4 ms·

1. This is kind of a founding principle of the country, so... Is it? Saying "all mean are created equal" has a lot of interpretations, of which many valid ones

1. This is kind of a founding principle of the country, so... Is it? Saying "all mean are created equal" has a lot of interpretations, of which many valid ones do not include "all men are born of equal ability in every regard." Given that some people are born to grow up to be 5'4 and weigh 100lbs and others are born to grow up to 6'7 and 320lbs, it should be clear that not everyone is "equal" at least in terms of their physical abilities. I'm pretty sure the Founders were aware of this, making it highly unlikely that their version of "created equal" meant "exactly equal in all terms of ability."

wonnage 5y ago
- mindcrime 5y ago
  Regardless of interpretation, I'm pretty sure deciding whether a kid is fit for the elite/intellectual track or the physical labor track at the tender age of 10 based on whether they can do some tests is not in the spirit of "all men are created equal" And I would agree. But your earlier comment seemed to imply a much more absolute stance. That's what I would disagree with.
- keneda7 5y ago
  Could you point out where anyone (besides someone like you arguing for these reforms) has said kids have to pick their course at 10 based on some tests? As far as I can tell, your side of the argument made this up. It is ironic as you are sayings forcing kids down one path is bad, yet your solutions is to force kids down one path. The current system does not make you choose your path based on a some test at 10.