Posted on 05/17/2002 3:36:51 AM PDT by L.N. Smithee
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."
James 4:17: "Therefore to him that knoweth to do good, and doeth [it] not, to him it is sin."
No, I would not let my children to play at the home of a stripper. It's not only stripping and nude modeling but all the sleazy associated with it. For example, most of these clubs are controlled by organized crime and there is rampant use of drugs. Also, while strippers make up only a very tiny percentage of American women, they provide an exceptionally high perentage of female killers -- I forgot the estimated percentage but it was way above average.
She absolutly shocked me with her reply: "I can make $2,000 a night and it is all legal." She was using her lovely body to expoit men and pay her way for a college degree.
Cool lady, more power to you!
dealing drugs hurts others as well as oneself....as does stripping for money: stripping for money, whether this woman believes it or not, lowers her self-esteem, potentially causes others to lust after her (against biblical teachings), maybe even clouds other decisions with the "I do what I had to do" attitude.
So if it's legal it's moral? I don't get you.
I have absolutly no problem when a woman uses her natural tallents to make a profit.
How about her natural talents as a prostitute or drug dealer? Would you deny her a living?
I am beginning to think that I am unusual in that I don't sign any contract before I read it completely.
Here's what the article says about what Silvas signed in order to enroll her daughter:
Silvas, in effect, pledged to be the type of parent that the school thinks would support their type of religious instruction. But it turns out Silvas' values are -- obviously -- different than those who run the school and enforce the policy. Therefore, after paying hundreds of dollars each month for the privilege to have her daughter instructed by Capital Christian Center, she is now choosing to reject the school's philosophy -- even after offers to financially assist her in a sinless way that would be compliant with her contract.
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."
The school isn't expelling her child as much as she is walking away with her daughter from the school in order to continue at her lucrative and loose profession. There's no fraud here. The school never said, "We'll educate anybody's child for $400 a month." There would be no controversy here if Silvas wasn't stirring it up (think the school called the TV stations?), and regardless of her not mentioning litigation, I have to wonder what her true motives are. On top of that, it shouldn't be too long before Hefner, Guccione, or Flynt comes-a-callin' with offers that will pay for her daughter's college education -- or, at the very least, she'll be booked on Fox Celebrity Boxing.
that's illegal
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.