Type your comments, thoughts, or observations in the comment box below!
I think it is a little over dramatic to tell high schoolers they cannot graduate unless they fill out an application to nearby colleges. I say this for many reasons. What if they are going to move? What if a girl is pragnant and unable to attend college right away? What if a family does not have the sources to send there child to college- a car or what not? College is also not meant for everybody. Say yes everyone summitted an application and even if they did not want to because they knew college was not for them. Well 88% of the appicants go and by the end of the semester 30% drop out because they knew it was not for them but tried anyways due to the fact they wanted to graduate high school. Well now these students will be required to pay off loans right away that perhaps they don't have the money for. And say they did get state grants for the whole year but only use up half a year, they are now entitled to pay that back- plus in the future they will be on some type of probation if they decide to go back to college. Now having recuiters coming to schools to talk about college and point peple in the right direction is a good idea but to keep a high school diploma from a student is wrong.
I do agree that before marriage couples, if they want, should come up with their own provisions, such as prenums, if they find it necessary. Although most couples believe that they will last forever statistics show different and hopefully by having something in place in case of divorce it will be less ugly then it would be by not having one.
On page 226 it reads in the first paragraph that nudges should be introduced to protect those who are most vulnerable, frequently women and above all children. For instance Michigan is a state for mothers but in my eyes if a couple is married with a child but the mom goes and cheats on the dad and the dad is forced out of the child's life due to the actions of the mother then the mother should not get the upper hand, therefore any consequences should be faced by the woman. This goes for both men and women, if the man is the caused of a divorce (legit reason-beating, cheating, addict, or etc, not for un-ligit reasons- I'm bored).
On the last page it reads that privatization will reduce ugly and unnecessary debates but there will always be debates and with this view a more likely chance for more debates. I think it would be harder for people to choose what institution or religious organization they want to be part of. Yes most people are raised in an institution or religious organization and believe most what what they have to say. But there comes a time a person questions an organization. Say a person beliefs all of what their church practices besides the fact there church does not believe in interracial marriage and they do (something that was fought a long time ago through the government). Depending on the persons stand point depends on her actions. If she has a fiance or boyfriend of a different race it is likely she will abandon her institution but if she does not, although she disagrees she will continue to stay. Overall it will be more chaotic if the state was not involved to set some guidelines. Yes times have changed so guidelines should change. There needs to be provisions for same sex marriages- homosexuality is not new, it has been around for hundreds of years. Without the state being involved divorce will be chaos, more than it already is because there is no protection of laws even within private institutions. A person can say to an institution well that is not law. The only benefit will be the company of one another. If something happens to the spouse pension is out of the question because that is government. What if a institution believes that a man should never get custody of a child- who are they to say? I believe there is more equality within the state then in institutions. People do join religious groups and institutions based on what they believe but overall the state over powers these organizations to protect people of the unfairness that can occur within these groups.