J.B.Katz said:

---

Canon said:

---

Malbec said:

---

Well, your first complaint should have been that they are teaching climate and geology in Social Studies class.

---

It's a leftism class, for all intents and purposes. My son also had a class requiring him to talk only about the evils of plastic use. We provided a response on what the world would look like without plastics.

My daughter was told to write a letter to the food delivery driver advocating he use less plastic as if it was his choice). I told her that since the (English) lesson was about persuasive writing, she could pick any other topic she liked to write a persuasive letter on. She picked "Why kids shouldn't have to wear masks". I was very proud of her. The teacher was not and deleted it. Since it was an English assignment, the teacher was forced to admit it had nothing to do with English, but propaganda instead. That didn't go over well.

My children no longer trust teachers. I'm good with that. I don't either.

---

Moral of this story:

Parroting stupid propaganda promoted by a schoolteacher is bad.

Parroting stupid propaganda promoted by your parents is good.

---

Neither is propaganda. Both present one side of the story. The point is that the school should not be taking sides by presenting one side as fact.

How is that bag of dicks?

J.B.Katz said:

---

Canon said:

---

Malbec said:

---

Well, your first complaint should have been that they are teaching climate and geology in Social Studies class.

---

It's a leftism class, for all intents and purposes. My son also had a class requiring him to talk only about the evils of plastic use. We provided a response on what the world would look like without plastics.

My daughter was told to write a letter to the food delivery driver advocating he use less plastic as if it was his choice). I told her that since the (English) lesson was about persuasive writing, she could pick any other topic she liked to write a persuasive letter on. She picked "Why kids shouldn't have to wear masks". I was very proud of her. The teacher was not and deleted it. Since it was an English assignment, the teacher was forced to admit it had nothing to do with English, but propaganda instead. That didn't go over well.

My children no longer trust teachers. I'm good with that. I don't either.

---

Moral of this story:

Parroting stupid propaganda promoted by a schoolteacher is bad.

Parroting stupid propaganda promoted by your parents is good.

---

ah... good to see you are still here and following the thread.

Any chance that you will respond to these followup questions I asked you yesterday?

Quote:

---

From the sound of it, this happened awhile ago... "none of them could get into Baylor" implies that they are all beyond high school age.

Since they are presumably all adults now... can you inform us how many of them are criminals? how many of them have a job? how many of them have illegit kids? how many of them are on welfare? how many homeless? how many are drug addicts?

I would really like to hear the results of this tragedy, beyond that they couldn't get into Baylor. There are millions of people who never go to Baylor... as sad as that is, it isn't the same as getting into the federal pen.

---

I think everyone would benefit from hearing "the rest of the story".
I apologize in advance for potentially asking you to air your dirty laundry... assuming they are all in prison... or worse.

I know absolutely nothing abot home schooling. Everyone has a choice. Not sure I agree with the assertion that there should be some renumeration relative to property taxes for Private or Homeschooling. We moved to defiantly one of the hight property tax difference and sent our kids to private school through 6th grade for 1 and 8th for the other. Then sent them to the town HS that is really highly rated and they receive very good educations from both. It was a good blend for us. My property taxes were really high, but I knew what I was doing when I bought that house, so I didn't have anything to ***** about.

ShooterTX said:

---

J.B.Katz said:

---

Canon said:

---

Malbec said:

---

Well, your first complaint should have been that they are teaching climate and geology in Social Studies class.

---

It's a leftism class, for all intents and purposes. My son also had a class requiring him to talk only about the evils of plastic use. We provided a response on what the world would look like without plastics.

My daughter was told to write a letter to the food delivery driver advocating he use less plastic as if it was his choice). I told her that since the (English) lesson was about persuasive writing, she could pick any other topic she liked to write a persuasive letter on. She picked "Why kids shouldn't have to wear masks". I was very proud of her. The teacher was not and deleted it. Since it was an English assignment, the teacher was forced to admit it had nothing to do with English, but propaganda instead. That didn't go over well.

My children no longer trust teachers. I'm good with that. I don't either.

---

Moral of this story:

Parroting stupid propaganda promoted by a schoolteacher is bad.

Parroting stupid propaganda promoted by your parents is good.

---

ah... good to see you are still here and following the thread.

Any chance that you will respond to these followup questions I asked you yesterday?

Quote:

---

From the sound of it, this happened awhile ago... "none of them could get into Baylor" implies that they are all beyond high school age.

Since they are presumably all adults now... can you inform us how many of them are criminals? how many of them have a job? how many of them have illegit kids? how many of them are on welfare? how many homeless? how many are drug addicts?

I would really like to hear the results of this tragedy, beyond that they couldn't get into Baylor. There are millions of people who never go to Baylor... as sad as that is, it isn't the same as getting into the federal pen.

---

I think everyone would benefit from hearing "the rest of the story".
I apologize in advance for potentially asking you to air your dirty laundry... assuming they are all in prison... or worse.

---

Getting into Bayor ain't the end all be all. Lots of really good options out there. My kids had Zero interest in Baylor.....

Oldbear83 said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Teachers are everything the right hates -- intellectual elitism and lowly organized labor -- in one maddening package. The Republican brain can't decide whether to feel threatened or superior, so it just starts throwing sparks. Quite a show.

---

Thanks for finally confirming you are not a Republican, much less a Conservative, Sam.

---

Every group has its biases. It doesn't hurt to be aware of them.

Sam Lowry said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Teachers are everything the right hates -- intellectual elitism and lowly organized labor -- in one maddening package. The Republican brain can't decide whether to feel threatened or superior, so it just starts throwing sparks. Quite a show.

---

Thanks for finally confirming you are not a Republican, much less a Conservative, Sam.

---

Every group has its biases. It doesn't hurt to be aware of them.

---

It's also illuminating when someone reveals their malice. That also tells of their character.

bear2be2 said:

---

LIB,MR BEARS said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

I don't know the answers to these questions, but I'm curious.
Does No pass, no play rule apply to home school athletes?
Are they required to take Staar tests like public schoolers?
Transferring from one school to another in a different attendance zone is a relatively rigorous process. It requires the 2 schools (one from which student is transferring & one to which student is transferring) to declare whether it is for sports participation.
Will the district EC have jurisdiction over home schoolers like it does over public schoolers?
Grade inflation?
Academic rigor?

---

When the legislature answers these questions, I'll let you know if I'm for or against it.

---

I'm against it because the public school coaches I deal with on a near daily basis are pretty staunchly against it.

This reeks of the type of attack on public school norms we've seen Dan Patrick lead in recent years.

If you don't want to send your kids to public school, fine. But you shouldn't get to demand the benefits of public schooling from outside of that system.

---

Last I checked home school parents still pay full school tax. So yeah, they are entitled to the extra curricular of government schools and should demand it.

Oldbear83 said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Teachers are everything the right hates -- intellectual elitism and lowly organized labor -- in one maddening package. The Republican brain can't decide whether to feel threatened or superior, so it just starts throwing sparks. Quite a show.

---

Thanks for finally confirming you are not a Republican, much less a Conservative, Sam.

---

Every group has its biases. It doesn't hurt to be aware of them.

---

It's also illuminating when someone reveals their malice. That also tells of their character.

---

I'm sure your judgment is as excellent in that respect as in all others.

Sam Lowry said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Teachers are everything the right hates -- intellectual elitism and lowly organized labor -- in one maddening package. The Republican brain can't decide whether to feel threatened or superior, so it just starts throwing sparks. Quite a show.

---

Thanks for finally confirming you are not a Republican, much less a Conservative, Sam.

