July 2013 Interregional Debate!

[PJ]

Welcome everyone to this election's debate.  I am glad to help give Atlasian Citizens from different regions the chance for lively debate. If you have not already officially signed up, you can join in debate, but only if you are running for office.

First question will last for 24 hours.

Senator Scott has recently introduced some education reform that includes banning tuition fees, funding private schools, eliminating standardized testing, and and significantly loosening curriculum requirements.

What tactics would you use to improve Atlasian education?

[Incipimus iterum]

Thanks, I think one way to improve Education is to have Local Control of schools, because Local Control allows for each unique district to more appropriately respond to the educational needs of students. Local districts can adapt to the unique social cultural dynamics of their community and pursue more creativity in addressing educational issues which develop.Also the states and school districts are more flexible and pragmatic about designing reform to meet the needs of particular schools” due to their proximity to students, schools, teachers and parents.

[PJ]

I also agree that education needs to be specified for each school's requirements, with still requirements on certain subjects to be taught. However, I believe that teaching creationism should not be legal. When we consider budget cuts, education should NEVER be considered for cutting funds. I am also in favor of eliminating standardized tests, because it is unfair to students to base their entire future based on a couple test scores, instead of the grades they worked to earn.

[H.E. VOLODYMYR ZELENKSYY]

I echo the beliefs of the nice gentlemen who have posted before me that a nationalized, one-size-fits-all approach to educating our children is inefficient and bad for said children. Curricula should be tailored to fit each school's (and each student's) needs, making sure that every student balances what they want to learn with what they need to learn. In addition, I believe that education is a fundamental human right, and that we should increase funding for public schools, increase student loans, and decrease public college tuition. Our teachers also must be held accountable - they should not get away with failing at their jobs simply because they've been around for a while. I believe that we should increase oversight for teachers, but we should also give good teachers more incentives to stay at their job - my parents are both teachers, and damn is it a hard job - like increasing their salaries and retirement benefits.

[Njall]

Like those that have spoken before me, I believe that a federally-dictated curriculum is simply not a good idea for a nation as large as Atlasia.  There should, of course, be general guidelines on what students should know by the time that they graduate high school, but it should be left up to the individual schools to decide the best way to go about teaching the material.  With that in mind, I also favour the elimination of standardized testing.  I find that when standardized tests are utilized, and especially when they are worth a large percentage of the students' marks, teachers tend to teach to the test and don't focus on any material that isn't covered within the tests, even if that material would otherwise be considered relevant to the topic at hand. 

With regards to teachers, I believe that they hold some of the most important jobs in our nation, and as such there should be more incentives (pay, benefits etc.) available in order to attract talented young men and women to the profession, and to encourage those who are already teaching to continue their careers.  That said, I'm sure we have all heard about certain cases where bad teachers are taking advantage of their tenured status, and in order to try and end this practice, I believe that administrative officials (eg. principals) should be more involved in teacher oversight, so that cases of below-standard teaching can be recorded and dealt with.

Finally, on the issue of private school funding, I am a little bit conflicted.  See, my brother attended a private school that  focused on helping kids with learning disabilities, and while it did help him a great deal, it must have cost my parents at least 10 times more to send him there than it did to send me to public school.  In cases such as this, private school that exist for a specific purpose are very helpful for the students.  However, there are many parents who wouldn't be able to afford this, and to me, that is just wrong.  On the other hand, using public money to fully fund private schools makes little sense, as that essentially turns them into public schools that are independently administrated.  In my mind, the best solution here would be to allow private school to continue to function, but would require them to operate as non-profit organizations.  They would have to report their curriculum to the government, in order to ensure that it meets the general guidelines that are given to all schools.  As well, in order to ensure that all students would be able to attend one of these institutions if they so chose to do so, tuition could be subsidized by the government, on a sliding scale that corresponds to the income of the student's family.

[MyRescueKittehRocks]

Education is one of the most important issues that governments at any level deal with. The question I'd like to pose is how do we get our academic prowess back into the elite of the world? Senator Scott has expressed many of my own ideas. However I'd like to address the issue of academic freedom. Someone expressed a view I feel to be antithetical to that freedom. They think the scientific view of creation shouldn't be legal. That is what I call academic suppression. Shouldn't there be fair competition among the views both religiously and otherwise inspired to figure out the core matters of the human experience.

[PJ]

Education is one of the most important issues that governments at any level deal with. The question I'd like to pose is how do we get our academic prowess back into the elite of the world? Senator Scott has expressed many of my own ideas. However I'd like to address the issue of academic freedom. Someone expressed a view I feel to be antithetical to that freedom. They think the scientific view of creation shouldn't be legal. That is what I call academic suppression. Shouldn't there be fair competition among the views both religiously and otherwise inspired to figure out the core matters of the human experience.

