Posted on 09/26/2005 10:31:48 PM PDT by Bonaparte
Private institutions, whether religious or secular, thrive on "sameness." This isn't a bad thing or a good thing, but just the way the world works. Administrators (paid administrators) of these institutions are given the responsibility of keeping that "sameness" intact. That's true for the guy who manages the country club and the school administrator.
The school did demonstrate the moral high ground.....they stuck by the rules.
Helping kids should be more important than any sin committed by a parent.
How do you want this kid helped? By the school telling her during Bible class that her "mommies" are in open sin? Yeah. That'll help. And this is a SCHOOL not a neighborhood outreach. What makes you think this kid would accept being told what the Bible says about her "mommies"? This, from the article, is what the kid thinks of the school enforcing their published rules: As for the school's leadership, "They should be embarrassed," Shay said.
You misunderstand what's going on here. This is a setup. The "mommies" and kid had a press conference in front of the school. Believers, all too often, cave to this kind of pressure. This school drew a line in the sand, as is their right.
Again with the "innocent child," OY VEY!!! Pigtails and hopscotch, right? I remember what I was like at 14, dear. I was a smug know-it-all, just like this innocent child, and I knew all about sex--hetero and homo--just like this child. The good Lord and most FReepers know I am woefully unscholared with regard to the good book, but I am fairly certain that my Prophet never said anything about unrepenant sin being without consequence. I have pointed out several times now that this doe-eyed, thumb-sucking wee lassie (of 14!) has herself committed sin with regard to her admission to the school. I fully expect you to continue to ignore that point, since it's probably a tough one to get around.
Yes it is. She was expelled not because of anything she did
Go back and read the thread real slow like. It was something the young lady did that got this ball rolling.
I'm rolling my eyes. Can you see me rolling my eyes??! They're spinning like wheels over here!
Why trot out theories? I like the facts of this case.
The mommies lied when they accepted the terms of the school's admissions policy.
I don't even really want to think about other facts, I've already cited many throughout this thread. The one I cite here seems to stand pretty well on its own.
Because he was trying to change their sinful ways.
I hope that your point is that we should strive to do the same. Clearly, he wasn't screaming at them while having a meal. He was listening and being...uh...mannerly. Otherwise, I doubt they would have stayed very long.
While I think we all should, I will not tell you or others that you must.
I only speak for myself. Not you or the school board.
Let me add that I feel sorry for the child. She must be confused and hurt.
My thing all along with this has been that I hope that it was a prayerful move on behalf of the school. That being said, I am not sure about people who would have a press conference outside the school to talk about their daughter's expulsion.
You're right. Any kid in this situation would be hurt and confused on some level.
I do. I also see a child being sacrificed on the profane altar of 'Gay Rights' by two scheming homosexuals, which is the worst part of it all.
Sort of like ethnic cleansing?
Very different. There is no moral component to ethnicity, whereas -- as all human beings are instinctively aware, whether they admit it or not -- homosexuality is a profoundly immoral act for all persons, under all circumstances, at all times.
What a target rich environment your post is.
(1)"ethnically cleansed" -- you are making a demonstrably false comparison between non-chosen ethnicity, and deliberate sinful sexual conduct. Ethnic "contamination" does not exist; sexual contamination is an all too well documented phenomenon.
(2) "whom he felt" -- this has nothing to do with feelings whatsoever. The Christian resistance to "gay rights" is the result of deeply well thought out moral reasoning, with revelation as a starting point. Also, an almost equally strong case against homosexuality can be made from a combination of history and natural law, without any religious references at all. Either way, feelings have nothing do to with it.
(3)"because Hitler was Catholic" -- if you knew anything at all about Christianity in general or Catholicism in particular, you would know that Hitler was by NO STRETCH of the imagination, a PRACTICISING Christian, Catholic or otherwise. Only PRACTICISING Christians enter heaven, not those who were raised in church and abandoned its teachings in adulthood. If you repeat that "Hitler was Catholic" calumny one more time, I shall be forced to ping BlackElk.
(4) "discriminating against a child because her parent is homosexual" -- again, you must be reminded that the contract was between the Christian school and the parents, and the latter are required to uphold Christian moral standards in the home. This is to protect ALL the children in the school from unwholesome influences that might be brought in through less-that-committed families. By definition, a homosexual couple can't uphould Christian moral standards except by breaking up and publicly renouncing homosexuality -- which they did not do.
Furthermore, the flash point of the controversy was a pro-homosexual speech made at the school by the girl herself --which ultimately proves the school's point: corruption in the home will spill over into the school.
If you believe for one moment, that this whole scenario wasn't set up by the lesbian "family" precisely for the purpose of attacking Christian education, you're living in a dream world.
Finally... This problem isn't just about homosexuals -- a few years ago there was a case where a stripper was sending her kid to a Christian school. She was told to either change jobs or pull her kid from school. She refused to change jobs, even when people stepped forward and made offers.
...and this is a new development, how?
Come to NYC and go to Chelsea. Walk up to the first gay guy you meet and ask him where he's originally from. Then repeat the process a hundred times. No doubt 75% will be from small town America.
Looking for hypocrisy in religion is kind of a senseless exercise. You may find it, but nobody ever changes their views, not ever.
LOL!
You're right, it really is a senseless exercise.
I've been to NYC once and had a really great time but I sure don't know how you guys can live there. You can't get any sleep with all that noise!
There's a bottomline to this discussion. These women had a clue that they weren't liked and they tried to buy their way in, for whatever reason. They may be deeply religious and have reconciled that with their ability to play softball, but surely they knew somebody was going to say something someday.
What cracks me up are these gay guys who come to New York and spend years bitching and moaning about what they left behind. They miss the mountains, the desert, the woods, whatever. I have a stock answer: Buy A Postcard.
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.