Posted on 08/04/2021 7:32:30 PM PDT by marshmallow
Left-wing lunatic parents have no business sending their kids to a Christian school. They are parasites on anything not liberal.
The school just dodged a bullet. Buh-bye, unrepentant apostates!
I disagree with your suggestion that the school should alter their instructions to cater to secular viewpoints. It’s their job to teach Christian and Catholic values, even to the parents.
It's the school's core mission to teach all subjects through the beliefs of Catholicism, including to any parents who wish to enroll their children there. The purpose of the school is not primarily to make money, which would require them to compromise with market tastes. They are supposed to teach the values expressed in the decision. I say this as a protestant who sent mine to a Catholic school, expecting it to adhere to Christian bedrock values, and was disappointed by the iin-your-face secularization.
Just guessing here, but I think female church attendees don't climb up on jungle gyms, play doctor, or run on the playground and fall with their legs in the air during the mass. It's kind of expected that during mass, women will either sit, kneel or stand, and men will not try to peek up their skirts.
“Uniforms help self-conscious adolescents deal with each other as equals because they are not divided by something as definitionally-“superficial” as clothing. Cliques form largely on the basis of external appearance, with the kids whose parents buy them expensive, trendy clothes looking down on the kids whose parents don’t, or can’t.
When parents are doing this type of thing, and I’ll bet there are less that buy the expensive clothes than there are students that are self-conscious, then they are just as much an enabler of failed education as trying to moderate the success of a student, if not more. Students need to come to grips with their strengths to expand on their abilities down the road rather than be equalized to those who do not have those strengths but may in other areas. But both will be suppressed to expand on them because of the effort to equalize student capacity. So with anything that limits the kids you are either slowing the possible development of some and offering the opportunity to never try with the other because they are equal, not even competitive with themselves.
A perfect example is sports in many systems. Everyone gets a reward. They have no idea if they accomplished anything at all because everyone accomplished it. Is this how you want your child to be educated when there is no recognition of success or failure until it is crunch time in the real world? I would assume you want your student prepared to take on the world and win. The way the schools are doing it is preparing them almost for survival.
wy69
I had to wear uniforms from grammar school all the way through high school. In college I was finally free of the things, but then I signed up for AFROTC...
“A day has 24 hours....plenty of hours to wear other clothing.”
As long as the future of the child is being constructed and the uniforms are being used to suppress them with equality, you are not wishing for the child to be recognized for success and encouraged. That will fail.
Limiting children’s behavior with equalization makes everyone prepared for fast food. And that will move on to the next generation until everyone lives in slums. Having those that are motivated and encouraged to exceed, makes them successful and maybe own the house on the hill. But if they are not asked or even allowed to exceed by having them equal, they won’t. And unless you are doing it at home with schooling, they will have a good time with their friends doing as little as the weakest link. Count the number of ball caps being worn backwards. It makes hardly any sense to do it...but it’s trendy.
wy69
One poster responded to my question and stated that the diocese does not require women to wear dresses to church. This means, I guess, that the diocese is comfortable with women affirming their God-given identity without the necessity of wearing dresses. So, if it is acceptable at church, I would think girls could wear pants to school, particularly during the cold months and at recess (or is recess a thing of the past). I should think some kind of difference between the boys’ uniform and the girls’ uniform would be sufficient, like different colors, lace versus plain collars or something.
FYI, when I attended public school all girls were required to wear dresses but it interfered with tetherball, monkey bars and foot racing against the boys quite a bit, and was quite frosty walking to and from school. (If I wanted to be perverse, I would say if the girls have to wear dresses all the time then require the boys to wear shorts all the time and see how well that would go over.) These days I have met young women who only own dresses for formal occasions since they are no longer required at work, church or even funerals, for Pete’s sake. Women and girls do wear dresses at the church I attend.
As I stated earlier, I had to wear dresses, jumpers, skirts and blouses as a girl attending grammar school and high school in the 50's and 60's. Then in 1980, I went to work for the New York State Department of Correctional Services, and wore a uniform for the next 25 years. Saved a lot of money on clothes back then, and even now, I have a scant wardrobe because about the only places I go these days is grocery shopping, and to my doctor appointments.
Tempest in a teapot!
The school is better off without these crazy parents wanting attention. They are the type who are likely to file frivolous lawsuits and make fake accusations.
The overly dramatic local news delivery is a real laugh.
Let me get this straight, one couple pulled two kids? WGAF?
boys are required to wear dress slacks, dress shoes, a sport coat and tie. Girls should wear a dress, suit, or skirt and blouse. Skirts and dresses must be at or below the knee.
You as a parent don't like it then send your kid somewhere else............
Annual tuition is approx. $28,000 so you know what you're getting in to and don't complain about dress code bullshit............
You send your kid there for an education, not social justice indoctrination........
I suppose the diocese takes for granted that, by the time their congregants are women, they have already developed a clear idea of which sex they were born into and what their catechism and diocese advises about sex and its nature, roles and purposes. I notice that the school’s response document did mention that while grown women wear pants, they still look or style themselves differently from men.
The school’s policy also stated that the girl pupils could wear tights, leggings or shorts under their skirts, presumably for modesty or warmth, so it seems they have thought this through with the idea of affirming their wards in the Biblical idea of God’s design for two sexes without any intention to hobble girls’ sports or freeze the girls to death.
Today’s young people have been raised in this culture of anti-Christ, anti-establishmentarianism, protest, litigiousness, and taking offense. There is no flexibility, compassion, tolerance, and certainly no forgiveness. It’s as if words, clever argumentation and catching people out is more important than any other consideration.
I reacted to the “gotcha” nature of the query about whether the church allowed women to wear pants, as it struck me that way.
You know: snotty.
Understandable. A lot of posters treat Catholicism in snotty ways. Mine wasn’t meant to be but I can see it looked that way.
No, yours was not. The original snark was.
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.