Tim Tebow Bill passes in Alabama

#6
#6
Maybe I'm in the minority on this, but sports and extracurricular activities at a school are a privilege of attending said school. There are city/rec leagues and travel/AAU opportunities for many sports outside of football for HS aged kids.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#7
#7
bowlinggreenvol said:
Maybe I'm in the minority on this, but sports and extracurricular activities at a school are a privilege of attending said school. There are city/rec leagues and travel/AAU opportunities for many sports outside of football for HA aged kids.
Click to expand...

I tend to agree with you. There is nothing unreasonable about expecting someone who is representing a high school in competition to actually be a student at the school. I don't think there is anything wrong with homeschooling but it does come with some sacrifices. If a family is unwilling to make those sacrifices then they should send their kids to school.

Also, it should be noted that Tebow's family abused this law when Tim and his mother relocated to an apartment in another county where he would be given a chance to play quarterback at a school outside of his district. The rest of the family stayed in their residence in Jacksonville. That sort of thing indicates misplaced priorities and should not be allowed.
 
#8
#8
I agree with this for the following reason:

Homeschool parents pay taxes to fund the public schools. Therefore, if their child wants to utilize those dollars allocated to those athletic programs then they be able to do so.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 5 people
#9
#9
Jxn Vol said:
I agree with this for the following reason:

Homeschool parents pay taxes to fund the public schools. Therefore, if their child wants to utilize those dollars allocated to those athletic programs then they be able to do so.
Click to expand...

Yes but the parents of private school students pay those same taxes to fund public schools which they are also not utilizing. Just like the parents of kids that are homeschooled they had a choice to send their kids to a public school but for one reason or another decided against it. The fact is much of the money we spend on taxes is allocated to services which the average citizen gains no direct utility from. That's just life in America.

I think more than anything else that this law will be abused such as it was by the Tebow family.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#10
#10
BowlBrother85 said:
Yes but the parents of private school students pay those same taxes to fund public schools which they are also not utilizing. Just like the parents of kids that are homeschooled they had a choice to send their kids to a public school but for one reason or another decided against it. The fact is much of the money we spend on taxes is allocated to services which the average citizen gains no direct utility from. That's just life in America.

I think more than anything else that this law will be abused such as it was by the Tebow family.
Click to expand...

You say they abused the law. I say they utilized a situation that their tax dollars went to fund.

Also some of these public schools suck so bad the parents that actually care about their children really don't have a choice. Their choice is made by the low quality of the public school that they are zoned for.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 people
#11
#11
I totally agree that a homeschooler should be allowed to participate with their zoned schools. Whether someone agrees with it or not, they have to pay the taxes that send all kids to public schools. I am a proponent of school vouchers, but I donÂ’t see that happening anytime soon. I would like my tax dollars being spent for education that I believe is the best for my children.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#12
#12
Jxn Vol said:
You say they abused the law. I say they utilized a situation that their tax dollars went to fund.

Also some of these public schools suck so bad the parents that actually care about their children really don't have a choice. Their choice is made by the low quality of the public school that they are zoned for.
Click to expand...

Really? You don't see any problem with the Tebows circumventing the law requiring the homeschooled student to compete for the school in his district by renting an apartment they didn't need (or likely even use) in another county for the sole purpose of allowing their son to play his position of choice for a school in another district? That absolutely sends a bad message about what should be most important to the parents of someone in high school.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#13
#13
BowlBrother85 said:
Really? You don't see any problem with the Tebows circumventing the law requiring the homeschooled student to compete for the school in his district by renting an apartment they didn't need (or likely even use) in another county for the sole purpose of allowing their son to play his position of choice for a school in another district? That absolutely sends a bad message about what should be most important to the parents of someone in high school.
Click to expand...

No is my answer. I don't care where anyone spends their money. Apartments, homes, trailers, etc.

I also don't fault anyone for doing the best they can for their children. A lot of school systems are terrible. That is the cause of this. Fix crappy schools and nobody has a reason to do this type of thing.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#14
#14
Jxn Vol said:
No is my answer. I don't care where anyone spends their money. Apartments, homes, trailers, etc.

I also don't fault anyone for doing the best they can for their children. A lot of school systems are terrible. That is the cause of this. Fix crappy schools and nobody has a reason to do this type of thing.
Click to expand...