---

Every group has its biases. It doesn't hurt to be aware of them.

---

It's also illuminating when someone reveals their malice. That also tells of their character.

---

I'm sure your judgment is as excellent in that respect as in all others.

---

I've been balanced in this thread, if you bother to look.

But you don't look for anything below the surface these days Sam, and that is truly disappointing.

LiBeartarian said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

LIB,MR BEARS said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

I don't know the answers to these questions, but I'm curious.
Does No pass, no play rule apply to home school athletes?
Are they required to take Staar tests like public schoolers?
Transferring from one school to another in a different attendance zone is a relatively rigorous process. It requires the 2 schools (one from which student is transferring & one to which student is transferring) to declare whether it is for sports participation.
Will the district EC have jurisdiction over home schoolers like it does over public schoolers?
Grade inflation?
Academic rigor?

---

When the legislature answers these questions, I'll let you know if I'm for or against it.

---

I'm against it because the public school coaches I deal with on a near daily basis are pretty staunchly against it.

This reeks of the type of attack on public school norms we've seen Dan Patrick lead in recent years.

If you don't want to send your kids to public school, fine. But you shouldn't get to demand the benefits of public schooling from outside of that system.

---

Last I checked home school parents still pay full school tax. So yeah, they are entitled to the extra curricular of government schools and should demand it.

---

And their local public school system is available to them should they -- like the vast majority of their neighbors -- choose to take advantage of it. They are choosing to forego that public service, not being excluded from it. Trying to turn it into an a la carte table when it was not created to be just speaks to the entitlement of a crowd that wants its cake and to eat it to.

bear2be2 said:

---

LiBeartarian said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

LIB,MR BEARS said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

I don't know the answers to these questions, but I'm curious.
Does No pass, no play rule apply to home school athletes?
Are they required to take Staar tests like public schoolers?
Transferring from one school to another in a different attendance zone is a relatively rigorous process. It requires the 2 schools (one from which student is transferring & one to which student is transferring) to declare whether it is for sports participation.
Will the district EC have jurisdiction over home schoolers like it does over public schoolers?
Grade inflation?
Academic rigor?

---

When the legislature answers these questions, I'll let you know if I'm for or against it.

---

I'm against it because the public school coaches I deal with on a near daily basis are pretty staunchly against it.

This reeks of the type of attack on public school norms we've seen Dan Patrick lead in recent years.

If you don't want to send your kids to public school, fine. But you shouldn't get to demand the benefits of public schooling from outside of that system.

---

Last I checked home school parents still pay full school tax. So yeah, they are entitled to the extra curricular of government schools and should demand it.

---

And their local public school system is available to them should they -- like the vast majority of their neighbors -- choose to take advantage of it. They are choosing to forego that public service, not being excluded from it. Trying to turn it into an a la carte table when it was not created to be just speaks to the entitlement of a crowd that wants its cake and to eat it to.

---

It wants only the cake it paid for. Who are you to deny entitlements? Your way or the highway? They either let you propagandize their children all day or no games?

Petty tyrants are silly and should feel embarrassed, yet rarely are.

Canon said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

LiBeartarian said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

LIB,MR BEARS said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

I don't know the answers to these questions, but I'm curious.
Does No pass, no play rule apply to home school athletes?
Are they required to take Staar tests like public schoolers?
Transferring from one school to another in a different attendance zone is a relatively rigorous process. It requires the 2 schools (one from which student is transferring & one to which student is transferring) to declare whether it is for sports participation.
Will the district EC have jurisdiction over home schoolers like it does over public schoolers?
Grade inflation?
Academic rigor?

---

When the legislature answers these questions, I'll let you know if I'm for or against it.

---

I'm against it because the public school coaches I deal with on a near daily basis are pretty staunchly against it.

This reeks of the type of attack on public school norms we've seen Dan Patrick lead in recent years.

If you don't want to send your kids to public school, fine. But you shouldn't get to demand the benefits of public schooling from outside of that system.

---

Last I checked home school parents still pay full school tax. So yeah, they are entitled to the extra curricular of government schools and should demand it.

---

And their local public school system is available to them should they -- like the vast majority of their neighbors -- choose to take advantage of it. They are choosing to forego that public service, not being excluded from it. Trying to turn it into an a la carte table when it was not created to be just speaks to the entitlement of a crowd that wants its cake and to eat it to.

---

It wants only the cake it paid for. Who are you to deny entitlements? Your way or the highway? They either let you propagandize their children all day or no games?

Petty tyrants are silly and should feel embarrassed, yet rarely are.

---

My taxes help pay for streets. Does that entitle me to drive in the turn lane or ignore stop signs? Of course not.

Rules were established a long time ago to govern interscholastic athletics in Texas -- with the most basic being that members of a particular team must attend that particular school. We now have people saying those rules shouldn't apply to them. They're demanding to be allowed to represent a school they elected not to go to. It's entitlement, plain and simple.

bear2be2 said:

---

Canon said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

LiBeartarian said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

LIB,MR BEARS said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

I don't know the answers to these questions, but I'm curious.
Does No pass, no play rule apply to home school athletes?
Are they required to take Staar tests like public schoolers?
Transferring from one school to another in a different attendance zone is a relatively rigorous process. It requires the 2 schools (one from which student is transferring & one to which student is transferring) to declare whether it is for sports participation.
Will the district EC have jurisdiction over home schoolers like it does over public schoolers?
Grade inflation?
Academic rigor?

---

When the legislature answers these questions, I'll let you know if I'm for or against it.

---

I'm against it because the public school coaches I deal with on a near daily basis are pretty staunchly against it.

This reeks of the type of attack on public school norms we've seen Dan Patrick lead in recent years.

If you don't want to send your kids to public school, fine. But you shouldn't get to demand the benefits of public schooling from outside of that system.

---

Last I checked home school parents still pay full school tax. So yeah, they are entitled to the extra curricular of government schools and should demand it.

---

And their local public school system is available to them should they -- like the vast majority of their neighbors -- choose to take advantage of it. They are choosing to forego that public service, not being excluded from it. Trying to turn it into an a la carte table when it was not created to be just speaks to the entitlement of a crowd that wants its cake and to eat it to.

---

It wants only the cake it paid for. Who are you to deny entitlements? Your way or the highway? They either let you propagandize their children all day or no games?

Petty tyrants are silly and should feel embarrassed, yet rarely are.

---

My taxes help pay for streets. Does that entitle me to drive in the turn lane or ignore stop signs? Of course not.

Rules were established a long time ago to govern interscholastic athletics in Texas -- with the most basic being that members of a particular team must attend that particular school. We now have people saying those rules shouldn't apply to them. They're demanding to be allowed to represent a school they elected not to go to. It's entitlement, plain and simple.

---

Your traffic analogy is atrocious. No one should have to tell you why.

That rule just dampens recruiting across school district lines. I assume homeschoolers can't just parachute into any school anywhere and play varsity immediately but still have to follow the same residence rules. Even kids attending school can transfer into a district where they don't live and play immediately and varsity after a 1 year cooling off period.

Malbec said:

---

Booray said:

---

Malbec said:

---

Booray said:

---

If the NCAA announced that athletes no longer needed to attend the school they played for we would say the new rule destroys the purpose of athletics. The same thing applies to high school-athletes are supposed to play for their school, not a school.

As to academic performance, my guess is that Mothra's excelling home schoolers would also excel if they attended public schools.

---

Wouldn't they be playing for their school?

---

No, they wouldn't. A kid's school is the school he or she attends. Deals with the teachers, the administrators, the other students and the facilities. The good and the bad.

