once again the dead fraud and liar called brightfart sucks Lew into his fringe belief system and of course Lew bites.
> Date: Sat, 23 Feb 2013 03:59:43 -0800
> Subject: Homeschoolers Barred from H.S. Sports but Illegal Immigrant Peers Play On
> From: lewcoop@aol.com
> To: opendebateforum@googlegroups.com
>
> Homeschoolers Barred from H.S. Sports but Illegal Immigrant Peers Play
> On
>
> breitbart.com
> by Benjamin Chance21 Feb 201362post a comment
>
> Is it "fair" that illegal immigrants and foreign exchange students are
> allowed to play high school football on Friday nights and to
> participate in extra curricular activities at public schools, while
> many of their peers, who are legal US citizens but who happen to be
> homeschooled, are being denied "equal" access to the same
> opportunities in their local communities?
> In Virginia last week, seven Democrats and a lone Republican, perhaps
> unaware or unmoved by such a discrepancy, made the point moot and
> rejected the so called "Tebow Bill" that sought to "level the playing
> field."
>
> In the weeks preceding the committee vote, the national media took an
> interest in Virginia's version of the "Tebow Bill." Most notably,
> Laura Ingraham, "the most listened-to woman in political talk radio in
> the United States," had a memorable exchange discussing the measure on
> her show with guest Ken Tilley, Executive Director of the Virginia
> High School League (VHSL) and a fierce opponent of the bill. According
> to the Washington Post "The current ban against home-schoolers is the
> result of long-standing policy set by the Virginia High School League,
> which governs interscholastic sports and other activities in
> Virginia's more than 300 high schools."
>
> After Tilley put forth several reasons for the opposition such as
> "participation is a privilege not a right" and "equity and fairness,"
> Ingraham, whose conservatism, wisdom and wit is like kryptonite to the
> left's speciousness, took to task Tilley's "equity arguments."
> Ingraham highlighted how exemptions seemingly are being made for every
> group except homeschoolers and the country's big push for
> inclusiveness doesn't include tax paying parents that choose to
> homeschool. At one point, Ingraham asked Tilley if undocumented
> immigrants have to have parents residing in the attendance zones to
> compete and the response given was "We don't address that point."
>
> By calling out the practice of giving exemptions to some (illegal
> immigrants and foreign exchange students) but denying similar
> treatment to others (homeschooled US citizens), Ingraham invalidated
> Tilley's core talking points. More importantly, Ingraham offered a new
> dynamic over "what's fair" conspicuously absent in both previous and
> current debates.
>
> Although many leftists believe they own a monopoly on the terms and
> conditions of how to define and apply "fairness," Ingraham forcefully
> demonstrated how the left's pretense of "equity" and "fairness" can
> collapse upon closer examination. When pointed questions like
> Ingraham's are introduced, "Professional" politicians and educators
> frequently become exposed not only by their opposition to measures
> like the "Tebow Bill," but also by their mannered sincerity.
>
> These "professionals" love to lecture about the notions of "fairness,"
> of "equal access," and of "a commitment to united excellence" in
> education, yet circle the wagons year after year to deny 14 and 15
> year old homeschoolers the opportunity to tryout for the high school
> basketball or debate team. What exactly are these "professionals"
> dedicated to? Do they seek to promote a safe and healthy environment
> to educate and develop every child, or only those students who attend
> "their" public schools?
>
> In view of current exemptions, people's overwhelming support, and
> legislative provisions, arguments against the "Tebow Bill" appear
> small and punitive. For example, in a 2010 article, Tilley said "By
> playing by a different set of rules it's inequitable and unfair to
> public school students." He added "the parents of homeschooled
> students have voluntarily chosen not to participate in the free public
> school system in order to educate their children at home. That's fine,
> but in making that choice they have also chosen to forgo the
> privileges incidental to public education. One of which is the
> opportunity to play athletics."
>
> Tilley's notion of "choice" further invalidates his argument. Most
> likely, illegal immigrants parents did not give their children a
> choice to stay behind when the decision was made to ignore our
> nation's rules and enter the country illegally. American's,
> nevertheless, are compassionate and even the most fervent advocates
> for stricter immigration laws, can both appreciate and understand that
> a child should not be punished for his parents actions.