I believe that evolution is proven fact, and while I do believe that religious beliefs should be allowed to be taught in private schools, this is simply denying that which has already been proven.

[Incipimus iterum]

Education is one of the most important issues that governments at any level deal with. The question I'd like to pose is how do we get our academic prowess back into the elite of the world? Senator Scott has expressed many of my own ideas. However I'd like to address the issue of academic freedom. Someone expressed a view I feel to be antithetical to that freedom. They think the scientific view of creation shouldn't be legal. That is what I call academic suppression. Shouldn't there be fair competition among the views both religiously and otherwise inspired to figure out the core matters of the human experience.

I would also like to add that I also believe that Private schools should be allowed to study beliefs relating to religion, and I would also like to mention that i oppose standardized tests.

[H.E. VOLODYMYR ZELENKSYY]

Education is one of the most important issues that governments at any level deal with. The question I'd like to pose is how do we get our academic prowess back into the elite of the world? Senator Scott has expressed many of my own ideas. However I'd like to address the issue of academic freedom. Someone expressed a view I feel to be antithetical to that freedom. They think the scientific view of creation shouldn't be legal. That is what I call academic suppression. Shouldn't there be fair competition among the views both religiously and otherwise inspired to figure out the core matters of the human experience.

Creation is not a scientific view. Creation is bullsh**t that should not be taught to our children. Although, if you really want to teach it, then how about we compromise and teach every single religion's creation myth - Christianity, Hinduism, science (not a religion but whatevs) - to children? I'm sure we can rustle up the funds somewhere.

[Хahar 🤔]

Education is one of the most important issues that governments at any level deal with. The question I'd like to pose is how do we get our academic prowess back into the elite of the world? Senator Scott has expressed many of my own ideas. However I'd like to address the issue of academic freedom. Someone expressed a view I feel to be antithetical to that freedom. They think the scientific view of creation shouldn't be legal. That is what I call academic suppression. Shouldn't there be fair competition among the views both religiously and otherwise inspired to figure out the core matters of the human experience.

No, that's not what academic freedom means.

[PJ]

Next question: What is your opinion of recent legislation referring to banning parties that display characteristics of terrorism according to the bill?

24 hrs

[H.E. VOLODYMYR ZELENKSYY]

I oppose fascism.

[sentinel]

I oppose fascism.

[Хahar 🤔]

Certain people in this game seem to have lost sight of what exactly the game is about.

[The Simpsons Cinematic Universe]

Next question: What is your opinion of recent legislation referring to banning parties that display characteristics of terrorism according to the bill?

24 hrs

Oppose, strongly. The people may cause such parties to fail, through the democratic process. To ban them from participating in the electoral process is a travesty of democracy.

[PJ]

I also agree that any attempts to get a political party out of office should be done democratically.

[Hash]

Education: This issue gets debated way too much every election, and everybody more or less agrees with one another or agrees to disagree with the few people who don't agree with everybody else. However, I am proud of having written and helped passed a large bill in the IDS Legislature dealing with bullying, cyberbullying and mental health issues. It's a topic where legislation can serve a purpose and which isn't debated enough. This also goes to prove that all the reactionaries who are intent on calling us 'trolls' are quite wrong - we are quite capable of writing useful and serious legislation, unlike them.

Also, teaching creationism in public schools should be banned outright, not permitted. Unless you teach it in some world religions class. Additionally, I oppose public funding for religious (private) schools of any denomination.

Banning parties: Obviously I made a tl;dr speech in the appropriate thread which I encourage everybody to read: https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=176194.msg3793540#msg3793540

The tl;dr summary is basically: banning parties is undemocratic and verging on fascism. Defining people and parties we disagree with as terrorists is just retarded, not to say dangerous and blatantly unconstitutional. Last time I checked, Atlasia is supposed to be a democracy. Of course, Mustafinism-Komovism represents the first serious threat to the established order, the status-quo and the political castes in a very long time, so naturally we are up against a united front of reactionaries and counterrevolutionaries. They are allowed to hold these views, and I won't do anything to ban those views. Likewise, they shouldn't do anything to ban our views. Unless they fancy being fascists and anti-democratic.

[Napoleon]

Next question: What is your opinion of recent legislation referring to banning parties that display characteristics of terrorism according to the bill?

24 hrs

Oppose, strongly. The people may cause such parties to fail, through the democratic process. To ban them from participating in the electoral process is a travesty of democracy.

And if they ban in he democratic process?

[H.E. VOLODYMYR ZELENKSYY]

Next question: What is your opinion of recent legislation referring to banning parties that display characteristics of terrorism according to the bill?

24 hrs

Oppose, strongly. The people may cause such parties to fail, through the democratic process. To ban them from participating in the electoral process is a travesty of democracy.

And if they ban in he democratic process?

