Quote:
|
Originally Posted by SC Ump
Especially with the history of this thread, I am surprised at the tone of your answer. To me it comes across as smart a$$.
|
Take it however you want. It was simply asking the poster to back up his statement with something other than apocryphal stories or opinions.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by SC Ump
Have you read Title IX? .
|
Yes.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by SC Ump
My understanding of Title IX is that it means equal funding for qirls and boys programs.
|
Incorrect. It mean equal opportunity. Opportunity does not equal funding. Nor does it mean equal facilities.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by SC Ump
I do not believe it is limited to a sport-by-sport evaluation,
|
True, it is much broader than merely sports.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by SC Ump
but just that a school cannot budget money unfairly earmarked for one specific demographic.
|
You could read that into it, but "fair" does not mean "equal."
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by SC Ump
..how 'booster club' money would affect this parity.
|
If the booster club is closely associated with the school's atheltic program, it is not separated out. What I was referring to was not booster club money, but (for example) Little League raising money to build dugouts on elementary school fields. That is separate, and does not obligate the school to spend tax-payer money to similarly upgrade the softball fields. I hope you can see how that would be very unfair to both the Little League and the taxpayers, since the end result of such a policy would likely be the LLs would not be allowed to improve the facilities for their use. Given the nutty courts these days, all this does not mean such a ruling will not be made (or maybe already has been made). But it is not in the law itself.