Chester Darling , the lawyer who previously brought a suit by Lynn parents all the way to the Supreme Court, hopes that a successful challenge will prompt other Massachusetts school districts to end their desegregation programs....
Darling said yesterday. "What benefit of integration in kindergarten do you get if you force a white kid to sit next to a black kid? There isn't any."
Oh, it's not beneficial to make sure our children learn a little bit about diversity at a young age at all. Nope, we want them to grow up as uneducated bigots, right? After all, every (bigoted) parent wants their kids to be just like them.
Lynn's current plan affects its 18 public elementary schools, which draw from small pockets of the district, more than its three high schools, said Capano.
"It's a balanced system right now," Capano said. "Our neighborhoods are sometimes very cultural- and very race-oriented. So, if you keep a very low-economic neighborhood going to the same school, then you get an unbalanced school -- and that's what we fear."
Heaven forbid a little diversity. We can't have none of that. Separate, I guess, is equal after all.
Posts
11 comments:
I think this is a very lazy assessment of the situation and the article. I'll ignore the obvious bias in the article by referring it to a desegregation program, which is simply an emotional phrase to derive sympathy for it. As far as the meat and facts, the schools shouldn't restrict a student who wishes to transfer schools because it would upset "racial balance". To not give people that choice, in my eyes, is to say there's something inherently wrong with majority-black schools because if we didn't force them, all the white students would go to a different school.
Look at what Justice Roberts wrote:
"To the extent the objective is sufficient diversity so that students see fellow students as individuals rather than solely as members of a racial group, using means that treat students solely as members of a racial group is fundamentally at cross-purposes with that end."
How is this incorrect?
Joe, was it lazy? A little. Was it right? Most definately. I'm not going to spend all sorts of paragraphs writing about something I view as pretty basic.
The simple fact is that integration is a good thing. Even if all the schools in Lynn were equally fabulous (any many of them are decent), that doesn't change the fact that it benefits children to be around a diverse body of peers. If Lynn has the capability to do that, they should.
From what I understand, the policy only effects people who wish to change districts - which means that everyone would have at least some choice. Furthermore, it wouldn't be impossible to get your child into a different district if he or she weren't a minority. My aunt had all three of her boys go to Lynn's best elementary school at the time (shoemaker), even though none of them lived in the Shoemaker district and were a pasty pale.
Very few people are hurt by Lynn's policy, but almost everyone gets to be educated in a more diverse, better environment.
But isn't it still inherently racist to deny a transfer on the grounds of the race of the person in question?
It's worth pausing and remembering who Chester Darling is:
http://www.boston.com/business/articles/2006/02/22/a_legal_lightning_rod_bows_out/
Chester Darling has been a longtime champion of difficult, often unpopular causes. He fought for, and won, a unanimous Supreme Court ruling that banned gays and lesbians from marching in the South Boston St. Patrick's Day parade. He railed against buffer zones that protect abortion clinics from protesters. He successfully defended a Woburn minister's right to whip his son with a leather belt. He sued the town of Lexington for refusing to display a Nativity scene on its public green. He sought to overturn race-based school admissions policies.
(As an aside, when Brian Camenker is the only person they can find to say nice things about you, you may be on the wrong side of history).
On integration, the salient point is this: it's easy to hate in the abstract. The point of the Lynn law, is not to create separation based on race, but to put a check on it. Also to prevent a two tiered system. Acknowledging that segregation exists and is bad for society is NOT racist. Nor is trying to prevent it.
If you find yourself agreeing with the likes of Howie Carr, Whacko Hurley, and Chester Darling, you might want to take a step back...
But if people want to choose to segregate themselves, shouldn't they be afforded that choice? Or is the argument going to be made that people shouldn't be allowed to choose to do something that others would deem morally deplorable?
Yes, people who choose to segregate themselves can do so. They can, and do, in private schools.
-
But there are people who cannot afford to make that choice. In this case, it should be allowed in public schools.
joe, why do you think people want to segregate themselves?
Because they see a correlation between racial makeup at a school and the success of students.
"Asshole parents in Lynn rejoice!"
This is hardly a true "Liberal" attitude to have with someone whom you disagree.
"Heaven forbid a little diversity. We can't have none of that. Separate, I guess, is equal after all."
It is the forced nature of it that is so repulsive. Are you in favor of arranged mariage as well?
Post a Comment