Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

LeeOblivious t1_jcdpmt2 wrote

Direct link without the third party site serving ad's: https://www.kcur.org/education/2023-03-14/missouri-homeschool-families-want-access-to-public-school-activities-and-sports-teams?_amp=true

So they want the schools to let their kids not attend like other students, but still participate in sports and other such activities? Sounds like they want to pick and choose what part of society they get to take advantage of while opting out of things they do not want. Maybe they should get together with the other homeschool parents and make a homeschool sports team.

10

gaeyez t1_jcfp8vh wrote

So, would you argue for a parent who is homeschooling to be able to opt out of the property taxes that go directly to the school district in which they live? What about people who will have no children? They pay a tax for no benefit, in your calculation.

−1

LeeOblivious t1_jcgmzrj wrote

Taxes for school districts are not use taxes, rather they are public service taxes just like road, sales, and income taxes. While YOUR children (if any) may not be using the service, you as a member of the public ARE using said service. As YOU directly benefit from having public schools. We had this debate over a century ago when we first set up the mandatory public school system...

5

Suitable_Magician515 t1_jcg87sx wrote

Great point. I don’t think opting out of property taxes is the answer. In this scenario, people that don’t have kids aren’t really part of the equation because they don’t have a dog in the fight. Here, property tax payers pay for a service to be provided to their children.. but aren’t able to because they disagree with other aspects of the education system. I guess I can put it this way.. you want a pizza.. but the only type being served is a supreme pizza. You hate mushrooms… why can’t you order it without mushrooms. BTW, I don’t have an answer.. I’m just curious what the logical counter arguments are. 👍

1

PassingWithJennifer t1_jcdtx0p wrote

Would this mean their homeschool children would have access to sports scholarships typically meant for public education kids?

Also I can see an argument either way for this. Why is it particularly bad in your opinion?

−4

LeeOblivious t1_jcdz7dx wrote

There are several arguments against.

  1. Why should the schools have to accommodate a non-student? Especially with limited budgets.
  2. Why should a non-student get to take up a spot on a team that a regular student may want?
  3. This opens up schools to athletic recruiting shenanigans. If you can get a non-regular student on your sportsball team, there is a significant risk (as we saw in the past leading to the current rule set) that children will be recruited to specific teams.
  4. Homeschoolers opt out of the school system for a reason. Getting to pick and chose what parts you want should not be an option. If you want your kid in a public schools athletic program (or art or music) then enroll them public school.

As a child I was home schooled for several years. It was not a good thing and I suffered from it. But god said to do so and thus I was stuck. And while over the decades I've interacted with a small number of children who were helped by it, the vast majority I've met were not.

11

420shaken t1_jcg894e wrote

You don't have to play mainstream high school sports to get college sports scholarships, FYI. I know plenty of kids who have received baseball/softball and lacrosse full college rides but didn't play for their local school system.

3