Do you think that it is acceptable to falsify residency for a better school district? (interpretation, grade)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I never claimed YOU said anything. I asked what was unjust about them. How is that misrepresenting anything YOU said?
Answer: It's not.
I NEVER SAID THAT THOSE LAWS ARE UNJUST. What is so complicated about that concept?
[quote[I stand corrected about what law she broke. I will have to take your word on this. In my state (FL) people who have done the same thing have been charged with lying to public officials.
What is unjust about these particular laws? [/quote]
I have explained my issue with segregation and residency laws at least three times. I am sorry you cannot comprehend, on the other hand that is sort of your problem
Quote:
Thanks for the vocabulary lesson.
Your welcome.
Quote:
Because you do not answer them.
I have. Repeatedly.
Quote:
Look this woman is no Rosa Parks. This woman is a lowlife.
Actually a woman who will drive 3 hours a day to get her kids a better education is not a lowlife. She was wrong in her methods but she is not a low life.
Quote:
She has no particular social agenda. She is not standing up for any kind of social justice.
How do you KNOW that? You have no idea what her motives or beliefs are. You are amazingly quick to judge people.
Quote:
She is just a liar who is trying to milk the system for something she is not entitled to have and she is pissed off that she got caught.
All children are entitled to a free EQUAL public education she just went about getting one the wrong way. And your assumptions and attempts to vilify this woman are telling in and of themselves.
Quote:
While I do think the sentence was way over the top and did not fit the severity of the crime I do think that what she did was WRONG.
Can you please explain to me what is unjust about residency laws? It is not unjust for school districts to educate only those who legally reside within its borders. What is unjust is stealing the public resources of others.
LOL! PUBLIC resources of OTHERS. I am damn sure the irony of that sentence goes right over your head.
The current system (of districts funded primarily by local taxes) is resulting in segregation. Segregation is fundamentally unjust.
All children are entitled to a free EQUAL public education she just went about getting one the wrong way. And your assumptions and attempts to vilify this woman are telling in and of themselves.
No-children are entitled to a free and APPROPRIATE education under section 504 (which applies to disabilities but is generally understood to apply to all children). NOT an equal education, and APPROPRIATE education.
Quote:
Originally Posted by lkb0714
LOL! PUBLIC resources of OTHERS. I am damn sure the irony of that sentence goes right over your head.
Public resources are funded by the taxpayers of a particular entity (school district, city, county, state, etc....) Those taxes are generally for the benefit of those who are members of that entity (whether it be a school district, county, city, or other taxing entity). Lying to use the resources of others is fraud. The resources are considered public resources because the are available to anyone who qualifies but not to anyone who decides they want them.
Is it ok for someone to lie about state residence so that they can get a resident's rate at a state university?
Quote:
Originally Posted by lkb0714
The current system (of districts funded primarily by local taxes) is resulting in segregation. Segregation is fundamentally unjust.
It isn't school districts that result in segregation. Here in FL we have county wide school districts which encompass all the cities within a county. We have equitable funding. The rich kids that live right on the ocean get the same school funding as the poor kids who live in the rough neighborhoods. That has not made our schools less segregated than the rest of the country which has small, local school districts.
It is a crime no matter if you think it was justified for her to send her kids to another district .This woman did not pay taxes for the school and ,she should be punished for it . Is there any reason why she did not move in with her father full time establish residency,since she lived their part time ?It was a silly reason to possibly ruin a good teaching career.
i am amazed at some of these replies. its so typically american as well. but i digress.
i had to do the same thing to attend a different high school in my county. i wasn't legally allowed to do so, like i said, i don't consider it robbing the taxpayer because we paid county taxes as well. but the thing was, i had been regularly harassed and bullied since i was in second grade, and by the time i went to high school or was about to go i had been threatened that "when you come to high school we are gonna really get you this time, its a bigger school", etc etc., i mean, very brutal threats. my mother and i had been in and out of the principal's office for years, and nothing had ever been done about it. so my mother decided to lie and say that i lived somewhere else so that i would be able to attend high school without getting beaten to death by redneck girls. friends of mine were badly beaten and finally some kids were thrown out of school. do you guys suggest i just have went instead of wasting the taxpayers' dollars? what about the damage and waste that would have ensued had they been sued because of negligence and not taking my claims seriously, which went back for years, and had physical evidence to back it up? i am not saying this woman's child was in the same predicament, but there can be very compelling extenuating circumstances and consideration goes both ways. i didn't want to waste taxpayers dollars but nothing was being taken care of, so why should i care? why can't a girl expect to be safe at school? is that too much to ask? this was in the precolumbine days, they have gotten smarter, but all i am saying is, sometimes its more complex than you think.
Of course it's more complex that one thinks; however, to justify fraud by saying "What else was I going to do?" instead of to keep raising heck about it until someone paid attention, only serves to stir the pot of contention even further when someone who plays by the rules has to pay. The media absolutely LOVES stories like that.
