Posted on 05/17/2002 3:36:51 AM PDT by L.N. Smithee
Friday, May 17, 2002
Stripper mom: I'm following the Bible
Mother says high-paying job gives her time to teach daughter values
The mother of a 5-year-old California girl facing expulsion from the Christian school she attends acknowledges her job as a stripper is not one to be proud of, but says her work allows her time to follow the Bible by being a "hands-on" parent.
As WorldNetDaily reported yesterday, the mother, Christina Silvas, was called into a conference at Capital Christian School in Sacramento after school officials became aware that she works as a part-time strip-tease dancer at a local club.
Rick Cole, senior pastor of Capital Christian Church, which sponsors the school, and other staff members met with Silvas to discuss their contention that her occupation is in violation of an agreement with and commitment to the school philosophy that parents must sign before the children are admitted as students. Her daughter would have to be removed, she was told, if Silvas did not quit her job.
The officials offered to cover the girl's last month's tuition of $400 if Silvas would change jobs. They also offered to support Silvas both financially and spiritually, and to help her find a different job that was in keeping with the school's values. Silvas declined the offer.
As a requirement for admission, parents of prospective students must sign a "commitment" to support the philosophy of the school. That philosophy, in part, reads: "Emphasis is placed on learning about God and the truths of God's Word in relationship to man and his world; recognizing that the way to God comes through personal faith in Jesus Christ; and Christian maturity comes by application of the truths of the Bible in all areas of life." In signing the document, parents agree to maintain a "partnership" with the school "regarding the standards and criteria of a Christian learning structure that involves the entire family."
According to reporter George Franco of KOVR-TV, Silvas has retained legal counsel and is considering filing a motion for an immediate injunction to have the child remain in school while the mother continues to work as a stripper.
Last night, Cole and Silvas discussed the matter with Bill O'Reilly, host of "The O'Reilly Factor" on Fox News Channel.
"We have appealed to her to change her occupation," Cole told O'Reilly, adding that "God would bless" such a decision.
While Silvas said she agrees with the school's philosophy, she sidestepped the question of whether she considered her occupation a "sinful lifestyle."
"I am just doing it for a season," Silvas reasoned, adding, "I'm not proud of what I'm doing."
Silvas argued that since her job takes her away for only three days a week – the days her daughter, Abby, is with her father – she is therefore available to be "the one to teach [Abby] the Bible at home," thus upholding her commitment to partner with the school in her daughter's education.
"The Bible calls on parents to be hands-on," Silvas told O'Reilly. She sees her situation as better than that of a single mother who puts her child in daycare for several hours a day.
When asked if it was fair that the school's actions were, in effect, punishing the daughter, Cole put the responsibility for the expulsion on the mother.
"My concern is, who is the cause of this consequence?" he asked. "The consequence of [Silvas'] choice is affecting her daughter adversely."
None of the participants in the televised segment talked about the possibility of litigation. Silvas did mention, however, that she hoped to find a new job soon and that people outside Capital Christian Church had offered to help her find work.
Previous story:
Kindergartener's stripper-mom in church-school flap
There is no comparison because I don't think that it is immoral, maybe distasteful but not immoral
we can just agree to disagree. (not to mention, as I told one particular harbor yesterday, "maybe I have issues with this mother who apparently has a good enough body to make a lot of money stripping...and I know I don't!!...and she's obviously had at least one baby!" sure, feminazis would have my head for that...but I'm only human)
Sorry, I didn't mean that what she is doing is not wrong, but just that a lot of the passages cited in this thread are really more applicable to the men. The Arabs love blaming women for their lust, and so I don't like to see Christians do that.
A Christian, male or female, does not encourage or become an accessory to other folks engaging in sin. If viewing a woman with lust is a sin, then being a woman who takes money to be a lust object is encouraging others to sin.
This has nothing do to with Arabs beating women for showing their ankles. If she were walking down the street and a man lusted after her, that is one thing. But we are talking about her "line of work." Her job description is to arouse lust in men.