---

I think you misunderstood my question. You made a correlation to college student-athletes which I find confusing. You seem to be suggesting that home-schooled students had the same opportunity to select the school for which they choose to play, hence "a school" and not "their school." My question concerned the fact that "their school" would be the one in their attendance zone, and isn't that the one they would play for if they played, not simply "a school?"

---

Not sure about other towns but in Arlington I think they can transfer to where they wish. There was a kid at my sons small TAPPS private school who was simply dominant at that level, basically he was a grown man playing with Jr. High kids.

He chose which Jr. High in Arlington he wanted to transfer to, not bound by an attendance zone. I knew he was really good and hoped he would transfer to my brothers Jr. High school. He did not. These are 6A feeder Jr. High schools.

When the kids team played my brothers he dominated. Scored 4 TD's and was simply lighting people up from his outside LB position. He had grown up since K going to that tiny private school and even at a huge Jr. High he simply was dominant. Thing is he was as tall as he was getting in the 8th grade, we will see what happens from here out.

J.R. said:

---

ShooterTX said:

---

J.B.Katz said:

---

Canon said:

---

Malbec said:

---

Well, your first complaint should have been that they are teaching climate and geology in Social Studies class.

---

It's a leftism class, for all intents and purposes. My son also had a class requiring him to talk only about the evils of plastic use. We provided a response on what the world would look like without plastics.

My daughter was told to write a letter to the food delivery driver advocating he use less plastic as if it was his choice). I told her that since the (English) lesson was about persuasive writing, she could pick any other topic she liked to write a persuasive letter on. She picked "Why kids shouldn't have to wear masks". I was very proud of her. The teacher was not and deleted it. Since it was an English assignment, the teacher was forced to admit it had nothing to do with English, but propaganda instead. That didn't go over well.

My children no longer trust teachers. I'm good with that. I don't either.

---

Moral of this story:

Parroting stupid propaganda promoted by a schoolteacher is bad.

Parroting stupid propaganda promoted by your parents is good.

---

ah... good to see you are still here and following the thread.

Any chance that you will respond to these followup questions I asked you yesterday?

Quote:

---

From the sound of it, this happened awhile ago... "none of them could get into Baylor" implies that they are all beyond high school age.

Since they are presumably all adults now... can you inform us how many of them are criminals? how many of them have a job? how many of them have illegit kids? how many of them are on welfare? how many homeless? how many are drug addicts?

I would really like to hear the results of this tragedy, beyond that they couldn't get into Baylor. There are millions of people who never go to Baylor... as sad as that is, it isn't the same as getting into the federal pen.

---

I think everyone would benefit from hearing "the rest of the story".
I apologize in advance for potentially asking you to air your dirty laundry... assuming they are all in prison... or worse.

---

Getting into Bayor ain't the end all be all. Lots of really good options out there. My kids had Zero interest in Baylor.....

---

Dallas Baptist College? The 2 that made it to college went there. They both work at Gateway Church in DFW.

bear2be2 said:

---

Canon said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

LiBeartarian said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

LIB,MR BEARS said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

I don't know the answers to these questions, but I'm curious.
Does No pass, no play rule apply to home school athletes?
Are they required to take Staar tests like public schoolers?
Transferring from one school to another in a different attendance zone is a relatively rigorous process. It requires the 2 schools (one from which student is transferring & one to which student is transferring) to declare whether it is for sports participation.
Will the district EC have jurisdiction over home schoolers like it does over public schoolers?
Grade inflation?
Academic rigor?

---

When the legislature answers these questions, I'll let you know if I'm for or against it.

---

I'm against it because the public school coaches I deal with on a near daily basis are pretty staunchly against it.

This reeks of the type of attack on public school norms we've seen Dan Patrick lead in recent years.

If you don't want to send your kids to public school, fine. But you shouldn't get to demand the benefits of public schooling from outside of that system.

---

Last I checked home school parents still pay full school tax. So yeah, they are entitled to the extra curricular of government schools and should demand it.

---

And their local public school system is available to them should they -- like the vast majority of their neighbors -- choose to take advantage of it. They are choosing to forego that public service, not being excluded from it. Trying to turn it into an a la carte table when it was not created to be just speaks to the entitlement of a crowd that wants its cake and to eat it to.

---

It wants only the cake it paid for. Who are you to deny entitlements? Your way or the highway? They either let you propagandize their children all day or no games?

Petty tyrants are silly and should feel embarrassed, yet rarely are.

---

My taxes help pay for streets. Does that entitle me to drive in the turn lane or ignore stop signs? Of course not.

Rules were established a long time ago to govern interscholastic athletics in Texas -- with the most basic being that members of a particular team must attend that particular school. We now have people saying those rules shouldn't apply to them. They're demanding to be allowed to represent a school they elected not to go to. It's entitlement, plain and simple.

---

To use your earlier analogy, you pay for the streets but you don't choose to buy a car, so you don't use the streets. Based on that.... I'm gonna make damn sure that you also don't get to walk on the sidewalks, you freeloading *******!

If homeschoolers are allowed to participate in the extra-curricular activities available at their local public school... that is hardly a freeloading mentality. They will be tax payers who will take advantage of maybe .01% of the actual school budget. They won't be using the buildings, the cafeteria, or more than 99% of the salaries involved in the school.

Your approach is a very thuggish, totalitarian model. You demand payment under penalty of law, and then you demand subservience & allegiance to enjoy the benefits of those monies. Anyone outside of the party, is not allowed to enjoy the benefits of our benevolence.... sounds pretty dang dictatorial to me. If modern education wasn't filled with propaganda & political brainwashing, then your argument might have a better leg to stand on.

Does it sound very American to tell people that they are forced to pay for their children to be indoctrinated with beliefs that are in direct opposition to their own personal beliefs? If you can go with that "Hitler Youth" model, then it makes sense that you wouldn't want to let the un-indoctrinated have any benefits within society.

I believe that Americans should have the ability to enjoy the benefits of their tax dollars, even though I know that the majority of homeschoolers will continue to opt out entirely. The option should be there.

J.B.Katz said:

---

J.R. said:

---

ShooterTX said:

---

J.B.Katz said:

---

Canon said:

---

Malbec said:

---

Well, your first complaint should have been that they are teaching climate and geology in Social Studies class.

---

It's a leftism class, for all intents and purposes. My son also had a class requiring him to talk only about the evils of plastic use. We provided a response on what the world would look like without plastics.

My daughter was told to write a letter to the food delivery driver advocating he use less plastic as if it was his choice). I told her that since the (English) lesson was about persuasive writing, she could pick any other topic she liked to write a persuasive letter on. She picked "Why kids shouldn't have to wear masks". I was very proud of her. The teacher was not and deleted it. Since it was an English assignment, the teacher was forced to admit it had nothing to do with English, but propaganda instead. That didn't go over well.

My children no longer trust teachers. I'm good with that. I don't either.

---

Moral of this story:

Parroting stupid propaganda promoted by a schoolteacher is bad.

Parroting stupid propaganda promoted by your parents is good.

---

ah... good to see you are still here and following the thread.

Any chance that you will respond to these followup questions I asked you yesterday?

Quote:

---

From the sound of it, this happened awhile ago... "none of them could get into Baylor" implies that they are all beyond high school age.

Since they are presumably all adults now... can you inform us how many of them are criminals? how many of them have a job? how many of them have illegit kids? how many of them are on welfare? how many homeless? how many are drug addicts?