It's deplorable what you had to go through and it certainly shouldn't have happened, but to say "Well, it's okay this time because of the circumstances" is to say it's okay to defraud someone about _______ fill in the blank. There is enough of that mentality going on elsewhere as it is now. At what point do we say "Enough is enough?"
This is how arguments are started in the first place.
No-children are entitled to a free and APPROPRIATE education under section 504 (which applies to disabilities but is generally understood to apply to all children). NOT an equal education, and APPROPRIATE education.
Actually, the findings of Brown vs. BOE do find that all children in public education are to have an equal education. This is now understood to include funding, and in many states (such as NJ) it has given rise to funding temporary fixes like the Abbott districts.
And, fyi, section 504 is specifically part of the rehabilitation act guaranteeing civil rights to those with disabilities and in no way defines public education standards for EVERYONE.
Quote:
Public resources are funded by the taxpayers of a particular entity (school district, city, county, state, etc....) Those taxes are generally for the benefit of those who are members of that entity (whether it be a school district, county, city, or other taxing entity). Lying to use the resources of others is fraud. The resources are considered public resources because the are available to anyone who qualifies but not to anyone who decides they want them.
The district in question uses both state and county funding in addition to local funds. As a matter of fact in Ohio, nearly 40% of all the state monies are used to fund all the public schools including the one in question. Therefore this woman, had a right to at least a portion of that education tuition free as a state resident.
Additionally, school funding in Ohio is a mess. From Derolph I and II the Ohio supreme court has already found that the current funding system is UNCONSTITUTIONAL.
Quote:
Is it ok for someone to lie about state residence so that they can get a resident's rate at a state university?
College residency laws are also unconstitutional and have been found so in some states and are currently being challenged in others.
Quote:
It isn't school districts that result in segregation. Here in FL we have county wide school districts which encompass all the cities within a county. We have equitable funding. The rich kids that live right on the ocean get the same school funding as the poor kids who live in the rough neighborhoods. That has not made our schools less segregated than the rest of the country which has small, local school districts.
Florida's education problems are varied, enormous, and could spawn a thread of their own. I do not advocate their system at all, especially as they have the worst record of funding education in the nation. Other states (including Ohio) have open enrollment with larger success once all schools are on the system.
Finally, I suspect you have no idea what I mean by segregation.
When the high temperature for the day is 12oC and she goes to a school with no hallways, yes, I would.
Yep and our kids go to school when it is below zero without coats because they don't want to wear them, big deal. It's called pick your battles and this is just one that is not one to fight. Kids know if they are cold or not and walking for a couple minutes in 12 degree weather just isn't that big of a deal.
Yep and our kids go to school when it is below zero without coats because they don't want to wear them, big deal. It's called pick your battles and this is just one that is not one to fight. Kids know if they are cold or not and walking for a couple minutes in 12 degree weather just isn't that big of a deal.
To you, maybe. But when windchill is -4oF the walk across campus from the tech building to the cafeteria can end with frostbite. A tank top is not appropriate winter wear in this situation ever. In fact its dangerous.
The argument related to equality is of equal educational opportunity not an equal education. A child with severe disabilities receives much more funding and services than a child without those disabilities. It would be an unequal educational opportunity for the child with disabilities if he/she received an equal education to the one without.
The law calls for equal education opportunity that does not discriminate on race, sex, national origin, etc. Residence is a separate issue.
To you, maybe. But when windchill is -4oF the walk across campus from the tech building to the cafeteria can end with frostbite. A tank top is not appropriate winter wear in this situation ever. In fact its dangerous.
I think a 9th grader would have to be dumber than a chunk of mud to walk in -40F weather in a tank top. Really, and if they aren't, then perhaps they deserve to spend a little 'educational time' in an ER learning how to dress appropriately while bandaged.
Is it that necessary to always be right? Seriously?
Don't have kids you can't afford.
Don't have kids you can't afford.
Don't have kids you can't afford.
Don't have kids you can't afford.
Don't have kids you can't afford.
So what happens if you can afford them until your husband or wife has a midlife crisis and dumps you?
What if you could afford them while you stayed at home with your kids, and upon being dumped realized you have years of relative blue sky on your resume and need to go back to school? Wait! Does this mean that I get to defraud the government for welfare benefits? Does this justify my shlepping my kid off to a better school in a different town while I pay less for subsidized housing? No. It doesn't regardless.
What if you could afford them until your company decided to outsource your job?
What if you could afford them until you got cancer and your treatments left you penniless AND without a job?
What if you could afford them until one of them became sick and required extensive medical treatment?
What then?
Walk a mile...
Walk a mile...
Walk a mile...
Walk a mile...
Walk a mile...
Last edited by cebdark; 01-29-2011 at 12:54 AM..
Reason: added
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
