Universal human rights, A.K.A. garbage

[RabbiKnife]

And the Bible makes no mention of the United Nations or the Human Rights Commission so it is at least as irrelevant

[DavidGYoung]

In addition to the drinking-water example, here is another case where it is rights versus rights.

What do you do with psychopathically violent children in schools?

Option one: The status quo

Pros:

Every child gets to go to school.
You don't have corporal punishment.

Cons:

There are astronomically high levels of psychopathic child-on-child violence.

Option two: Corporal punishment.

Pros:

Every child gets to go to school.
You have a drastic drop in (but not a complete elimination of) psychopathic child-on-child violence.

Cons:

You have corporal punishment.

Option three: Permanent expulsion of psychopathically violent children from school for the rest of their childhood.

Pros:

You don't have corporal punishment.
You have a drastic drop in (but not a complete elimination of) psychopathic child-on-child violence.

Cons:

You violate the rights of psychopathically violent children to go to school.


Leaving aside fantasies about infinite school budgets, revolutionary changes in society and 'I reckon' drivel about effective alternatives to corporal punishment, you only have these three options. Whose rights do you violate in order to uphold the rights of the others?

[RabbiKnife]

I don’t accept your only 3 choices premise and the underlying presumption that government sponsored education is a human right

So nothing to discuss

[DavidGYoung]

I am not presuming that government-sponsored education is a human right. I am challenging the idea that it should be.

This is patently obvious from everything else I have written in this thread.

[RabbiKnife]

Yet your three options all presume the same

[DavidGYoung]

Yes, that is very astute of you. And your point is?

[RabbiKnife]

It is impossible to disprove a presupposition when you base your effort to disprove the presupposition on the presupposition that you are trying to disprove.  Think "logical mobius loop".

[DavidGYoung]

Try reading the posts before replying to them.
That helps.

[RabbiKnife]

Try assuming that people did not read your posts before replying.  It doesn't help.

[teddyv]

I'd be interested in the evidence for this statement:
"There are astronomically high levels of psychopathic child-on-child violence."

[DavidGYoung]

Well here's the tip of the iceberg:

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-64422633

There's also this, for child-on-teacher violence:

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-wales-65905403

If either of the magic numbers, either 45% increase or 5000 recorded in 5 years, related to alleged racist language, police brutality or saying that men can't become women, 'astronomically high levels' would be the way they are reported.

[teddyv]

Your casual use of "psychopathic" that is problematic since that has a definition to it that does not apply. Forgive me if you simply meant that as hyperbole.

The first link does note that the dataset is limited. Also, I suspect this has not been a tracked stat for the many years of schooling, so I think a better metric would be events per number of students.

[DavidGYoung]

See above for my use of 'astronomical' and note the term 'tip of the iceberg'.

As for 'psychopathic', the term would be overstatement in a setting in which corporal punishment is not classified as 'child abuse'.