Let me answer your question with a question: would you have a problem with President Chris Christie, together with a Republican House and Senate, banning the Democratic Party, and the Supreme Court upholding the ban as constitutional? Would you have any problem with that?

[MyRescueKittehRocks]

The democratic process is best in dealing with those who engage in Pacific Rimjob type of tactics.

So why can't we have a fair and honest dialog about the views of humanity's beginnings in the relms of science. I don't think the darwinist can accurately explain the skeletons of giants being found all over the world. Also the Smithsonian has been actively suppressing these kinds of archeological finds beacuse of the ramifications they hold firmly against the darwinist and by such in favor of at least intelligent design if not right out Biblical Creation. If you want information regarding the giants look up Steve Quayle, L.A. Marzulli,  Doug Hamp, or Rob Skiba. Kids need to know both sides to fairly and with their own free will choose what to believe about the origin of life.

To respond to Alfred's question the idea or theory of a one party state is anathema to all who believe in represenative democracy. Sometimes the courts and governments of people make major mistakes and adjudicate unjustly. That's when the people rise up (and should sooner than this point as well) to peacefully petition their grievence with their government. If the goverment meets peaceful protest with peace then then we have hope of a fair and equtible redress. If not than things like Egypt or our 60's race riots occur until change happens.

[PJ]

The democratic process is best in dealing with those who engage in Pacific Rimjob type of tactics.

So why can't we have a fair and honest dialog about the views of humanity's beginnings in the relms of science. I don't think the darwinist can accurately explain the skeletons of giants being found all over the world. Also the Smithsonian has been actively suppressing these kinds of archeological finds beacuse of the ramifications they hold firmly against the darwinist and by such in favor of at least intelligent design if not right out Biblical Creation. If you want information regarding the giants look up Steve Quayle, L.A. Marzulli,  Doug Hamp, or Rob Skiba. Kids need to know both sides to fairly and with their own free will choose what to believe about the origin of life.

To respond to Alfred's question the idea or theory of a one party state is anathema to all who believe in represenative democracy. Sometimes the courts and governments of people make major mistakes and adjudicate unjustly. That's when the people rise up (and should sooner than this point as well) to peacefully petition their grievence with their government. If the goverment meets peaceful protest with peace then then we have hope of a fair and equtible redress. If not than things like Egypt or our 60's race riots occur until change happens.

The debate time ended for education, but the debate can still carry over into the next debate time. Even if you believe that the earth is only 6000 years old, evolution is undeniably happening right now. Take for example the cancer that evolves in your body to resist different immunities.

[Incipimus iterum]

I think that this Proposal to call the NMAM "Terrorists" is not the solution, Isn't the right to vote for someone of any Political party the very foundation of a democracy?, of course it is we need to let people make there own decisions on who ever they vote for. The better way to deal with it is let the people vote yes or no on the NMAM candidates democratically.

[Njall]

I'm also against this piece of legislation.  Within a true democracy, the freedoms of thought, speech, and association are paramount to ensuring the political process continues to function as intended, where all citizens are afforded access to all points of view and are able to choose from the full range of candidates and/or parties that choose to contest elections.  A move to ban a political organization, no matter where it lies ideologically, stands in direct defiance of these principles.  Instead of this happening, the opponents of the NM-AM should seek to defeat them through the standard electoral process.  They must convince the voting citizenry why their candidates would be better legislators than those offered by the NM-AM.  Keep in mind, banning the name of a group cannot effectively silence ideas.  Instead, these ideas should be proven inferior by their opponents.  That is the true democratic way.

[H.E. VOLODYMYR ZELENKSYY]

I'm too lazy to do that multi-quote thing/don't know how to do it without copy-pasting the [/quote] blocks, so my responses are in bold.

The democratic process is best in dealing with those who engage in Pacific Rimjob type of tactics.

So why can't we have a fair and honest dialog about the views of humanity's beginnings in the relms of science. I don't think the darwinist can accurately explain the skeletons of giants being found all over the world.

Are you referring to the Cardiff Giant? Because that was revealed as a hoax.

Also the Smithsonian has been actively suppressing these kinds of archeological finds beacuse of the ramifications they hold firmly against the darwinist and by such in favor of at least intelligent design if not right out Biblical Creation. If you want information regarding the giants look up Steve Quayle, L.A. Marzulli,  Doug Hamp, or Rob Skiba. Kids need to know both sides to fairly and with their own free will choose what to believe about the origin of life.

Should kids "know both sides fairly" about geocentrism? Should they be taught that the sun goes around the earth?

To respond to Alfred's question the idea or theory of a one party state is anathema to all who believe in represenative democracy.

[Associate Justice PiT]

     Geocentrism is not useful, but it is much more valid than creationism is. I prefer to make a comparison between creationism and alchemy.