If the votes were on unmarked ballots, it was done so to insure that no school would have to account for its vote. Not only hypocrites but hypocrites with neither principle nor backbone.

 

 

First of all it is has been unmarked ballots and this was not just done this year. 2nd do you want people to vote on how they want to vote or vote because of pressure of the people around them?

The majority is not always right, but in a democracy, majority rules. Whats so hard to figure out about that?

 

I have a challenge for you, tell us fellow BGP members what the solution is to the problems?

Not true.

 

In 2000 a majority voted for Gore.

 

In the 50's and 60's the majority did not want to desegregate schools.

 

In the Senate, filibuster prevents a majority from completely overwhelming the minority.

 

In the US the courts protect the rights of minorities from overzealous majorities.

 

Now I know the stock answer will be that this doesn't compare with those things and that is true BUT it is proof that majority rules is not always the case.

All everyone needs is to enforce the current rules and leave the money out of it. Yes I said money.

This is what prop 8 (sponsored by the private schools) was intened to do. As someone else said it's very interesting (and telling to me) that more public schools wouldn't vote for this.

First of all it is has been unmarked ballots and this was not just done this year. 2nd do you want people to vote on how they want to vote or vote because of pressure of the people around them?

The first time voting was done on secret ballots was last year. Before that all votes were taken via paddles and everyone knew how every school voted.

The first time voting was done on secret ballots was last year. Before that all votes were taken via paddles and everyone knew how every school voted.

 

 

I stand corrected. But don't you think it is better that way. WE vote in elections with a secret ballot, I think the delegates should have the same priviledge. They need to vote how they want and now feel pressure from surrounding delegates.

No I don't. Comparing this to an election where one is voting stricly for themselves is apples to oranges.

 

These are not individual votes in an election they are representatives of a particular school and just like legislators I think that those that are being represented have the right to know how their representatives voted.

 

I would also LOVE to know the public schools that voted against the proposal that would increase enforcement efforts. WHY would they vote against that Hmmm?

I stand corrected. But don't you think it is better that way. WE vote in elections with a secret ballot, I think the delegates should have the same priviledge. They need to vote how they want and now feel pressure from surrounding delegates.

 

 

Should we allow the votes in congress to be secret? Or would you rather know how your rep voted?

Senecca AD said on TV that recruiting absolutely goes on and thats why he voted on prop 2.

 

I'm not saying it doesn't happen. IMO, though, before you cast a wide net over a bunch of schools that are not guilty, have the guts to report it to the KHSAA instead of making statements that make people wonder. Was it Beechwood? St Henry? CCH? Dixie? Who, Mike?

This is what prop 8 (sponsored by the private schools) was intened to do. As someone else said it's very interesting (and telling to me) that more public schools wouldn't vote for this.

 

What does it tell you All Tell? It tells me there is going to be problems till a separation occurs. Also for the record , I am against a different class for Public and Private school. That where I think you guys have me pegged wrong. I am just stating what I hear the most people say. That they want the privates to just accept the votes and not think they are above the majority, which is what you are saying. If you cannot accept the votes and then cry " Ill get a lawyer" what does that look like to the publics?

What does it tell you All Tell? It tells me there is going to be problems till a separation occurs. Also for the record , I am against a different class for Public and Private school. That where I think you guys have me pegged wrong. I am just stating what I hear the most people say. That they want the privates to just accept the votes and not think they are above the majority, which is what you are saying. If you cannot accept the votes and then cry " Ill get a lawyer" what does that look like to the publics?

It tell me that the publics aren't really interested in enforcing the rules that now exist, they want to use innuendo of rule breaking as an excuse for their inability to build programs that can compete with the private schools.

 

Let me ask you this, if your child had their status in a state sponsored program because a majority of his/her peers felt threatened by success he/she was having wouldn't you do everything in your power up to and including taking them to court to fight for the rights of your child? I certainly would. That's what the private schools are doing. If the public schools have a problem with that then that's just to bad. If they really expected the private schools to just sit back and take it then they miscalculated badly.

Why is recruiting used to describe families that choose to attend a certian school that people didn't expect or want them to attend.

What does it tell you All Tell? It tells me there is going to be problems till a separation occurs. Also for the record , I am against a different class for Public and Private school. That where I think you guys have me pegged wrong. I am just stating what I hear the most people say. That they want the privates to just accept the votes and not think they are above the majority, which is what you are saying. If you cannot accept the votes and then cry " Ill get a lawyer" what does that look like to the publics?

Sorry fella but its about right and wrong not what the "majority" wants. I'm old enough and from deep enough in the south to remember when only whites could play the game in the SEC. While the majority of ADs wanted to keep the status quo, it still wasn't right and eventually the right thing was done. I'm not for letting the mob rule.

Erlanger-Elsmere superintendent Mike Sanders says he supports Prop 2 because he does not have time to tend to the educational challenges AND also tend to the recruiting that goes on.

 

I'd challenge Mike to back up his statements if he's going to throw the "recruiting" charge out there.

 

I really think that the newspapers (Ryan?) should ask old Mike about his allegations on this matter, and if he refuses to answer the question, then As they say "either put up, or shut up"!:irked: :fight:

Sorry fella but its about right and wrong not what the "majority" wants. I'm old enough and from deep enough in the south to remember when only whites could play the game in the SEC. While the majority of ADs wanted to keep the status quo, it still wasn't right and eventually the right thing was done. I'm not for letting the mob rule.

 

I have saw the KHSAA delegates that voted for separation and against the Props that the privates support called alot of things, but "I'm not for letting the mob rule" about takes the cake.I am sure the delegates loved to be referred to in this manner. Sounds like you think that the public schools have convicts running the ship. Again let me say this, I am not for separation. But the attitude that is displayed here is some of the problem that is causing the problems.

 

So lets get to the bottom line. I have a question that is begging to be answered , and not with another question.

 

Is there anything wrong with the current rules that the KHSAA has? If not just say everything is great. If there are problems, then I want to hear the Privates point of view.

 

And please answer this question. Do not respond with another question.

I have saw the KHSAA delegates that voted for separation and against the Props that the privates support called alot of things, but "I'm not for letting the mob rule" about takes the cake.I am sure the delegates loved to be referred to in this manner. Sounds like you think that the public schools have convicts running the ship. Again let me say this, I am not for separation. But the attitude that is displayed here is some of the problem that is causing the problems.

 

So lets get to the bottom line. I have a question that is begging to be answered , and not with another question.

 

Is there anything wrong with the current rules that the KHSAA has? If not just say everything is great. If there are problems, then I want to hear the Privates point of view.

 

And please answer this question. Do not respond with another question.

Quite frankly I could care less about the feelings of the people that support separation. If they can't take the heat then get out of the kitchen. If they really expected that there would be no repercussions from this then they are either naive or stupid (or both).

 

You want an answer then here it is. No, I don't think that there are problems with the rules as they exist I think there is a problem with the way those rules are enforced. The private schools proposed legislation that would create an enforcement division. Why would the public schools not support this? Hmmmm?

 

Now it's your turn to answer a question. Several of us have pointed out instances where majority wishes were overlooked or over ruled for the betterment of the whole and yet you seem to believe that just because a majority of school administrators want these changes made the private schools should just shut up and accept it. Why should the private schools not take all steps thay can to make sure what they see as unfair treatment of kids doesn't occur?