I would really like to hear the results of this tragedy, beyond that they couldn't get into Baylor. There are millions of people who never go to Baylor... as sad as that is, it isn't the same as getting into the federal pen.

---

I think everyone would benefit from hearing "the rest of the story".
I apologize in advance for potentially asking you to air your dirty laundry... assuming they are all in prison... or worse.

---

Getting into Bayor ain't the end all be all. Lots of really good options out there. My kids had Zero interest in Baylor.....

---

Dallas Baptist College? The 2 that made it to college went there. They both work at Gateway Church in DFW.

---

So no one in jail?
No one on drugs?
No one on welfare?
No teenage pregnancies?
At least 2 of them went to some form of college?

Robert Wilson said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

Canon said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

LiBeartarian said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

LIB,MR BEARS said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

I don't know the answers to these questions, but I'm curious.
Does No pass, no play rule apply to home school athletes?
Are they required to take Staar tests like public schoolers?
Transferring from one school to another in a different attendance zone is a relatively rigorous process. It requires the 2 schools (one from which student is transferring & one to which student is transferring) to declare whether it is for sports participation.
Will the district EC have jurisdiction over home schoolers like it does over public schoolers?
Grade inflation?
Academic rigor?

---

When the legislature answers these questions, I'll let you know if I'm for or against it.

---

I'm against it because the public school coaches I deal with on a near daily basis are pretty staunchly against it.

This reeks of the type of attack on public school norms we've seen Dan Patrick lead in recent years.

If you don't want to send your kids to public school, fine. But you shouldn't get to demand the benefits of public schooling from outside of that system.

---

Last I checked home school parents still pay full school tax. So yeah, they are entitled to the extra curricular of government schools and should demand it.

---

And their local public school system is available to them should they -- like the vast majority of their neighbors -- choose to take advantage of it. They are choosing to forego that public service, not being excluded from it. Trying to turn it into an a la carte table when it was not created to be just speaks to the entitlement of a crowd that wants its cake and to eat it to.

---

It wants only the cake it paid for. Who are you to deny entitlements? Your way or the highway? They either let you propagandize their children all day or no games?

Petty tyrants are silly and should feel embarrassed, yet rarely are.

---

My taxes help pay for streets. Does that entitle me to drive in the turn lane or ignore stop signs? Of course not.

Rules were established a long time ago to govern interscholastic athletics in Texas -- with the most basic being that members of a particular team must attend that particular school. We now have people saying those rules shouldn't apply to them. They're demanding to be allowed to represent a school they elected not to go to. It's entitlement, plain and simple.

---

That rule just dampens recruiting across school district lines. I assume homeschoolers can't just parachute into any school anywhere and play varsity immediately but still have to follow the same residence rules. Even kids attending school can transfer into a district where they don't live and play immediately and varsity after a 1 year cooling off period.

---

A player transferring into a school has to go through a process. The players family has to file a form and the schools have to file forms. The school from which the player is transferring fills out the same form, as does the receiving school. Then the EC of the receiving school has to sign off on it.

99% of the time there is no problem and the player can start playing immediately, even varsity.
A player transferring from a private school has to comply and may not be able to play if the private school objects (claims it was for the purpose of playing athletics), even if the player has lived in the attendance zone of the receiving school for years.

ShooterTX said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

Canon said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

LiBeartarian said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

LIB,MR BEARS said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

I don't know the answers to these questions, but I'm curious.
Does No pass, no play rule apply to home school athletes?
Are they required to take Staar tests like public schoolers?
Transferring from one school to another in a different attendance zone is a relatively rigorous process. It requires the 2 schools (one from which student is transferring & one to which student is transferring) to declare whether it is for sports participation.
Will the district EC have jurisdiction over home schoolers like it does over public schoolers?
Grade inflation?
Academic rigor?

---

When the legislature answers these questions, I'll let you know if I'm for or against it.

---

I'm against it because the public school coaches I deal with on a near daily basis are pretty staunchly against it.

This reeks of the type of attack on public school norms we've seen Dan Patrick lead in recent years.

If you don't want to send your kids to public school, fine. But you shouldn't get to demand the benefits of public schooling from outside of that system.

---

Last I checked home school parents still pay full school tax. So yeah, they are entitled to the extra curricular of government schools and should demand it.

---

And their local public school system is available to them should they -- like the vast majority of their neighbors -- choose to take advantage of it. They are choosing to forego that public service, not being excluded from it. Trying to turn it into an a la carte table when it was not created to be just speaks to the entitlement of a crowd that wants its cake and to eat it to.

---

It wants only the cake it paid for. Who are you to deny entitlements? Your way or the highway? They either let you propagandize their children all day or no games?

Petty tyrants are silly and should feel embarrassed, yet rarely are.

---

My taxes help pay for streets. Does that entitle me to drive in the turn lane or ignore stop signs? Of course not.

Rules were established a long time ago to govern interscholastic athletics in Texas -- with the most basic being that members of a particular team must attend that particular school. We now have people saying those rules shouldn't apply to them. They're demanding to be allowed to represent a school they elected not to go to. It's entitlement, plain and simple.

---

To use your earlier analogy, you pay for the streets but you don't choose to buy a car, so you don't use the streets. Based on that.... I'm gonna make damn sure that you also don't get to walk on the sidewalks, you freeloading *******!

If homeschoolers are allowed to participate in the extra-curricular activities available at their local public school... that is hardly a freeloading mentality. They will be tax payers who will take advantage of maybe .01% of the actual school budget. They won't be using the buildings, the cafeteria, or more than 99% of the salaries involved in the school.

Your approach is a very thuggish, totalitarian model. You demand payment under penalty of law, and then you demand subservience & allegiance to enjoy the benefits of those monies. Anyone outside of the party, is not allowed to enjoy the benefits of our benevolence.... sounds pretty dang dictatorial to me. If modern education wasn't filled with propaganda & political brainwashing, then your argument might have a better leg to stand on.

Does it sound very American to tell people that they are forced to pay for their children to be indoctrinated with beliefs that are in direct opposition to their own personal beliefs? If you can go with that "Hitler Youth" model, then it makes sense that you wouldn't want to let the un-indoctrinated have any benefits within society.

I believe that Americans should have the ability to enjoy the benefits of their tax dollars, even though I know that the majority of homeschoolers will continue to opt out entirely. The option should be there.

---

We're not talking about walking on the sidewalk here. We're talking about walking in the middle of the road with the cars. The roads were created with cars in mind. You don't want a car? Fine. That doesn't change the purpose of the street. The street was created for cars and it will remain open to you should you choose use it for that purpose. But you don't get to dictate how it's used because you don't want to use it for its intended purpose.

ShooterTX said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

Canon said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

LiBeartarian said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

LIB,MR BEARS said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

I don't know the answers to these questions, but I'm curious.
Does No pass, no play rule apply to home school athletes?
Are they required to take Staar tests like public schoolers?
Transferring from one school to another in a different attendance zone is a relatively rigorous process. It requires the 2 schools (one from which student is transferring & one to which student is transferring) to declare whether it is for sports participation.
Will the district EC have jurisdiction over home schoolers like it does over public schoolers?
Grade inflation?
Academic rigor?

---

When the legislature answers these questions, I'll let you know if I'm for or against it.

---

I'm against it because the public school coaches I deal with on a near daily basis are pretty staunchly against it.

This reeks of the type of attack on public school norms we've seen Dan Patrick lead in recent years.

If you don't want to send your kids to public school, fine. But you shouldn't get to demand the benefits of public schooling from outside of that system.

---

Last I checked home school parents still pay full school tax. So yeah, they are entitled to the extra curricular of government schools and should demand it.

