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."
And I would agree. But your earlier comment seemed to imply a much more absolute stance. That's what I would disagree with.
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.
Just that they are 'equal' i.e. before God, or before the Law.
That one man is not from some superior lineage, that makes him a superior being.
I would be the founding fathers would have no problem if one man decided to 'discriminate' among others for some arbitrary reason - even if they were landholding men of high status etc..
As of now we effectively underwrite anyone who wants to go, often at the expense of the student racking up debt for a useless degree and later the taxpayer who will inevitably have to subsidize them.
curious to learn how you arrived at this conclusion?
Those compound advantages you're talking about are good things that we want people to have because they help them do more good for society. You seem to want to handicap them in the name of fairness. Where does that thinking end when you realize that the founding assumption (1. above) is false? Disfiguring beautiful people to prevent them accumulating the compounding advantages that come with beauty? Brain damaging intelligent people?
“ 1. This is kind of a founding principle of the country, so...”
yes those slave owning people really thought their slaves were the same as them, totally dude
Entitlement principles are why the West was the 1st place in the world to abolish slavery and then went about and abolished it throughout the world.
2. This follows from #1, if we rule out nature then it must be nurture. Also, you must not be a parent if you'll accept "some kids are just dumb" as an excuse
3,4. Replace "oppression" with "competition". I think it might sound better to you. But the conclusion is the same.
You want to prevent winners from accumulating an advantage, eliminating all others (which sounds vaguely genocidal in this context), then you have to handicap winners and support the others. And the fact that the wealth distribution in America is so uneven certainly suggests that the initial premise is true (i.e, winning allows you to accumulate and compound advantages with repeated victories).