Forget about parents or teachers teaching manners. Not going to happen with the possible exception of their own home when Dad and Mom are eating. This is not a criticism of minorities, there is little difference in white or black, asian a little better. Mexicans eat in their own places, hispanics, I don't know.

Whitewater has always been full. I was told 40 something kids moved to the two schools, Whitewater and Sandycreek from Fayetteville county highschool. I asked that my child leave Sandycreek and go to Whitewater and was turned down, saying all kids must go to the school in their district. My kid is white, I am thinking these players are black and that makes the difference. If Fayette county high school already had openings, which I am told is the case, and Whitewater is full, which I was also told, why else would you break the rules and let them go? This is reverse discrimination. I can't wait to move!

I don't know anything about the high school situation. So, I have no comment about that. However, please understand that there really is no such thing as "reverse discrimination". From the Webster's Dictionary:

Main Entry: dis·crim·i·na·tion
Pronunciation: dis-"kri-m&-'nA-sh&n
Function: noun
1 a : the act of discriminating b : the process by which two stimuli differing in some aspect are responded to differently
2 : the quality or power of finely distinguishing
3 a : the act, practice, or an instance of discriminating categorically rather than individually b : prejudiced or prejudicial outlook, action, or treatment
synonym see DISCERNMENT

Although Websters does provide a definition for "reverse discrimination", it is, largely, because of common usage. That is to say, their definition of "reverse discrimination" (discrimination against whites or males (as in employment or education)) is already contemplated within the definition of "discrimination" (#3 to be exact) and only came into existence because of common (mis)use. Discrimination has no forward or reverse; it's wrong in any direction.

Peace and good luck in your move.

-------------------------------
If you and I are always in agreement, one of us is likely armed and dangerous.

Reverse discrimination
From The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, also available from The American Heritage Dictionary, Wilkopedia, Merriam-Webster's Dictionary of Law and Dictionary.com

Reverse discrimination is a term used to describe discriminatory policies or acts that benefit a historically sociopolitically nondominant group (typically women and minorities), at the expense of a historically sociopolitically dominant group (typically men and majority races).

Particularly in the U.S., the term is used to imply that underqualified members of minority groups are being hired and promoted instead of more qualified members of majority groups. [1] [2] [3], [4], [5]

It is worth noting that in particular, racial quotas for collegiate admission were held to be unconstitutional in the United States, although non-quota race preferences are legal.

Many legal cases involving claims of "reverse discrmination" are settled before they go to court. [6]

Criticism of the term itself: (Your point)

The term reverse discrimination has been criticized by advocates of Affirmative Action as casting it in a negative light, without due consideration of its aims.

It's a noun, like 'moron'. Peace Out SWMBO.

OldSchoolFootball,

It is unfortunate that you have chosen to engage in a personal attack in response to a purely academic post.

First and foremost, we know that Wikipedia is edited by anyone who is so inclined. We also know that Dictionaries include words and phrases that come into existence as a result of common usage. So, to that extent, your response largely proves my point -- that discrimination (broadly defined) can be practiced by people of every race, creed, nationality and gender, and can be wielded against people of every race, creed, nationality and gender. People have created a new definition for those instances in which a member of a dominant population experiences discrimination at the hands of a member of a non-dominant population. Although the act is the same, only the source of the act is different.

Your post seems to suggest that I am an advocate of Affirmative Action; you could not be farther from the truth. Although I am vaguely aware of the Dekalb County Library situation, I do not know enough detail about it to speak knowledgeably on the topic. I am educated enough to restrict myself to topics about which I have adequate and accurate information.

That said, we are all familiar with cases in which "unqualified" people get a job over more "qualified" people. It happens every time some business owner elevates his progeny to senior management on the basis of nothing other than his genetic composition. I do not defend practices which favor the unqualified over the qualified and nothing in my post can be read to imply such a position. I am an advocate of precise speech, logic and intelligence.

It is good to see that you have mastered the parts of speech. I wish you well in mastering the other two.

-------------------------------
If you and I are always in agreement, one of us is likely armed and dangerous.

call it, or disclaim it, as it pleases you, but the word came into being because valid claims by whitea of discrimination charges being taken over the line, and others sitting back and letting these same people bear the blunt of it. Did you read about the head of the libraries for Dekalb, with many degrees, being displaced, demoted and sent to an all black library and being displaced by a black woman who had never been past high school? This kind of thing was so common, and then Lee Parks took this and many other cases, and won. This is what is about to start here with the school systems way of placating some at the exspense of so many others

.