Not in Tebow's case. His parents wanted him to be indoctrinated with their religious beliefs and were afraid of what exposure to his peers might do to undermine them. Their decision to rent an apartment in another county that they didn't need had to do with football and they had no qualms with circumventing the law.
 
#15
#15
Only thing not fair about it is academic eligibility - there is no real way to know if the home schooled kid is actually doing required and passing schoolwork, at a level required to play sports, like the ones in regular schools, have to abide by.
 
#16
#16
BowlBrother85 said:
Not in Tebow's case. His parents wanted him to be indoctrinated with their religious beliefs and were afraid of what exposure to his peers might do to undermine them. Their decision to rent an apartment in another county that they didn't need had to do with football and they had no qualms with circumventing the law.
Click to expand...

Wow. Okay. So the public school system is not in the business of indoctrinating kids? Not to get political, but dang. It's their child. They did what was best for him. I see no problem with what they did. I will agree to disagree.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#17
#17
508mikey said:
Only thing not fair about it is academic eligibility - there is no real way to know if the home schooled kid is actually doing required and passing schoolwork, at a level required to play sports, like the ones in regular schools, have to abide by.
Click to expand...

Right. Derrick Rose agrees with this. His public school was on top of his eligibility status.
 
#18
#18
Jxn Vol said:
Wow. Okay. So the public school system is not in the business of indoctrinating kids? Not to get political, but dang. It's their child. They did what was best for him. I see no problem with what they did. I will agree to disagree.
Click to expand...

Fair enough. :hi:
 
#21
#21
BowlBrother85 said:
Not in Tebow's case. His parents wanted him to be indoctrinated with their religious beliefs and were afraid of what exposure to his peers might do to undermine them. Their decision to rent an apartment in another county that they didn't need had to do with football and they had no qualms with circumventing the law.
Click to expand...

With Tebow's case, by renting an apartment are they paying any form of property tax? I don't think so but I don't know, unless it's built into your rent. If they weren't paying property tax (the main revenue source in FL because of no state income tax and low sales tax rate) in St. John's County but only Duval County and taking advantage of that just for him to play QB.
 
#22
#22
BowlBrother85 said:
Not in Tebow's case. His parents wanted him to be indoctrinated with their religious beliefs and were afraid of what exposure to his peers might do to undermine them. Their decision to rent an apartment in another county that they didn't need had to do with football and they had no qualms with circumventing the law.
Click to expand...

With Tebow's case, by renting an apartment are they paying any form of property tax? I don't think so but I don't know, unless it's built into your rent. If they weren't paying property tax (the main revenue source in FL because of no state income tax and low sales tax rate) in St. John's County but only Duval County, at their primary residence then I have more of a problem with it. In that case they're not "paying into the pot" as they would be had he played/schooled in Duval Co.
 
#23
#23
bowlinggreenvol said:
With Tebow's case, by renting an apartment are they paying any form of property tax? I don't think so but I don't know, unless it's built into your rent. If they weren't paying property tax (the main revenue source in FL because of no state income tax and low sales tax rate) in St. John's County but only Duval County, at their primary residence then I have more of a problem with it. In that case they're not "paying into the pot" as they would be had he played/schooled in Duval Co.
Click to expand...

Is it really that big of a deal? If they can pay for an apartment good for them. Why do you care how they spend their money?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#24
#24
Jxn Vol said:
Is it really that big of a deal? If they can pay for an apartment good for them. Why do you care how they spend their money?
Click to expand...

It has nothing to do with spending their money. Your argument is they pay taxes but don't utilize the school system for education but they have a right to for athletics. Fine.

If they're not paying taxes in a county but utilizing their school for athletics for their personal benefit then it's wrong. You shouldn't be able to hand pick which school you want to play sports for, no one else zoned for a particular school gets that opportunity.
 
#25
#25
bowlinggreenvol said:
It has nothing to do with spending their money. Your argument is they pay taxes but don't utilize the school system for education but they have a right to for athletics. Fine.

If they're not paying taxes in a county but utilizing their school for athletics for their personal benefit then it's wrong. You shouldn't be able to hand pick which school you want to play sports for, no one else zoned for a particular school gets that opportunity.
Click to expand...

You missed my point. If they have the money to have 2 places of residence, they should be allowed to utilize whatever services both have to offer. You can't tell people where they can and can't live. Or how many homes they can own......yet.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top