---

And their local public school system is available to them should they -- like the vast majority of their neighbors -- choose to take advantage of it. They are choosing to forego that public service, not being excluded from it. Trying to turn it into an a la carte table when it was not created to be just speaks to the entitlement of a crowd that wants its cake and to eat it to.

---

It wants only the cake it paid for. Who are you to deny entitlements? Your way or the highway? They either let you propagandize their children all day or no games?

Petty tyrants are silly and should feel embarrassed, yet rarely are.

---

My taxes help pay for streets. Does that entitle me to drive in the turn lane or ignore stop signs? Of course not.

Rules were established a long time ago to govern interscholastic athletics in Texas -- with the most basic being that members of a particular team must attend that particular school. We now have people saying those rules shouldn't apply to them. They're demanding to be allowed to represent a school they elected not to go to. It's entitlement, plain and simple.

---

To use your earlier analogy, you pay for the streets but you don't choose to buy a car, so you don't use the streets. Based on that.... I'm gonna make damn sure that you also don't get to walk on the sidewalks, you freeloading *******!

If homeschoolers are allowed to participate in the extra-curricular activities available at their local public school... that is hardly a freeloading mentality. They will be tax payers who will take advantage of maybe .01% of the actual school budget. They won't be using the buildings, the cafeteria, or more than 99% of the salaries involved in the school.

Your approach is a very thuggish, totalitarian model. You demand payment under penalty of law, and then you demand subservience & allegiance to enjoy the benefits of those monies. Anyone outside of the party, is not allowed to enjoy the benefits of our benevolence.... sounds pretty dang dictatorial to me. If modern education wasn't filled with propaganda & political brainwashing, then your argument might have a better leg to stand on.

Does it sound very American to tell people that they are forced to pay for their children to be indoctrinated with beliefs that are in direct opposition to their own personal beliefs? If you can go with that "Hitler Youth" model, then it makes sense that you wouldn't want to let the un-indoctrinated have any benefits within society.

I believe that Americans should have the ability to enjoy the benefits of their tax dollars, even though I know that the majority of homeschoolers will continue to opt out entirely. The option should be there.

---

Should home schoolers have to be passing their classes to play extra curriculars?

Should they have to take the same classes as enrolled students?

ShooterTX said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

Canon said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

LiBeartarian said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

LIB,MR BEARS said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

I don't know the answers to these questions, but I'm curious.
Does No pass, no play rule apply to home school athletes?
Are they required to take Staar tests like public schoolers?
Transferring from one school to another in a different attendance zone is a relatively rigorous process. It requires the 2 schools (one from which student is transferring & one to which student is transferring) to declare whether it is for sports participation.
Will the district EC have jurisdiction over home schoolers like it does over public schoolers?
Grade inflation?
Academic rigor?

---

When the legislature answers these questions, I'll let you know if I'm for or against it.

---

I'm against it because the public school coaches I deal with on a near daily basis are pretty staunchly against it.

This reeks of the type of attack on public school norms we've seen Dan Patrick lead in recent years.

If you don't want to send your kids to public school, fine. But you shouldn't get to demand the benefits of public schooling from outside of that system.

---

Last I checked home school parents still pay full school tax. So yeah, they are entitled to the extra curricular of government schools and should demand it.

---

And their local public school system is available to them should they -- like the vast majority of their neighbors -- choose to take advantage of it. They are choosing to forego that public service, not being excluded from it. Trying to turn it into an a la carte table when it was not created to be just speaks to the entitlement of a crowd that wants its cake and to eat it to.

---

It wants only the cake it paid for. Who are you to deny entitlements? Your way or the highway? They either let you propagandize their children all day or no games?

Petty tyrants are silly and should feel embarrassed, yet rarely are.

---

My taxes help pay for streets. Does that entitle me to drive in the turn lane or ignore stop signs? Of course not.

Rules were established a long time ago to govern interscholastic athletics in Texas -- with the most basic being that members of a particular team must attend that particular school. We now have people saying those rules shouldn't apply to them. They're demanding to be allowed to represent a school they elected not to go to. It's entitlement, plain and simple.

---

To use your earlier analogy, you pay for the streets but you don't choose to buy a car, so you don't use the streets. Based on that.... I'm gonna make damn sure that you also don't get to walk on the sidewalks, you freeloading *******!

If homeschoolers are allowed to participate in the extra-curricular activities available at their local public school... that is hardly a freeloading mentality. They will be tax payers who will take advantage of maybe .01% of the actual school budget. They won't be using the buildings, the cafeteria, or more than 99% of the salaries involved in the school.

Your approach is a very thuggish, totalitarian model. You demand payment under penalty of law, and then you demand subservience & allegiance to enjoy the benefits of those monies. Anyone outside of the party, is not allowed to enjoy the benefits of our benevolence.... sounds pretty dang dictatorial to me. If modern education wasn't filled with propaganda & political brainwashing, then your argument might have a better leg to stand on.

Does it sound very American to tell people that they are forced to pay for their children to be indoctrinated with beliefs that are in direct opposition to their own personal beliefs? If you can go with that "Hitler Youth" model, then it makes sense that you wouldn't want to let the un-indoctrinated have any benefits within society.

I believe that Americans should have the ability to enjoy the benefits of their tax dollars, even though I know that the majority of homeschoolers will continue to opt out entirely. The option should be there.

---

Should home schoolers have to be passing their classes to play extra curriculars?

Should they have to take the same classes as enrolled students?

One other thing that should be noted-passing this bill will not end the debate. The bill does not mandate that non-enrolled students be allowed to participate; it only allows each school district and charter school to decide for itself whether to allow non-enrolled students to participate.

I have no school age kids, but I'd really like to join the HS debate team...

A lot of this has been about home schoolers. What about private school kids (I don't know if the bill includes them). In Waco, Live Oak and Vanguard play 6 man. Lets say a kid living in Midway is good enough to play for the Panthers but he attends one of those two other schools. Does he get to elect to play for the Panthers?

Booray said:

---

A lot of this has been about home schoolers. What about private school kids (I don't know if the bill includes them). In Waco, Live Oak and Vanguard play 6 man. Lets say a kid living in Midway is good enough to play for the Panthers but he attends one of those two other schools. Does he get to elect to play for the Panthers?

---

That happened a couple of years ago. Live Oak objected and the player had to play JV for his first year at Midway. The player had lived in the MW attendance zone for years

bear2be2 said:

---

ShooterTX said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

Canon said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

LiBeartarian said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

LIB,MR BEARS said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

I don't know the answers to these questions, but I'm curious.
Does No pass, no play rule apply to home school athletes?
Are they required to take Staar tests like public schoolers?
Transferring from one school to another in a different attendance zone is a relatively rigorous process. It requires the 2 schools (one from which student is transferring & one to which student is transferring) to declare whether it is for sports participation.
Will the district EC have jurisdiction over home schoolers like it does over public schoolers?
Grade inflation?
Academic rigor?

---

When the legislature answers these questions, I'll let you know if I'm for or against it.

---

I'm against it because the public school coaches I deal with on a near daily basis are pretty staunchly against it.

This reeks of the type of attack on public school norms we've seen Dan Patrick lead in recent years.

If you don't want to send your kids to public school, fine. But you shouldn't get to demand the benefits of public schooling from outside of that system.

---

Last I checked home school parents still pay full school tax. So yeah, they are entitled to the extra curricular of government schools and should demand it.