>
> Why then do "Tebow Bill" opponents believe it's "fair" and "equitable"
> to punish teenage homeschoolers because their law-abiding tax-paying
> parents made a different choice on how to educate best their
> children?
>
> Even the Washington Post's position has evolved from skeptical to
> acceptable. According to a recent editorial "State athletic officials
> ought to look for a solution that preserves a level playing field but
> doesn't deny local school districts or their students the important
> right to choose." What's more, a January 2013 survey released by the
> Commonwealth Educational Policy Institute indicated 67% of Virginian's
> "favored allowing students who are homeschooled to participate on
> local public school sport teams."
>
> Over the years, proponents have worked to address various objections
> and the proposed bill is a common sense and comprehensive solution.
> Currently, the "Tebow bill" stipulates that only home-schoolers who
> meet specific eligibility, disciplinary, and residency criteria can be
> eligible to try out for high school extracurricular activities or
> sports. For example, to comply with academic requisites, homeschoolers
> must provide standardized test scores or undergo an annual review by
> the school system.
>
> The bill also provides for individual localities, not the state, to
> decide if home-schoolers should be allowed to participate or not.
> Additional provisions in the bill prevent students from "school
> shopping" and allows localities to charge homeschoolers any additional
> fees incurred as a result of their joining the team or club.
>
> Home schoolers are asking only for the opportunity to compete and want
> to earn a roster spot not take one away. They may not walk the halls
> with their public school peers during the day, but that shouldn't
> disqualify them as potential teammates in the afternoon. Ultimately,
> as more people are made aware of the opposition's false arguments,
> their false posturing "of wanting everyone to play by the same rules,"
> and their false definitions of "fairness," homeschoolers should be
> optimistic about next year's prospects for the "Tebow Bill" to pass
> and become law.
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Open Debate Political Forum IMHO" group.
> To post to this group, send email to OpenDebateForum@googlegroups.com
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to OpenDebateForum-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com
> For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/OpenDebateForum?hl=en
> ---
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Open Debate Political Forum IMHO" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to opendebateforum+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
> To post to this group, send email to opendebateforum@googlegroups.com.
> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/opendebateforum?hl=en.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
>
>
> Subject: Homeschoolers Barred from H.S. Sports but Illegal Immigrant Peers Play On
> From: lewcoop@aol.com
> To: opendebateforum@googlegroups.com
>
> Homeschoolers Barred from H.S. Sports but Illegal Immigrant Peers Play
> On
>
> breitbart.com
> by Benjamin Chance21 Feb 201362post a comment
>
> Is it "fair" that illegal immigrants and foreign exchange students are
> allowed to play high school football on Friday nights and to
> participate in extra curricular activities at public schools, while
> many of their peers, who are legal US citizens but who happen to be
> homeschooled, are being denied "equal" access to the same
> opportunities in their local communities?
> In Virginia last week, seven Democrats and a lone Republican, perhaps
> unaware or unmoved by such a discrepancy, made the point moot and
> rejected the so called "Tebow Bill" that sought to "level the playing
> field."
>
> In the weeks preceding the committee vote, the national media took an
> interest in Virginia's version of the "Tebow Bill." Most notably,
> Laura Ingraham, "the most listened-to woman in political talk radio in
> the United States," had a memorable exchange discussing the measure on
> her show with guest Ken Tilley, Executive Director of the Virginia
> High School League (VHSL) and a fierce opponent of the bill. According
> to the Washington Post "The current ban against home-schoolers is the
> result of long-standing policy set by the Virginia High School League,
> which governs interscholastic sports and other activities in
> Virginia's more than 300 high schools."
>
> After Tilley put forth several reasons for the opposition such as
> "participation is a privilege not a right" and "equity and fairness,"
> Ingraham, whose conservatism, wisdom and wit is like kryptonite to the
> left's speciousness, took to task Tilley's "equity arguments."
> Ingraham highlighted how exemptions seemingly are being made for every
> group except homeschoolers and the country's big push for
> inclusiveness doesn't include tax paying parents that choose to
> homeschool. At one point, Ingraham asked Tilley if undocumented
> immigrants have to have parents residing in the attendance zones to
> compete and the response given was "We don't address that point."
