I feel that My statements were beaten around somewhat. I did not attack anyone who chooses to participate in the public system. I feel that by referring to "whackos" and bringing up discipline as a qualification for participation, that some are missing the point that I was attempting to make. as for not sharing in the cost of membership, you forget that the schools are spending tax money, not private enterprise money, on their decision to enroll as members, and that means that I did pay into the membership of the school in my district. as far as discipline, my oldest son ran a tougher track schedule by far than any my youngest son ran when he was in his high school's track program, and my youngest son was quite equal to most wrestlers when participating in the kid's program. When I mentioned the term "peers" I didn''t say anything about public school peers, I specifically referenced the term to include all children in his age group. My two home schooled children have both earned ACT scores above the average level for acceptance into college, which many public school products achieve after several attempts and many clinics that help them utilize the system to raise their scores. That is not a complaint or whining, it is a fact. As for my choice to home school and my complaint that I can't selectively participate in some school programs, it is a point well taken. My third son is in the public system because I was willing to put him into public schools so that he could participate in sports. He has done relatively well in the sports, has had some trouble in the academics. That may be proof that his home school background did not prepare him for high school, or it may be a reflection on his priorities. at any rate, I meant no hostility to the purveyors of public education, and was somewhat surprised at the hostility that resulted from my post. My decision to home school my children, while in the view of some would make me a "whacko", has not affected my basic desire to be civil to others.
