Well they'll have to make a difference within the requirements of civil rights laws, or cease taking government money. They aren't special.There is a REASON why Charter Schools are springing up. Do you even have the first clue about the parish, about the existing public schools and the problems they faced prior to the establishment of the charter schools? Schools which, BTW, people have to CHOOSE to even TRY to get into and have to qualify to be accepted into? They are trying to make a difference. In many cases they ARE making a difference. Lord knows we cant have that.
Are you coming to bed?
I can't. This is important.
Someone is WRONG on the internet! -XKCD
There are the family rules.
The school rules.
And the state law.
Every teenager should be clear on what they are and what the consequences are. I like the philosophy of this Charter School--if you're not disciplined enough to abstain from sex or at least practice protected sex (as long as you're the legal age of consent) then you really aren't focused on getting your education. The Charter School should be seen as a privilege and not a right--you make a choice to got there. They do receive public funds, so this policy may be problematic.
I'm sure you're right, there are legal issues, but I agree with sentiment of behavior expectations, boundaries, and consequences.
When I read this article at first I was pretty was strongly against this. After reading through the forum I am far less against it and I think it does make some sense.
The policy’s complete disregard for Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972, the federal law that prohibits sex discrimination in federally funded education programs and activities, is astonishing. Title IX and its regulations explicitly mandate that schools cannot exclude any student from an education program or activity, “including any class or extracurricular activity, on the basis of such student’s pregnancy, childbirth, false pregnancy, termination of pregnancy or recovery therefrom.”
Besides violating Title IX, the policy is also in violation of the Constitution’s due process right to procreate, and equal protection: it treats female students differently from male students and relies on archaic stereotypes linked to sex and pregnancy.
Approximately 70 percent of teen girls who give birth leave school, due in part to illegal discrimination. Schools should be supporting pregnant and parenting teens that face numerous barriers to completing their education, not illegally excluding them from school. The ACLU’s Women’s Rights Project protects the rights of pregnant and parenting teens through advocacy, education, and litigation, working to combat the push-out of pregnant and parenting teens from school.
"I have been thinking that I would make a proposition to my Republican friends... that if they will stop telling lies about the Democrats, we will stop telling the truth about them." --Adlai Stevenson, Politician
I agree that discrimination is wrong for things that a person cannot control. However, you can control whether or not you get pregnant for the most part.
Teenage sex? Apparently not, unless we're assuming only females have sex.
Teenage pregnancy? Apparently not, unless we're assuming females can typically become pregnant independent from a male component
The actual physical state of being pregnant? That's something where it'd be reasonable to say it would only apply to the female, but then the question goes why are you attempting to discriminate against the physical state itself?
"I am appalled that somebody who is the nominee...would take that kind of position"
"A court took away a presidency"
"...the brother of a man running for president was the governor of the state..."
It's horrifying because Trump is blunt instead of making overt implications.
Disallowing pregnant teens is not one of those exemptions, especially in California. As mentioned before, I happen to know the Master teacher who develops most of the charters for the state. He has confirmed there is no such exemption.
They'll be on the hook to the feds and the state on this policy decision.
Would you have a problem with people not attending the school who were on trial for breaking the law or make other poor life choices that would or could potentially adversely effect their education and those around them? Would you want your teenage son or daughter being influenced by people making these types of decisions if you had the option?
Last edited by Kreton; 08-08-12 at 03:02 PM.