---

And their local public school system is available to them should they -- like the vast majority of their neighbors -- choose to take advantage of it. They are choosing to forego that public service, not being excluded from it. Trying to turn it into an a la carte table when it was not created to be just speaks to the entitlement of a crowd that wants its cake and to eat it to.

---

It wants only the cake it paid for. Who are you to deny entitlements? Your way or the highway? They either let you propagandize their children all day or no games?

Petty tyrants are silly and should feel embarrassed, yet rarely are.

---

My taxes help pay for streets. Does that entitle me to drive in the turn lane or ignore stop signs? Of course not.

Rules were established a long time ago to govern interscholastic athletics in Texas -- with the most basic being that members of a particular team must attend that particular school. We now have people saying those rules shouldn't apply to them. They're demanding to be allowed to represent a school they elected not to go to. It's entitlement, plain and simple.

---

To use your earlier analogy, you pay for the streets but you don't choose to buy a car, so you don't use the streets. Based on that.... I'm gonna make damn sure that you also don't get to walk on the sidewalks, you freeloading *******!

If homeschoolers are allowed to participate in the extra-curricular activities available at their local public school... that is hardly a freeloading mentality. They will be tax payers who will take advantage of maybe .01% of the actual school budget. They won't be using the buildings, the cafeteria, or more than 99% of the salaries involved in the school.

Your approach is a very thuggish, totalitarian model. You demand payment under penalty of law, and then you demand subservience & allegiance to enjoy the benefits of those monies. Anyone outside of the party, is not allowed to enjoy the benefits of our benevolence.... sounds pretty dang dictatorial to me. If modern education wasn't filled with propaganda & political brainwashing, then your argument might have a better leg to stand on.

Does it sound very American to tell people that they are forced to pay for their children to be indoctrinated with beliefs that are in direct opposition to their own personal beliefs? If you can go with that "Hitler Youth" model, then it makes sense that you wouldn't want to let the un-indoctrinated have any benefits within society.

I believe that Americans should have the ability to enjoy the benefits of their tax dollars, even though I know that the majority of homeschoolers will continue to opt out entirely. The option should be there.

---

We're not talking about walking on the sidewalk here. We're talking about walking in the middle of the road with the cars. The roads were created with cars in mind. You don't want a car? Fine. That doesn't change the purpose of the street. The street was created for cars and it will remain open to you should you choose use it for that purpose. But you don't get to dictate how it's used because you don't want to use it for its intended purpose.

---

so you're saying that football in the center of the road? I would think that the center of the public education road is... ACADEMICS! If the extra curricular activities are the center of public education.. then you have a much bigger problem than worrying about homeschoolers wanting to play sports.

Booray said:

---

ShooterTX said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

Canon said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

LiBeartarian said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

LIB,MR BEARS said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

I don't know the answers to these questions, but I'm curious.
Does No pass, no play rule apply to home school athletes?
Are they required to take Staar tests like public schoolers?
Transferring from one school to another in a different attendance zone is a relatively rigorous process. It requires the 2 schools (one from which student is transferring & one to which student is transferring) to declare whether it is for sports participation.
Will the district EC have jurisdiction over home schoolers like it does over public schoolers?
Grade inflation?
Academic rigor?

---

When the legislature answers these questions, I'll let you know if I'm for or against it.

---

I'm against it because the public school coaches I deal with on a near daily basis are pretty staunchly against it.

This reeks of the type of attack on public school norms we've seen Dan Patrick lead in recent years.

If you don't want to send your kids to public school, fine. But you shouldn't get to demand the benefits of public schooling from outside of that system.

---

Last I checked home school parents still pay full school tax. So yeah, they are entitled to the extra curricular of government schools and should demand it.

---

And their local public school system is available to them should they -- like the vast majority of their neighbors -- choose to take advantage of it. They are choosing to forego that public service, not being excluded from it. Trying to turn it into an a la carte table when it was not created to be just speaks to the entitlement of a crowd that wants its cake and to eat it to.

---

It wants only the cake it paid for. Who are you to deny entitlements? Your way or the highway? They either let you propagandize their children all day or no games?

Petty tyrants are silly and should feel embarrassed, yet rarely are.

---

My taxes help pay for streets. Does that entitle me to drive in the turn lane or ignore stop signs? Of course not.

Rules were established a long time ago to govern interscholastic athletics in Texas -- with the most basic being that members of a particular team must attend that particular school. We now have people saying those rules shouldn't apply to them. They're demanding to be allowed to represent a school they elected not to go to. It's entitlement, plain and simple.

---

To use your earlier analogy, you pay for the streets but you don't choose to buy a car, so you don't use the streets. Based on that.... I'm gonna make damn sure that you also don't get to walk on the sidewalks, you freeloading *******!

If homeschoolers are allowed to participate in the extra-curricular activities available at their local public school... that is hardly a freeloading mentality. They will be tax payers who will take advantage of maybe .01% of the actual school budget. They won't be using the buildings, the cafeteria, or more than 99% of the salaries involved in the school.

Your approach is a very thuggish, totalitarian model. You demand payment under penalty of law, and then you demand subservience & allegiance to enjoy the benefits of those monies. Anyone outside of the party, is not allowed to enjoy the benefits of our benevolence.... sounds pretty dang dictatorial to me. If modern education wasn't filled with propaganda & political brainwashing, then your argument might have a better leg to stand on.

Does it sound very American to tell people that they are forced to pay for their children to be indoctrinated with beliefs that are in direct opposition to their own personal beliefs? If you can go with that "Hitler Youth" model, then it makes sense that you wouldn't want to let the un-indoctrinated have any benefits within society.

I believe that Americans should have the ability to enjoy the benefits of their tax dollars, even though I know that the majority of homeschoolers will continue to opt out entirely. The option should be there.

---

Should home schoolers have to be passing their classes to play extra curriculars?

Should they have to take the same classes as enrolled students?

---

I said it earlier, but I'll be happy to restate it here.

i think any student who wishes to participate in competitive sports, should be subject to the same standardized testing that all students take for eligibility purposes.

I don't think this would apply to art clubs or drama or orchestra, etc.
I think it is far more likely that homeschool kids will participate in non-sports related extra-curricular activities, rather than flooding the football, baseball and basketball teams.

I'm sure it would not be hard at all to develop a simple testing system to determine eligibility for competitive sports.

ShooterTX said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

ShooterTX said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

Canon said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

LiBeartarian said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

LIB,MR BEARS said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

I don't know the answers to these questions, but I'm curious.
Does No pass, no play rule apply to home school athletes?
Are they required to take Staar tests like public schoolers?
Transferring from one school to another in a different attendance zone is a relatively rigorous process. It requires the 2 schools (one from which student is transferring & one to which student is transferring) to declare whether it is for sports participation.
Will the district EC have jurisdiction over home schoolers like it does over public schoolers?
Grade inflation?
Academic rigor?

---

When the legislature answers these questions, I'll let you know if I'm for or against it.

---

I'm against it because the public school coaches I deal with on a near daily basis are pretty staunchly against it.

This reeks of the type of attack on public school norms we've seen Dan Patrick lead in recent years.

If you don't want to send your kids to public school, fine. But you shouldn't get to demand the benefits of public schooling from outside of that system.

---

Last I checked home school parents still pay full school tax. So yeah, they are entitled to the extra curricular of government schools and should demand it.

---

And their local public school system is available to them should they -- like the vast majority of their neighbors -- choose to take advantage of it. They are choosing to forego that public service, not being excluded from it. Trying to turn it into an a la carte table when it was not created to be just speaks to the entitlement of a crowd that wants its cake and to eat it to.