SD
After reading your posts on many threads for an extended period of time, i have noticed that you like to play very fast and loose with the english language.
Lesson learned and accepted. Actually, I did not realize my error until you told me about it.
THANKS!
To be fair, AP, that's a subjective interpretation. Some would claim, and I'm one of them, that stripping's a form of dancing, like Britney Spears' caterwalling is a form of music.
Some -- not all -- Muslims blame women for their lust, and as a result demand that they cover themselves completely. Christ said men are responsible for their lust, saying that looking at a woman that way was adultery in the heart. It is a natural progression of that principle that Christian women are not supposed to deliberately entice men into lusting after them (Matthew 5:28) by uncovering themselves completely.
For the same reason that lies are called "misstatements". It's an attempt to make something bad appear harmless.
you can send your kids to the best schools...but kids are going to learn from their parents....good or bad.
Why isn't the hypocrisy that this mom signed an agreement with the school, then still did whatever she wanted to do and cried when the school pointed it out? Is she going to tell the child HONESTLY what happened, "well, mommy signed a piece of paper promising to do something and then did something else...." there's hypocrisy for you...not to mention running to the media and giving half the story.
I would expect the school to uphold the Christian values according to the signed agreement.
You only see what you want to see, and what you want to see is hypocrisy.
The argument that some strippers are prostitutes and drug dealers can't be applied to all of them. She probably isn't doing those things (there's certainly no evidence here that she is). She's stripping, which appears to be legal in her locale.
That said, if what she is doing breaks a contract with this private entity, then they are right.
Dave in Eugene
BINGO!
This mother, who claims to be wanting a Christian education for her daughter, is teaching her a *terrible* lesson. She's teaching her that it's OK to be lukewarm about what God very plainly says. The girl's innocence could well be being mutilated here. What does God say about corrupting the innocence of a child?
This isn't about the mother's "right" (under man's law, not God's) to work as a stripper. It's about what a girl child learns when she knows that mother won't stop taking her clothes off for money *even when it means giving up her child's school enrollment.*
I think the school was wrong in insisting the child leave before the end of term. That is also hurtful to the child. The right thing to do is let the child finish the term, at least.
As to whether or not a Christian school should accept the child of "scandalous" sinners, that's an individual call. Not all Christians see it the same way. Many people put their children in Christian schools because they specifically want to isolate their children from "unbelievers," the "unrighteous," etc. They know that children form friendships at school, go over to each others houses, etc. I would be very reluctant to let a first or second grade child go over to the house of someone I knew was in some branch of the sex trade - I would fear for my child's safety, not from the mother necessarily, but from whatever "boyfriends," pimps, etc. might be hanging around.
This is speculation, but most likely the mother *knew* what kind of conservative school she was dealing with. She had a chance to change things, and refused. If this means public school or a more "liberal" Christian school, then so be it.
By this logic, the school would have to accept "blood" money from an abortion doctor who is a member of NAMBLA, and advocates the institution of a Muslim State that would outlaw Christianity.
After all, I might not consider it immorral.
A reasonable person would agree that stripping is not a moral behavior.
If the school knew she worked at the strip club before the student enrolled, the school would be hyprocrites. But what happened was the school offered her free tution (the original reason for being a stripper) networking, and spirtual guidance. All the parent had to do was abide by her voluntarly signed contract. The mother wanted money more than a Christian upbringing for the child. The child is a victim of the mothers greed.
It hurt her daughter.
-Kevin
Yeah...she'll be doing that "Do as I say, not as I do" type teaching that has proven to be so effective.
Hence, she can not refuse the type of work that allows her to do so.
She sure can. Face it, most women in her situation find ways without shaking their posteriors in the faces of horny drunk men she never wants to see again. She may have to struggle, but isn't it her daughter she's talking about?
Silvas was given choices, and she's shown what her priority is.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.