>
> By calling out the practice of giving exemptions to some (illegal
> immigrants and foreign exchange students) but denying similar
> treatment to others (homeschooled US citizens), Ingraham invalidated
> Tilley's core talking points. More importantly, Ingraham offered a new
> dynamic over "what's fair" conspicuously absent in both previous and
> current debates.
>
> Although many leftists believe they own a monopoly on the terms and
> conditions of how to define and apply "fairness," Ingraham forcefully
> demonstrated how the left's pretense of "equity" and "fairness" can
> collapse upon closer examination. When pointed questions like
> Ingraham's are introduced, "Professional" politicians and educators
> frequently become exposed not only by their opposition to measures
> like the "Tebow Bill," but also by their mannered sincerity.
>
> These "professionals" love to lecture about the notions of "fairness,"
> of "equal access," and of "a commitment to united excellence" in
> education, yet circle the wagons year after year to deny 14 and 15
> year old homeschoolers the opportunity to tryout for the high school
> basketball or debate team. What exactly are these "professionals"
> dedicated to? Do they seek to promote a safe and healthy environment
> to educate and develop every child, or only those students who attend
> "their" public schools?
>
> In view of current exemptions, people's overwhelming support, and
> legislative provisions, arguments against the "Tebow Bill" appear
> small and punitive. For example, in a 2010 article, Tilley said "By
> playing by a different set of rules it's inequitable and unfair to
> public school students." He added "the parents of homeschooled
> students have voluntarily chosen not to participate in the free public
> school system in order to educate their children at home. That's fine,
> but in making that choice they have also chosen to forgo the
> privileges incidental to public education. One of which is the
> opportunity to play athletics."
>
> Tilley's notion of "choice" further invalidates his argument. Most
> likely, illegal immigrants parents did not give their children a
> choice to stay behind when the decision was made to ignore our
> nation's rules and enter the country illegally. American's,
> nevertheless, are compassionate and even the most fervent advocates
> for stricter immigration laws, can both appreciate and understand that
> a child should not be punished for his parents actions.
>
> Why then do "Tebow Bill" opponents believe it's "fair" and "equitable"
> to punish teenage homeschoolers because their law-abiding tax-paying
> parents made a different choice on how to educate best their
> children?
>
> Even the Washington Post's position has evolved from skeptical to
> acceptable. According to a recent editorial "State athletic officials
> ought to look for a solution that preserves a level playing field but
> doesn't deny local school districts or their students the important
> right to choose." What's more, a January 2013 survey released by the
> Commonwealth Educational Policy Institute indicated 67% of Virginian's
> "favored allowing students who are homeschooled to participate on
> local public school sport teams."
>
> Over the years, proponents have worked to address various objections
> and the proposed bill is a common sense and comprehensive solution.
> Currently, the "Tebow bill" stipulates that only home-schoolers who
> meet specific eligibility, disciplinary, and residency criteria can be
> eligible to try out for high school extracurricular activities or
> sports. For example, to comply with academic requisites, homeschoolers
> must provide standardized test scores or undergo an annual review by
> the school system.
>
> The bill also provides for individual localities, not the state, to
> decide if home-schoolers should be allowed to participate or not.
> Additional provisions in the bill prevent students from "school
> shopping" and allows localities to charge homeschoolers any additional
> fees incurred as a result of their joining the team or club.
>
> Home schoolers are asking only for the opportunity to compete and want
> to earn a roster spot not take one away. They may not walk the halls
> with their public school peers during the day, but that shouldn't
> disqualify them as potential teammates in the afternoon. Ultimately,
> as more people are made aware of the opposition's false arguments,
> their false posturing "of wanting everyone to play by the same rules,"
> and their false definitions of "fairness," homeschoolers should be
> optimistic about next year's prospects for the "Tebow Bill" to pass
> and become law.
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Open Debate Political Forum IMHO" group.
> To post to this group, send email to OpenDebateForum@googlegroups.com
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to OpenDebateForum-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com
> For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/OpenDebateForum?hl=en
> ---
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Open Debate Political Forum IMHO" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to opendebateforum+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
> To post to this group, send email to opendebateforum@googlegroups.com.
> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/opendebateforum?hl=en.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
>
>
0 comments:
Post a Comment