to substantiate the claim.

why should he? That post was a fallacy.
#127 Posted by LittleMac19 (1638 posts) -
That's nice, Obama won, time to move on :)
#128 Posted by Laihendi (5810 posts) -
[QUOTE="jimkabrhel"][QUOTE="Laihendi"][QUOTE="jimkabrhel"] There are many state institutions that are held in as high a regard as the private institutions, most notably the California state system schools and the Big Ten schools. Both public and private schools are held to standards often set by the government because both types of schools received funding from the government in the form of NIH and NSF grants. Find a Nobel Prize - winning chemist in the US who didn't get a significant amount of funding from the NIH or NSF. Your ignorance of the educational system is quite impressive.

Please tell me which government imposed educational standards private universities are held to. Also the Nobel committee has no credibility. That is just a political organization.

All colleges and universities in the US must meet institutional standards if they want to be eligible for government grants, or in a similar way, accreditation from other groups or institutions. Most major research in this country cannot be done with at least some government funding. The Nobel committee recognizes ground breaking science. That isn't the same as the Nobel Peace Prize, which I don't give credibility too. If you look at Nobel chemists, they also have won major government grants, American and international chemical prizes, and other accolades. You obviously don't know how the research system works, and every important large college and university in the country does research these days.

Which institutional standards are private universities legally bound to?
#129 Posted by Laihendi (5810 posts) -
[QUOTE="Laihendi"][QUOTE="Guybrush_3"]

You're a special kind of stupid, aren't you?

Rich3232
Typical Guybrush - calling anyone who disagrees with him stupid but not making any attempt to substantiate the claim.

why should he? That post was a fallacy.

That was not a slippery slope fallacy. Obama is establishing the principle that it is wrong for someone to be able to do things that others can't do. He is against the concept of individuals having a competitive advantage. He wants everyone to be effectively disabled so that no one is better at something than anyone else.
#130 Posted by jimkabrhel (15417 posts) -

[QUOTE="jimkabrhel"][QUOTE="Laihendi"] Please tell me which government imposed educational standards private universities are held to. Also the Nobel committee has no credibility. That is just a political organization.Laihendi
All colleges and universities in the US must meet institutional standards if they want to be eligible for government grants, or in a similar way, accreditation from other groups or institutions. Most major research in this country cannot be done with at least some government funding. The Nobel committee recognizes ground breaking science. That isn't the same as the Nobel Peace Prize, which I don't give credibility too. If you look at Nobel chemists, they also have won major government grants, American and international chemical prizes, and other accolades. You obviously don't know how the research system works, and every important large college and university in the country does research these days.

Which institutional standards are private universities legally bound to?

All colleges and universities much register with the Office of Higher education (state and federal) in order to be recognized as a degree-giving institution.

#131 Posted by Laihendi (5810 posts) -

[QUOTE="Laihendi"][QUOTE="jimkabrhel"] All colleges and universities in the US must meet institutional standards if they want to be eligible for government grants, or in a similar way, accreditation from other groups or institutions. Most major research in this country cannot be done with at least some government funding. The Nobel committee recognizes ground breaking science. That isn't the same as the Nobel Peace Prize, which I don't give credibility too. If you look at Nobel chemists, they also have won major government grants, American and international chemical prizes, and other accolades. You obviously don't know how the research system works, and every important large college and university in the country does research these days.jimkabrhel

Which institutional standards are private universities legally bound to?

All colleges and universities much register with the Office of Higher education (state and federal) in order to be recognized as a degree-giving institution.

What academic standards does the Office of Higher Education impose on private universities? And in order to be recognized by who as degree-giving institution?
#132 Posted by Ace6301 (21389 posts) -
[QUOTE="Laihendi"][QUOTE="Rich3232"][QUOTE="Laihendi"] Typical Guybrush - calling anyone who disagrees with him stupid but not making any attempt to substantiate the claim.

why should he? That post was a fallacy.

That was not a slippery slope fallacy. Obama is establishing the principle that it is wrong for someone to be able to do things that others can't do. He is against the concept of individuals having a competitive advantage. He wants everyone to be effectively disabled so that no one is better at something than anyone else.

Where's this part where Obama is breaking students legs to even the playing field? I don't see it.
#133 Posted by sonicare (53451 posts) -

They should have the opportunity to participate in various types of physical/extracurricular activity. Doesnt mean they get to be on the varsity team, but neither do most people.

#134 Posted by jimkabrhel (15417 posts) -

[QUOTE="jimkabrhel"]

[QUOTE="Laihendi"] Which institutional standards are private universities legally bound to?Laihendi

All colleges and universities much register with the Office of Higher education (state and federal) in order to be recognized as a degree-giving institution.

What academic standards does the Office of Higher Education impose on private universities? And in order to be recognized by who as degree-giving institution?

I'm sure you can find it if you look. I'm not here to answer all of your questions.

http://www.ed.gov

http://www.ohe.state.mn.us/mPg.cfm?pageID=205

#135 Posted by Laihendi (5810 posts) -

[QUOTE="Laihendi"][QUOTE="jimkabrhel"]

All colleges and universities much register with the Office of Higher education (state and federal) in order to be recognized as a degree-giving institution.

jimkabrhel

What academic standards does the Office of Higher Education impose on private universities? And in order to be recognized by who as degree-giving institution?

