Re:Minnesota clarifies: Free online ed is OK
by 001sky on Saturday October 20, 2012 @12:52AM
(#4676379)
But I don't think any of the so-called Constitutional guarantees are absolute.
-- A "Free" Education = precisely founder's intent
Whatever legal carve-outs there are from No 1, this seems more like a poster child on why the bill of rights exists. Smart guy A wants to talk to Smart guy B, with no money changing hands, no promises being made. On topics that are verifiably beneficial to society, and on terms in line with society norms (historically). This <whatever-you-want-to-call-it> should not need a permit, a lawyer, or a PR flack. Is the state to have this law amended or taken off the books? It should if it is written in such a way that this is a decision of descretion by a gov't official. But for that, someone will probably need to sue (and waste everyone else's $$). Ugh.
-- A "Free" Education = precisely founder's intent
Whatever legal carve-outs there are from No 1, this seems more like a poster child on why the bill of rights exists. Smart guy A wants to talk to Smart guy B, with no money changing hands, no promises being made. On topics that are verifiably beneficial to society, and on terms in line with society norms (historically). This <whatever-you-want-to-call-it> should not need a permit, a lawyer, or a PR flack. Is the state to have this law amended or taken off the books? It should if it is written in such a way that this is a decision of descretion by a gov't official. But for that, someone will probably need to sue (and waste everyone else's $$). Ugh.