---

It wants only the cake it paid for. Who are you to deny entitlements? Your way or the highway? They either let you propagandize their children all day or no games?

Petty tyrants are silly and should feel embarrassed, yet rarely are.

---

My taxes help pay for streets. Does that entitle me to drive in the turn lane or ignore stop signs? Of course not.

Rules were established a long time ago to govern interscholastic athletics in Texas -- with the most basic being that members of a particular team must attend that particular school. We now have people saying those rules shouldn't apply to them. They're demanding to be allowed to represent a school they elected not to go to. It's entitlement, plain and simple.

---

To use your earlier analogy, you pay for the streets but you don't choose to buy a car, so you don't use the streets. Based on that.... I'm gonna make damn sure that you also don't get to walk on the sidewalks, you freeloading *******!

If homeschoolers are allowed to participate in the extra-curricular activities available at their local public school... that is hardly a freeloading mentality. They will be tax payers who will take advantage of maybe .01% of the actual school budget. They won't be using the buildings, the cafeteria, or more than 99% of the salaries involved in the school.

Your approach is a very thuggish, totalitarian model. You demand payment under penalty of law, and then you demand subservience & allegiance to enjoy the benefits of those monies. Anyone outside of the party, is not allowed to enjoy the benefits of our benevolence.... sounds pretty dang dictatorial to me. If modern education wasn't filled with propaganda & political brainwashing, then your argument might have a better leg to stand on.

Does it sound very American to tell people that they are forced to pay for their children to be indoctrinated with beliefs that are in direct opposition to their own personal beliefs? If you can go with that "Hitler Youth" model, then it makes sense that you wouldn't want to let the un-indoctrinated have any benefits within society.

I believe that Americans should have the ability to enjoy the benefits of their tax dollars, even though I know that the majority of homeschoolers will continue to opt out entirely. The option should be there.

---

We're not talking about walking on the sidewalk here. We're talking about walking in the middle of the road with the cars. The roads were created with cars in mind. You don't want a car? Fine. That doesn't change the purpose of the street. The street was created for cars and it will remain open to you should you choose use it for that purpose. But you don't get to dictate how it's used because you don't want to use it for its intended purpose.

---

so you're saying that football in the center of the road? I would think that the center of the public education road is... ACADEMICS! If the extra curricular activities are the center of public education.. then you have a much bigger problem than worrying about homeschoolers wanting to play sports.

---

No, I'm saying that the road is the public school system as a whole. In this analogy the bike lane would be private schools and the sidewalk would be home-schooled kids. Each already has its own lane. When you choose you don't want to own a car, you're opting off the road. Demanding at that point to ride your bike or walk in the middle of the street with those who have chosen to utilize it for its intended purpose is nonsense.

If you want to home school your kids, great. If you want to send them to private school, great. They can complete athletically for any of the many teams available to them or play club sports. The UIL was created to serve the public school system and its students.

J.B.Katz said:

---

J.R. said:

---

ShooterTX said:

---

J.B.Katz said:

---

Canon said:

---

Malbec said:

---

Well, your first complaint should have been that they are teaching climate and geology in Social Studies class.

---

It's a leftism class, for all intents and purposes. My son also had a class requiring him to talk only about the evils of plastic use. We provided a response on what the world would look like without plastics.

My daughter was told to write a letter to the food delivery driver advocating he use less plastic as if it was his choice). I told her that since the (English) lesson was about persuasive writing, she could pick any other topic she liked to write a persuasive letter on. She picked "Why kids shouldn't have to wear masks". I was very proud of her. The teacher was not and deleted it. Since it was an English assignment, the teacher was forced to admit it had nothing to do with English, but propaganda instead. That didn't go over well.

My children no longer trust teachers. I'm good with that. I don't either.

---

Moral of this story:

Parroting stupid propaganda promoted by a schoolteacher is bad.

Parroting stupid propaganda promoted by your parents is good.

---

ah... good to see you are still here and following the thread.

Any chance that you will respond to these followup questions I asked you yesterday?

Quote:

---

From the sound of it, this happened awhile ago... "none of them could get into Baylor" implies that they are all beyond high school age.

Since they are presumably all adults now... can you inform us how many of them are criminals? how many of them have a job? how many of them have illegit kids? how many of them are on welfare? how many homeless? how many are drug addicts?

I would really like to hear the results of this tragedy, beyond that they couldn't get into Baylor. There are millions of people who never go to Baylor... as sad as that is, it isn't the same as getting into the federal pen.

---

I think everyone would benefit from hearing "the rest of the story".
I apologize in advance for potentially asking you to air your dirty laundry... assuming they are all in prison... or worse.

---

Getting into Bayor ain't the end all be all. Lots of really good options out there. My kids had Zero interest in Baylor.....

---

Dallas Baptist College? The 2 that made it to college went there. They both work at Gateway Church in DFW.

---

yes, exactly or they can to one of those crazy ass liberal state schools!

ShooterTX said:

---

Booray said:

---

ShooterTX said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

Canon said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

LiBeartarian said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

LIB,MR BEARS said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

I don't know the answers to these questions, but I'm curious.
Does No pass, no play rule apply to home school athletes?
Are they required to take Staar tests like public schoolers?
Transferring from one school to another in a different attendance zone is a relatively rigorous process. It requires the 2 schools (one from which student is transferring & one to which student is transferring) to declare whether it is for sports participation.
Will the district EC have jurisdiction over home schoolers like it does over public schoolers?
Grade inflation?
Academic rigor?

---

When the legislature answers these questions, I'll let you know if I'm for or against it.

---

I'm against it because the public school coaches I deal with on a near daily basis are pretty staunchly against it.

This reeks of the type of attack on public school norms we've seen Dan Patrick lead in recent years.

If you don't want to send your kids to public school, fine. But you shouldn't get to demand the benefits of public schooling from outside of that system.

---

Last I checked home school parents still pay full school tax. So yeah, they are entitled to the extra curricular of government schools and should demand it.

---

And their local public school system is available to them should they -- like the vast majority of their neighbors -- choose to take advantage of it. They are choosing to forego that public service, not being excluded from it. Trying to turn it into an a la carte table when it was not created to be just speaks to the entitlement of a crowd that wants its cake and to eat it to.

---

It wants only the cake it paid for. Who are you to deny entitlements? Your way or the highway? They either let you propagandize their children all day or no games?

Petty tyrants are silly and should feel embarrassed, yet rarely are.

---

My taxes help pay for streets. Does that entitle me to drive in the turn lane or ignore stop signs? Of course not.

Rules were established a long time ago to govern interscholastic athletics in Texas -- with the most basic being that members of a particular team must attend that particular school. We now have people saying those rules shouldn't apply to them. They're demanding to be allowed to represent a school they elected not to go to. It's entitlement, plain and simple.

---

To use your earlier analogy, you pay for the streets but you don't choose to buy a car, so you don't use the streets. Based on that.... I'm gonna make damn sure that you also don't get to walk on the sidewalks, you freeloading *******!

If homeschoolers are allowed to participate in the extra-curricular activities available at their local public school... that is hardly a freeloading mentality. They will be tax payers who will take advantage of maybe .01% of the actual school budget. They won't be using the buildings, the cafeteria, or more than 99% of the salaries involved in the school.

Your approach is a very thuggish, totalitarian model. You demand payment under penalty of law, and then you demand subservience & allegiance to enjoy the benefits of those monies. Anyone outside of the party, is not allowed to enjoy the benefits of our benevolence.... sounds pretty dang dictatorial to me. If modern education wasn't filled with propaganda & political brainwashing, then your argument might have a better leg to stand on.

