The day will come when home schooled kids will be able to play sports at the local school. It is happening in Florida and about to happen in Alabama. Its coming. All it will take is some top notch athlete's parents electing to home school Jr. and some coach will press the issue and presto, the deal will be done. Why is anyone against it? What would it hurt? Aren't sports supposed to be about the fun and development of the kids?

FYI, I would support a private school kid that plays a sport not offered at his school the chance to play that sport at the local public school. Whats the harm?

 

I'm sure your right, the sad thing is you and I both know that the Coach will press the issue only to give himself a better opportunity to win, and not becasue of some moral idea that there should be equal opportunity because someones parents pay taxes to a particular school district.

 

If my son is 5'2", weighs 135 lbs., benches 85 lbs. and runs a 7.3 40, no Coach is going to give 30 sec. of their time to campaign to some school board about the right thing to do.

Furthermore, if these home schooled kids deserve to be on a local team simply because their parents pay taxes, than all students should be on the team. Why should a coach be able to cut my kid from the basketball team, I paid my taxes and I am entitled to that right. I want to see him playing on the court at Rupp Arena. I am entitled to it, my taxes are paid in full.

Furthermore, if these home schooled kids deserve to be on a local team simply because their parents pay taxes, than all students should be on the team. Why should a coach be able to cut my kid from the basketball team, I paid my taxes and I am entitled to that right. I want to see him playing on the court at Rupp Arena. I am entitled to it, my taxes are paid in full.

Great point. If the argument is about fairness so be it. Don't penalize my kids cause he is slow and 5'6" tall. I paid my taxes too. And if a person rents and does not pay their taxes, then do their kids not have the right?

 

The argument, I paid my taxes and I deserve is the biggest bunch of crock. You paid your taxes and don't deserve. You did it because it is simply for the betterment of society. Get off your high horse in that you deserve, you deserve. That is a MAJOR problem with our country. Too many people feeling they deserve and not putting others first.

If I send my child to Covington Catholic , should I be able to have him play football for Scott High School?

 

I pay property taxes and live in the district.

 

If your answer is "no" as I assume it will be, please point out the distinction that you are making.

 

This is about home schooling.

Great point. If the argument is about fairness so be it. Don't penalize my kids cause he is slow and 5'6" tall. I paid my taxes too. And if a person rents and does not pay their taxes, then do their kids not have the right?

 

The argument, I paid my taxes and I deserve is the biggest bunch of crock. You paid your taxes and don't deserve. You did it because it is simply for the betterment of society. Get off your high horse in that you deserve, you deserve. That is a MAJOR problem with our country. Too many people feeling they deserve and not putting others first.

I said they should be given teh opportunity to play, if that sport cuts then an opportunity to try out.

I would love to see what supporting information you could show to make your claim.

Because I know people who are home schooled, and they get more 1 on 1 attention, and move at their own pace, not a class of 20 to 30 kids.

This is about home schooling.

 

TigerKat - Read through the thread. You'll see that my example is pertinent to the argument. For some reason, however, my friend FairFan has not responded.

 

I invite you, TigerKat, to take his place. Read through the thread - pay particular attention to the thinking of 'I pay taxes - my kid s/b able to play for the public school team' and let me know why my example is any different.

TigerKat - Read through the thread. You'll see that my example is pertinent to the argument. For some reason, however, my friend FairFan has not responded.

 

I invite you, TigerKat, to take his place. Read through the thread - pay particular attention to the thinking of 'I pay taxes - my kid s/b able to play for the public school team' and let me know why my example is any different.

Because you are talking about enrolling your kid in 2 different schools.

Because I know people who are home schooled, and they get more 1 on 1 attention, and move at their own pace, not a class of 20 to 30 kids.

