Originally Posted By jonvn I can not believe that anyone would, on purpose, introduce birth defects into their children. Making them deaf on purpose? People who do such a thing should go to jail. <a href="http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/16299656/wid/11915773?GT1=8816" target="_blank">http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/16 299656/wid/11915773?GT1=8816</a>
Originally Posted By jonvn Here's a quote from the article: "But the survey also has led to a debate about the definition of “normal†and inspires a glimpse into deaf and dwarf cultures where many people do not consider themselves disabled." What kind of idiocy is this? I am someone who does not hear well, and it bloody well isn't normal. Neither is being a dwarf. This is where all this PC garbage takes us to. Just crazy.
Originally Posted By TALL Disney Guy I minored in American Sign Language, and interacted with several deaf students. Deaf people do have their own culture, and indeed don't see themselves as disabled.
Originally Posted By melekalikimaka Sounds pretty sick to me. From article: Cara Reynolds of Collingswood, N.J., who considered embryo screening but now plans to adopt a dwarf baby, is outraged by the criticism. “You cannot tell me that I cannot have a child who’s going to look like me,†Reynolds said. “It’s just unbelievably presumptuous and they’re playing God.†___ Oh, the irony.
Originally Posted By DlandJB It would be, imo, supremely selfish to deny advantages to your child just because you didn't have them. Yet, I have known people who actively encouraged their kids not to pursue higher education because they didn't. Perhaps they fear that their child will somehow look down on them (in one case, literally) but how incredibly selfish. Interestingly, a recent episode of House M.D. dealt with this question of dwarfism when it turned out that a child of a dwarf mother did not have the same condition as the mother and could be helped. Initially the mother did not want to but she was convinced otherwise.
Originally Posted By jonvn "ho actively encouraged their kids not to pursue higher education because they didn't" I know people like this, too. And it is terrible. To not encourage your children to be the best is simply disgraceful. One parent, though, eventually did go to college. I guess it was ok for them, at that point. In the meantime, the kid has no education and is a parent at 18.
Originally Posted By ClintFlint2 ////I have known people who actively encouraged their kids not to pursue higher education because they didn't.//// As if "higher ed." is so damn important and guarantees one a more fruitful life. In my circle of immediate peers EVERY person who graduated from higher education is far more fruitless than those who decided against a degree. One good friend graduated from UC Davis back in '95 and is still doing temp. work. Another graduated from UC Berkeley in '97 and is a starving script writer; he can't even afford a cel phone another close friend holds a Ph.d. in phys. chem. out of UA(razorbacks) and he barely makes enough just to pay his apt. and Honda Fit.. There are others too. These people can't even afford to go to Disney parks. Now all of the so called dropouts and non higher educated people around me(and including myself) are prosperous: an electrician who makes 200K per year, a real estate broker college drop out, another university dropout(me) who owns and operates 5 residential care homes for the elderly, another friend who never finished highschool works as a head animator/artist for Lucas Games. Still another friend dropped out of junior college and owns and runs a very thriving optical shop at a mall.
Originally Posted By jonvn "As if "higher ed." is so damn important and guarantees one a more fruitful life." You don't go to college just to be able to make more money.
Originally Posted By Shooba "As if "higher ed." is so damn important and guarantees one a more fruitful life." It's not the best choice for everyone, as your examples pointed out. However, actively discouraging someone from not getting an education, for the wrong reason, is bad parenting in any case.
Originally Posted By ClintFlint2 honestly, not trying to be snide with you nor "smartass" but really, in essence, what is the point of memorizing formulas, pulling "all nighters", spending countless hours preparing for exams and writing papers and ultimately forking out thousands(assuming one is on the "private pay" plan) if it is not primarily to enrich one at a later date? Future money/income/position is the main reason to graduate from universities for the vast majority of students.
Originally Posted By ClintFlint2 There is definitely a need for universities for many out there. All I'm saying is that I challenge the underlying assumption that univeristy bound people are necessarily headed in the right direction. They may or may not be and in my experience more fruits are found in the dropouts and non students rather than the "achievers" with their coveted degrees.
Originally Posted By DlandJB Clint has the distinct ring of a sock puppet. Got something to say, use your real screen name.
Originally Posted By DlandJB actively discouraging someone from not getting an education, for the wrong reason, is bad parenting in any case.>>> Exactly -- Parents should want their kids to do better than they did. It might not be for everyone, but these days and into the future a higher degree (even if it is a technical one) is going to give them an advantage over people that don't have it when they are trying to get a job.
Originally Posted By jonvn "what is the point " The point is to better yourself, and to enrich yourself with knowledge of the world. This is why universities are not trade schools.
Originally Posted By SingleParkPassholder Clint, good for you that you don't feel the need for higher education. It's now time however to back off attacking those who encourage others to get it or seek it for themselves. There are no disadvantages to getting one. Had you pursued it, you likely wouldn't be so militant about it.
Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan I'm guessing that the folks in the examples used earlier of people who got degrees and then flundered, has more to do with their internal drive and ambition than as evidence that a degree is a waste of time. I would wager that those same folks would be struggling just as much without the degree. They sound rather unmotivated or at least unfocused.
Originally Posted By ClintFlint2 ////I'm guessing that the folks in the examples used earlier of people who got degrees and then flundered, has more to do with their internal drive and ambition than as evidence that a degree is a waste of time./// To be fair with you I would say that applies to the one still doing temp. work but not to the others. ///I would wager that those same folks would be struggling just as much without the degree/// And you would win too. And I am not saying a degree is worthless or even a hinderance(to many it would help and to others it could become a huge opportunity cost). Once again I am challenging the underlying assumption for the NEED for a degree. Too many times parents assume the best path for riches and happiness is to be "joe college". Great if one aspires to be a dermatologist, alegebra teacher or a head store manager at a Taco Bell(all very honorable positions). After all, a four year degree is pretty much a prerequisite to get hired or go on to get licensing.
Originally Posted By jonvn "I am challenging the underlying assumption for the NEED for a degree" Then you are challenging the underlying assumption of education and self-enrichment. You can get degrees in all kinds of things that do NOT lead to a job. What sort of job does a BA in History get you? Not a lot. You're not going to end up a multi-millionare with BA in that or Art. That's not why you do it.
