IMO there is a solid justification, based on the wisdom of the founding fathers as expressed in the Constitution of the United States, for dismantling the Department of Education as it is now.
Two statements, one easily defended and the other a matter of fact.
One: the socio-political function of Education is to the concept of Science as the socio-political function of Religion is to the concept of God; and, Two: the First amendment to the Constitution which specifies the Federal Govt. shall make no law concerning an establishment of religion, the absolute separation of church and state.
I will argue that in this time when nearly half of the citizenry has retired the teachings of a diety as the reference standard of both ethics and morality to transfer that faith onto the mortal accomplishments of Science that transfer of FAITH means the First Amendment now has jurisdiction on the subject, which then resolves to mean a Federal Department of Education is blatantly unconstitutional.
There is a trajectory tangent to this argument that would serve both sides of this debate quite well, and might even serve to initiate a true constitutional convention to argue it out and produce a second set of amendments that address just how far into a citizen’s psychology is any political body allowed to penetrate with the intent of placing undue influence (think RICO laws) on that citizen’s judgment parameters.
The founding father’s obvious intent WAS NOT to protect the decision making process which is the foundation of Democracy from Jehovah, their intent was to protect it from The Pope, or the King of England, or Saudi Arabia. I see no good reason to allow a Federal Department to reprise that threat simply because the mechanism of the feedback loop did not yet exist in the year 1776.
February 8, 2025 @ 2:31 pm
IMO there is a solid justification, based on the wisdom of the founding fathers as expressed in the Constitution of the United States, for dismantling the Department of Education as it is now.
Two statements, one easily defended and the other a matter of fact.
One: the socio-political function of Education is to the concept of Science as the socio-political function of Religion is to the concept of God; and, Two: the First amendment to the Constitution which specifies the Federal Govt. shall make no law concerning an establishment of religion, the absolute separation of church and state.
I will argue that in this time when nearly half of the citizenry has retired the teachings of a diety as the reference standard of both ethics and morality to transfer that faith onto the mortal accomplishments of Science that transfer of FAITH means the First Amendment now has jurisdiction on the subject, which then resolves to mean a Federal Department of Education is blatantly unconstitutional.
There is a trajectory tangent to this argument that would serve both sides of this debate quite well, and might even serve to initiate a true constitutional convention to argue it out and produce a second set of amendments that address just how far into a citizen’s psychology is any political body allowed to penetrate with the intent of placing undue influence (think RICO laws) on that citizen’s judgment parameters.
The founding father’s obvious intent WAS NOT to protect the decision making process which is the foundation of Democracy from Jehovah, their intent was to protect it from The Pope, or the King of England, or Saudi Arabia. I see no good reason to allow a Federal Department to reprise that threat simply because the mechanism of the feedback loop did not yet exist in the year 1776.