 

Oh, OK! purely subjective observation. No testing or analytical analysis. Very good! No peer comparision, nothing! And this is better than ANY public school?! :sleep:

Oh, OK! purely subjective observation. No testing or analytical analysis. Very good! No peer comparision, nothing! And this is better than ANY public school?! :sleep:

Well I can say the same for you, prove its not better.

Because you are talking about enrolling your kid in 2 different schools.

 

FairFan - I CANNOT make it any clearer. I am NOT talking about enrolling my child in 2 schools.

 

Let me restate it AGAIN: Like you, I live across from Conner High School. However, for various reasons, I choose to send my child to St Henry (note: its the ONLY high school he is enrolled in). St Henry, as you know, does not have a football team.

 

I pay taxes that support Conner High School, thus, I think my child s/b able to play football at Conner since St Henry does not offer it.

 

Hopefully, I have made it clear that my child ONLY takes classes at St Henry.

 

Explain how your home-school child should be able to play football at Conner while my child should not be allowed.

All you have to do is be honest...tell me if my son is 1 on 1 with a teacher, and is moving though his studies at his own pace, how is that not better than sitting in a class with 25 kids in it. How many of those kids do you think learn at the same pace....maybe 5? So if those 5 move at a faster pace than the other 20, you are going to take longer for those other 20 to catch up, and slow the other 5 down.

 

Does that make sense to you?

FairFan - I CANNOT make it any clearer. I am NOT talking about enrolling my child in 2 schools.

 

Let me restate it AGAIN: Like you, I live across from Conner High School. However, for various reasons, I choose to send my child to St Henry (note: its the ONLY high school he is enrolled in). St Henry, as you know, does not have a football team.

 

I pay taxes that support Conner High School, thus, I think my child s/b able to play football at Conner since St Henry does not offer it.

 

Hopefully, I have made it clear that my child ONLY takes classes at St Henry.

 

Explain how your home-school child should be able to play football at Conner while my child should not be allowed.

What you might not realize is that Tim Tebow had to be enrolled in that school to play football, therefore as will your child have to be.

FairFan - do you not read anything else anyone types?

 

I found an article on Tebow and he was NOT enrolled at Neace High School. He played football there but was home-schooled. He was actually enrolled at a private school prior to that while being home-schooled.

 

The Dickingson Act in Florida does not limit a home-schoolers participation to public schools only.

 

 

Do yourself a favor and go to Google and type in the following: "tim tebow"+"home school".

 

Secondarily, Tim Tebow is irrelevant to this argument.

 

You said:

 

I live right across the street from Conner in Hebron, and I dont know much about that school. But if I felt I could give my child a better education than the school, why should I have to (1) punish my child by not letting him play football there if I wanted to home school, or (2) have to send him there to play football, but not give him the education that I want. Its not fair.

 

 

I said (a few times):

 

FairFan - I CANNOT make it any clearer. I am NOT talking about enrolling my child in 2 schools.

 

Let me restate it AGAIN: Like you, I live across from Conner High School. However, for various reasons, I choose to send my child to St Henry (note: its the ONLY high school he is enrolled in). St Henry, as you know, does not have a football team.

 

I pay taxes that support Conner High School, thus, I think my child s/b able to play football at Conner since St Henry does not offer it.

 

Hopefully, I have made it clear that my child ONLY takes classes at St Henry.

 

Explain how your home-school child should be able to play football at Conner while my child should not be allowed.

 

 

Look, I respect your opinion. However, I'd like you to actually think it through and debate it.

 

Thoughts?

Look, I respect your opinion. However, I'd like you to actually think it through and debate it.

 

Thoughts?

I will be the first one to admit when I am wrong...and I am wrong. I found the bill itself, and in Alabama, and Fla it states:This bill would permit students in private and church schools and those taught by a private tutor to participate in extracurricular activities at public school. Since students receiving instruction in Alabama are enrolled in church schools or taught by tutors, this bill would potentially affect them.

 

So to answer your question, if we had this law, you would be allowed to send you kid to a private school, and play football for a public school.