Does it sound very American to tell people that they are forced to pay for their children to be indoctrinated with beliefs that are in direct opposition to their own personal beliefs? If you can go with that "Hitler Youth" model, then it makes sense that you wouldn't want to let the un-indoctrinated have any benefits within society.

I believe that Americans should have the ability to enjoy the benefits of their tax dollars, even though I know that the majority of homeschoolers will continue to opt out entirely. The option should be there.

---

Should home schoolers have to be passing their classes to play extra curriculars?

Should they have to take the same classes as enrolled students?

---

I said it earlier, but I'll be happy to restate it here.

i think any student who wishes to participate in competitive sports, should be subject to the same standardized testing that all students take for eligibility purposes.

I don't think this would apply to art clubs or drama or orchestra, etc.
I think it is far more likely that homeschool kids will participate in non-sports related extra-curricular activities, rather than flooding the football, baseball and basketball teams.

I'm sure it would not be hard at all to develop a simple testing system to determine eligibility for competitive sports.

---

Sorry I missed your earlier post.

No pass, no play currently applies to all extra curriculars. STAAR testing, however, is not a condition of eligibility. So there is no standardized test that determines eligibility. Developing such a test would neither be simple nor inexpensive. Even if it was, however, you are saying that the school can (and should) apply academic requirements for eligibility concerns. In principle that is no different than applying enrollment requirements.

Osodecentx said:

---

Booray said:

---

A lot of this has been about home schoolers. What about private school kids (I don't know if the bill includes them). In Waco, Live Oak and Vanguard play 6 man. Lets say a kid living in Midway is good enough to play for the Panthers but he attends one of those two other schools. Does he get to elect to play for the Panthers?

---

That happened a couple of years ago. Live Oak objected and the player had to play JV for his first year at Midway. The player had lived in the MW attendance zone for years

---

What I am asking is does the bill allow the kid to play for Midway while he still attends Live Oak?

Booray said:

---

A lot of this has been about home schoolers. What about private school kids (I don't know if the bill includes them). In Waco, Live Oak and Vanguard play 6 man. Lets say a kid living in Midway is good enough to play for the Panthers but he attends one of those two other schools. Does he get to elect to play for the Panthers?

---

No, and I faced this when my kids were smaller. As I mentioned, earlier, my 2 when to private school though 6 and 8th grade, respectively, even though (Providence Christian School of Texas) located 2 miles from HP Middle School. I in no way expected them to play for that public school, even though we lived in the district and paid insane taxes. They were both really good athletes, so they played at their school (not terribly competitive) but a great school. They also played club and the town Y sports. They, then transferred to the middle school and HS and played their sports there and had to comply with the district guidelines. I knew the deal and didn't expect any special treatment.

Booray said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Booray said:

---

A lot of this has been about home schoolers. What about private school kids (I don't know if the bill includes them). In Waco, Live Oak and Vanguard play 6 man. Lets say a kid living in Midway is good enough to play for the Panthers but he attends one of those two other schools. Does he get to elect to play for the Panthers?

---

That happened a couple of years ago. Live Oak objected and the player had to play JV for his first year at Midway. The player had lived in the MW attendance zone for years

---

What I am asking is does the bill allow the kid to play for Midway while he still attends Live Oak?

---

Sorry. I misunderstood.

The bill seems to apply to home schoolers and a student a LO isn't being home schooled, but I have no insight on the question.

Booray said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Booray said:

---

A lot of this has been about home schoolers. What about private school kids (I don't know if the bill includes them). In Waco, Live Oak and Vanguard play 6 man. Lets say a kid living in Midway is good enough to play for the Panthers but he attends one of those two other schools. Does he get to elect to play for the Panthers?

---

That happened a couple of years ago. Live Oak objected and the player had to play JV for his first year at Midway. The player had lived in the MW attendance zone for years

---

What I am asking is does the bill allow the kid to play for Midway while he still attends Live Oak?

---

I thought we had already agreed that a home schooler could only play in the geographically assigned school according to where he lives?

bear2be2 said:

---

ShooterTX said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

Canon said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

LiBeartarian said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

LIB,MR BEARS said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

I don't know the answers to these questions, but I'm curious.
Does No pass, no play rule apply to home school athletes?
Are they required to take Staar tests like public schoolers?
Transferring from one school to another in a different attendance zone is a relatively rigorous process. It requires the 2 schools (one from which student is transferring & one to which student is transferring) to declare whether it is for sports participation.
Will the district EC have jurisdiction over home schoolers like it does over public schoolers?
Grade inflation?
Academic rigor?

---

When the legislature answers these questions, I'll let you know if I'm for or against it.

---

I'm against it because the public school coaches I deal with on a near daily basis are pretty staunchly against it.

This reeks of the type of attack on public school norms we've seen Dan Patrick lead in recent years.

If you don't want to send your kids to public school, fine. But you shouldn't get to demand the benefits of public schooling from outside of that system.

---

Last I checked home school parents still pay full school tax. So yeah, they are entitled to the extra curricular of government schools and should demand it.

---

And their local public school system is available to them should they -- like the vast majority of their neighbors -- choose to take advantage of it. They are choosing to forego that public service, not being excluded from it. Trying to turn it into an a la carte table when it was not created to be just speaks to the entitlement of a crowd that wants its cake and to eat it to.

---

It wants only the cake it paid for. Who are you to deny entitlements? Your way or the highway? They either let you propagandize their children all day or no games?

Petty tyrants are silly and should feel embarrassed, yet rarely are.

---

My taxes help pay for streets. Does that entitle me to drive in the turn lane or ignore stop signs? Of course not.

Rules were established a long time ago to govern interscholastic athletics in Texas -- with the most basic being that members of a particular team must attend that particular school. We now have people saying those rules shouldn't apply to them. They're demanding to be allowed to represent a school they elected not to go to. It's entitlement, plain and simple.

---

To use your earlier analogy, you pay for the streets but you don't choose to buy a car, so you don't use the streets. Based on that.... I'm gonna make damn sure that you also don't get to walk on the sidewalks, you freeloading *******!

If homeschoolers are allowed to participate in the extra-curricular activities available at their local public school... that is hardly a freeloading mentality. They will be tax payers who will take advantage of maybe .01% of the actual school budget. They won't be using the buildings, the cafeteria, or more than 99% of the salaries involved in the school.

Your approach is a very thuggish, totalitarian model. You demand payment under penalty of law, and then you demand subservience & allegiance to enjoy the benefits of those monies. Anyone outside of the party, is not allowed to enjoy the benefits of our benevolence.... sounds pretty dang dictatorial to me. If modern education wasn't filled with propaganda & political brainwashing, then your argument might have a better leg to stand on.

Does it sound very American to tell people that they are forced to pay for their children to be indoctrinated with beliefs that are in direct opposition to their own personal beliefs? If you can go with that "Hitler Youth" model, then it makes sense that you wouldn't want to let the un-indoctrinated have any benefits within society.

I believe that Americans should have the ability to enjoy the benefits of their tax dollars, even though I know that the majority of homeschoolers will continue to opt out entirely. The option should be there.

---

We're not talking about walking on the sidewalk here. We're talking about walking in the middle of the road with the cars. The roads were created with cars in mind. You don't want a car? Fine. That doesn't change the purpose of the street. The street was created for cars and it will remain open to you should you choose use it for that purpose. But you don't get to dictate how it's used because you don't want to use it for its intended purpose.

---

How about if I just want to use the 3 miles of street between my house and my office? Do I have to drive on the expressway in order to use the surface streets?