Maryland Senate votes to overturn after Labor Day school start

This_person

Well-Known Member
Yes. The school system has a list of approved absences.



Yes. It is the responsibility of the parents to make sure their kids attend school as required by law.


Having said that, there were times when I wanted to pull my kids from school for a week in order to go on vacation. I contacted the principal and they excused the absences for my kids on the condition that they make up all missed assignments.
I never once did anything more than let the school know my kids would be out. Making up assignments was assumed (by me). If I wanted them out for a month, that's my call. I never asked permission, and it wasn't up to the school whether or not it was ok.
 

awpitt

Main Streeter
I never once did anything more than let the school know my kids would be out. Making up assignments was assumed (by me). If I wanted them out for a month, that's my call. I never asked permission, and it wasn't up to the school whether or not it was ok.
Not sure when you had kids in school but I find it hard to believe that you'd get away with keeping them out for a month. I know that wouldn't fly these days.

If a student is absent twenty-five (25) or more days, the student will be referred to the Pupil Services Team (PST) for consideration of retention for the following year and/or credit withholding to ensure that the student has had an appropriate opportunity to learn and master grade level skills and/or course content. Students who are excessively absent from school may be referred to the Interagency Committee on School Attendance (ICSA).
https://sites.google.com/smcps.org/studenthandbook/Attendance#h.p_ZF_OiYZf_VnB
 

This_person

Well-Known Member
Not sure when you had kids in school but I find it hard to believe that you'd get away with keeping them out for a month. I know that wouldn't fly these days.
Various systems (they're Navy brats) from '94-'12. They're my kids, not the school's kids. 🤷
 

This_person

Well-Known Member
Not sure when you had kids in school but I find it hard to believe that you'd get away with keeping them out for a month. I know that wouldn't fly these days.
I had the same discussion with them when they told me they needed advanced notice of taking them out for an emergency. I told them to look up what the root of "emergency" is, and that it is impossible to give advanced notice of something like that.
 

awpitt

Main Streeter
Various systems (they're Navy brats) from '94-'12. They're my kids, not the school's kids. 🤷

Yes. They are your kids; however, the school system gets to decide what the attendance policy is, as established by law. Yes. They're your kids; however, if you told them to ignore the speed limit, there's not much you could do about that if they got caught.. Even though they're your kids.
 

This_person

Well-Known Member
Yes. They are your kids; however, the school system gets to decide what the attendance policy is, as established by law. Yes. They're your kids; however, if you told them to ignore the speed limit, there's not much you could do about that if they got caught.. Even though they're your kids.
Huge difference between speeding and forcing attendance when the parent doesn't concur, don't you think?
 

Hijinx

Well-Known Member
They aren't your kids they belong to the Government. just as your house, your land, your car and everything else belongs to the Government.
The Government is kind enough to loan them to you, but they in reality belong to the Government,as does everything else.
 

This_person

Well-Known Member
They aren't your kids they belong to the Government. just as your house, your land, your car and everything else belongs to the Government.
The Government is kind enough to loan them to you, but they in reality belong to the Government,as does everything else.
Clearly Pitt agrees
 
I'm not seeing Awpitt arguing against the fact that parents can keep their kids out of school. I simply see him stating the documented consequences of choosing to do so.
 

This_person

Well-Known Member
That would be incorrect.


I do believe that the law exists. Whether it deals with speed limits or deals with school attendance. We are not free to just ignore the law because we don't agree with it.
Actually we are. Nullification
 

Hijinx

Well-Known Member
Clearly Pitt agrees
It's not who agrees and who doesn't. The Government makes rules and governs as they see fit.
If anyone thinks this is a free country country just look around.
We already have thousands of rules and are getting more every day.
We may be a bit free'er than some other countries, but every day we lose some of that freedom.
Gun confiscation is coming as sure as the night turns to day, it's just that they are boiling we frogs a little at a time.

I know you said that just to show your opinion of how ignorant I am, but wake up.
Every day the legislature of Maryland and the Congress of the United States meets WE LOSE FREEDOMS.
 

Chris0nllyn

Well-Known Member
It's not who agrees and who doesn't. The Government makes rules and governs as they see fit.
If anyone thinks this is a free country country just look around.
We already have thousands of rules and are getting more every day.
We may be a bit free'er than some other countries, but every day we lose some of that freedom.
Gun confiscation is coming as sure as the night turns to day, it's just that they are boiling we frogs a little at a time.

I know you said that just to show your opinion of how ignorant I am, but wake up.
Every day the legislature of Maryland and the Congress of the United States meets WE LOSE FREEDOMS.
You realize you're actively rooting for localities to lose their freedom to choose their own school calendar? You rail against too much govt. and yet want more of it.
 

awpitt

Main Streeter
I'm not sure that's true. I am sure the founders did not believe that.

If that what you believe, I'd interested in see the information you're basing your belief on. The only nullification I'm aware of is jury nullification. Are you saying that if I don't like the speed limit that I can ignore (nullify) it and drive however fast I want?
 

This_person

Well-Known Member
If that what you believe, I'd interested in see the information you're basing your belief on. The only nullification I'm aware of is jury nullification. Are you saying that if I don't like the speed limit that I can ignore (nullify) it and drive however fast I want?
So, you seem hung up on speed limits. Let's talk about those.

Governments build most roads. They are engineered to be driven at given speeds. They are given an allowance for entry from driveways and other roads and other accesses based on government allowance, and that is all taken into consideration when establishing a limit on the speed one may drive. The ability of a driver (tested to be safe to drive on the roads by the government) to drive on the roads (established primarily by the government) in vehicles (of specific safety standards established by the government) is also taken into account.

Thus, it is perfectly reasonable for the state, per the tenth amendment to the constitution, to establish limits on speed on a given road.

The location of my given child (not yours, not a politicians, not the guy down the street) is my responsibility and not the government's. There is no reasonable justification for the government to establish where my child should be. To PROTECT the child from actual danger, there's good reason for an adjudicated, challengeable-by-due process reason for the government to say where my child should NOT be, but "anywhere but school" is not a reasonable place my child should NOT be.

The base assumption that the government can establish where my children should be is that the government knows best, and has ultimate authority. This is antithetical to the US Constitution and founding principles of this nation.

In 1798, the legislatures of Virginia and Kentucky approved resolutions that affirmed the states’ right to resist federal encroachments on their powers. If the federal government has the exclusive right to judge the extent of its own powers, warned the resolutions’ authors (James Madison and Thomas Jefferson, respectively), it will continue to grow – regardless of elections, the separation of powers, and other much-touted limits on government power. The Virginia Resolutions spoke of the states’ right to “interpose” between the federal government and the people of the state; the Kentucky Resolutions (in a 1799 follow-up to the original resolutions) used the term “nullification” – the states, they said, could nullify unconstitutional federal laws.

As such, it is equally reasonable to say that the people, per the tenth, also have the right to nullify state authority where it does not and should not exist.
 
Top