I'm sure you can find it if you look. I'm not here to answer all of your questions.

http://www.ed.gov

http://www.ohe.state.mn.us/mPg.cfm?pageID=205

All the department of education does it publish lists of accrediting agencies that it endorses. The agencies themselves are private entities, which is proof that government isn't needed to standardize higher education. And all the Office of Higher Education controls is whether an institution is allowed to use the words "academy", "college", "institute", and "university" in its name. That's a superficial and meaningless distinction.
#136 Posted by jimkabrhel (15417 posts) -

[QUOTE="jimkabrhel"]

[QUOTE="Laihendi"] What academic standards does the Office of Higher Education impose on private universities? And in order to be recognized by who as degree-giving institution?Laihendi

I'm sure you can find it if you look. I'm not here to answer all of your questions.

http://www.ed.gov

http://www.ohe.state.mn.us/mPg.cfm?pageID=205

All the department of education does it publish lists of accrediting agencies that it endorses. The agencies themselves are private entities, which is proof that government isn't needed to standardize higher education. And all the Office of Higher Education controls is whether an institution is allowed to use the words "academy", "college", "institute", and "university" in its name. That's a superficial and meaningless distinction.

How would there be any consistency in higher education if there wasn't any kind of oversight? I feel like I've asked you this before and you didn't give me a proper answer. This is associated with the issue of for-profit instiutions, which are fleecing many of their students with degrees that don't show proficiency.

#137 Posted by Laihendi (5810 posts) -

[QUOTE="Laihendi"][QUOTE="jimkabrhel"]

I'm sure you can find it if you look. I'm not here to answer all of your questions.

http://www.ed.gov

http://www.ohe.state.mn.us/mPg.cfm?pageID=205

jimkabrhel

All the department of education does it publish lists of accrediting agencies that it endorses. The agencies themselves are private entities, which is proof that government isn't needed to standardize higher education. And all the Office of Higher Education controls is whether an institution is allowed to use the words "academy", "college", "institute", and "university" in its name. That's a superficial and meaningless distinction.

How would there be any consistency in higher education if there wasn't any kind of oversight? I feel like I've asked you this before and you didn't give me a proper answer. This is associated with the issue of for-profit instiutions, which are fleecing many of their students with degrees that don't show proficiency.

Private accrediting agencies give legitimacy to educational institutions. People should do research on what school they attend before deciding to attend it. If a school has a reputation as a degree mill then they should simply not go to it. Also it is the responsibility of employers to research the educational institution attended by their prospective employees so that they may determine whether a degree from the institution has any credibility. It's worth mentioning that there are plenty of awful public universities in addition to awful private universities, so it's not as if government regulation of education is actually doing anything to stop worthless degrees. It's actually promoting it by forcing taxpayers to fund the bad institutions (in addition to the good ones).
#138 Posted by mingmao3046 (2482 posts) -
lmao. that is all.
#139 Posted by jimkabrhel (15417 posts) -

lmao. that is all.mingmao3046

So you probably think women have no place in sports too?

#140 Posted by sonicare (53451 posts) -

[QUOTE="mingmao3046"]lmao. that is all.jimkabrhel

So you probably think women have no place in sports too?

Female mud wrestling.
#141 Posted by hartsickdiscipl (14787 posts) -

That's like saying that a person who is mute has a right to sing. It's just stupid.

#142 Posted by DroidPhysX (17089 posts) -

[QUOTE="mingmao3046"]lmao. that is all.jimkabrhel

So you probably think women have no place in sports too?

well mingmao has misogynist tendencies
#143 Posted by DroidPhysX (17089 posts) -

That's like saying that a person who is mute has a right to sing. It's just stupid.

hartsickdiscipl
dumb analogy is dumb
#144 Posted by hartsickdiscipl (14787 posts) -

[QUOTE="hartsickdiscipl"]

That's like saying that a person who is mute has a right to sing. It's just stupid.

DroidPhysX

dumb analogy is dumb

Explain the difference.

#145 Posted by DroidPhysX (17089 posts) -

Explain the difference.

hartsickdiscipl

A disability and sports are both broad areas of discussion whilst your analogy zeroed on a specific disability and activity that are incompatible with one another.

#146 Posted by Ace6301 (21389 posts) -

That's like saying that a person who is mute has a right to sing. It's just stupid.

hartsickdiscipl
Are you saying that people with disabilities are completely incompatible with sports? Because that's what your analogy is. A complete incompatibility. Even then were we able to allow a mute person to no longer be mute and sing we would do it.
#147 Posted by Laihendi (5810 posts) -

[QUOTE="hartsickdiscipl"]

Explain the difference.

DroidPhysX

A disability and sports are both broad areas of discussion whilst your analogy zeroed on a specific disability and activity that are incompatible with one another.

Which team sport can the physically disabled participate in?
#148 Posted by Laihendi (5810 posts) -
The fact that the government is having to force schools to redefine their sports programs is proof that the physically disabled are largely incapable of participating in traditional sports.
#149 Posted by hartsickdiscipl (14787 posts) -

[QUOTE="hartsickdiscipl"]

Explain the difference.

DroidPhysX

A disability and sports are both broad areas of discussion whilst your analogy zeroed on a specific disability and activity that are incompatible with one another.

In the end it depends on the specific disability and the specific activity. That's why specific examples are the only way to see if a general statement like "people with disabilities have the right to play sports" is valid.

#150 Posted by hartsickdiscipl (14787 posts) -

[QUOTE="hartsickdiscipl"]

That's like saying that a person who is mute has a right to sing. It's just stupid.

Ace6301

Are you saying that people with disabilities are completely incompatible with sports? Because that's what your analogy is. A complete incompatibility. Even then were we able to allow a mute person to no longer be mute and sing we would do it.

There is no such thing as a "complete" incompatibility. There is a certain level of practical incompatibility that has to be determined. That's where the lines have to be drawn. Same as with anything in life.