School Suspends Teens For Wearing Crucifixes

[sherri79]

This is only when they are in school and that is reasonable. It's not the govt that makes these rules it is school admin. and this is usually in the best interest of our kids. I am ok with it. Tryng to keep peace where thousands of young peple congregate is a major undertaking. If you want to let your kids go to school in gang colors more power to ya but why would you want to do that?!

the school is the government unless it is a private school. in fact it is our first real exposure to the government. are we raising our kids to be good citizens or just quite citizens. religious freedom is a fundamental right. when they took away the right to wear a color to school it was no worth the fight. ok i can understand that. a cuff in ur pants. not worth the trouble if it is done for safety. the right to express your religion? do you have a line you would not allow them to cross? if the government said it was for your own safety is their a point when you say 1 right to many has been taken? my favorite poem. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_they_came...

When the Nazis came for the communists,
I remained silent;
I was not a communist.

When they locked up the social democrats,
I remained silent;
I was not a social democrat.

When they came for the trade unionists,
I did not speak out;
I was not a trade unionist.

When they came for the Jews,
I remained silent;
I wasn't a Jew.

When they came for me,
there was no one left to speak out.

if at some point we do not stand up and say you can not have this right from me you have given it up. what right will you allow them to take next?

 

[KOOL LOOK]

I can't live by fear in the whatever. People cause so much fear in the hearts and minds of others, and it's just wrong and goes against the teachings and instructions by God, our Greatest mightiest School Principal. If it was to be done, wouldn't he have mentioned such a thing somewhere in the Scriptures for us to adhere too for the benefit of our very lives?

We must never make decisions and choices based on a fear by especially wrong doers like gangs and the ill informed. This is a great discussion members, carry on. :clap:

Sherri, I especially appreciate your posts, their above in the higher thinking of matters.

 

[JBean]

the school is the government unless it is a private school. in fact it is our first real exposure to the government. are we raising our kids to be good citizens or just quite citizens. religious freedom is a fundamental right. when they took away the right to wear a color to school it was no worth the fight. ok i can understand that. a cuff in ur pants. not worth the trouble if it is done for safety. the right to express your religion? do you have a line you would not allow them to cross? if the government said it was for your own safety is their a point when you say 1 right to many has been taken? my favorite poem. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_they_came... if at some point we do not stand up and say you can not have this right from me you have given it up. what right will you allow them to take next?

The crosses are not about religion they are about gang activity. That's the bottom line. It is only during school hours and they have the right to dictate behavior during that time. Do you think it is wrong to keep boys and girls from dressing provocatively at school out of respect of their free speech rights? If not why?

 

[sherri79]

The crosses are not about religion they are about gang activity. That's the bottom line. It is only during school hours and they have the right to dictate behavior during that time. Do you think it is wrong to keep boys and girls from dressing provocatively at school out of respect of their free speech rights? If not why?

the right to be sexy is not expressly given to us by the founding fathers. students have fought for and won the right to wear clothing with a political message on it during school hours in some cases. it comes down to a judge deciding if the message the student is expressing is to distracting for other students to learn. the school claims it is and the student and the judge did not agree. the cross may be about a gang as the school fears or it may be about religion as the student claims. i still do not want the government to measure if i am devout enough to be allowed to wear a cross. in the cases where a school has won they did so by banning all shirts with slogans not walking down the hall and telling 1 student you may not wear support our troops but allow another student to wear bring our troops home. a cross is a religious item and if you doubt that let a school hang 1 up in its hall and watch the lawsuits pour in. by allowing students to wear a star of david or a crecent or a christian cross but not a crucifix it respects 1 religion over others.

 

[JBean]

the right to be sexy is not expressly given to us by the founding fathers. students have fought for and won the right to wear clothing with a political message on it during school hours in some cases. it comes down to a judge deciding if the message the student is expressing is to distracting for other students to learn. the school claims it is and the student and the judge did not agree. the cross may be about a gang as the school fears or it may be about religion as the student claims. i still do not want the government to measure if i am devout enough to be allowed to wear a cross. in the cases where a school has won they did so by banning all shirts with slogans not walking down the hall and telling 1 student you may not wear support our troops but allow another student to wear bring our troops home. a cross is a religious item and if you doubt that let a school hang 1 up in its hall and watch the lawsuits pour in. by allowing students to wear a star of david or a crecent or a christian cross but not a crucifix it respects 1 religion over others.

I do not think this has anything to do with religion at all nor is our right to wear a cross protected at school.
The reason this is prohibited is not to stifle religion, it is to stifle gangs. have you ever been exposed to gang activity? We have them here in SoCal and had several gangs right where my kids went to school. It is nasty business. Trying to keep order at our high school of 3500 kids isn't easy. If banning accessories helps maintain order at the school I am all for it. Our gangs killed other kids. If not wearing a cross can save any kid and puts down gang activity in any way..I am all over it. There is a greater good than *me* in our community the greater good is *us*.

 

[sandraladeda]

As another poster mentioned, in some Hispanic countries, it is a common practice. Some religious orders wear a rosary as well - Dominicans and Redemptorists come to mind.

Contrary to many posts here, there is nothing wrong with wearing a rosary, if one's intent is reverent.

I checked it out on another forum - Catholic Answers. From this source, it appears that it really depends on the intent of the wearer. See link:

http://forums.catholic.com/showthread.php?t=98158


Quote: Essentially, sacramentals such as rosaries must be treated with respect, particularly if they have been blessed. Reverence is the attitude of awe or respect that is most often given to sacred things. By its very definition, it is an interior disposition that usually cannot be determined by onlookers by appearances alone. A person may be wearing a rosary as a statement of faith, to keep it handy for praying throughout the day, or to avoid losing it. Those reasons would be indicative of reverence and would not interfere with the canon’s directive that sacramentals must be treated reverently.

Ordinarily speaking, then, if someone is spotted wearing a rosary, he should be charitably presumed to be wearing it for just reasons. Only if the rosary is being put to an objectively sordid use (e.g., a rock star is using it as a prop in a music video, obscenely contrasting the symbolic purity of the rosary with the immodest or immoral actions of the performers) can we be sure that the rosary is being treated irreverently.

 

[KOOL LOOK]

I do not think this has anything to do with religion at all nor is our right to wear a cross protected at school.
The reason this is prohibited is not to stifle religion, it is to stifle gangs. have you ever been exposed to gang activity? We have them here in SoCal and had several gangs right where my kids went to school. It is nasty business. Trying to keep order at our high school of 3500 kids isn't easy. If banning accessories helps maintain order at the school I am all for it. Our gangs killed other kids. If not wearing a cross can save any kid and puts down gang activity in any way..I am all over it. There is a greater good than *me* in our community the greater good is *us*.

I really didn't want to jump in for I'm enjoying sherri and your discussion here, I'm totally entertained and think you two are on top of things and bringing up good points. I had this thought, for I feel sure eventually you or sherri will cover it for sure. :blowkiss:

Don't you think no matter what, societies killing machines are going to kill regardless of everything we do to prevent it? If it's in a heart to do so, their going to do it, regardless.

I also personally feel wearing that crucifix, will cause them to re-think their views and actions. Maybe not at that one moment in time, but you just can't continue to mess around in God's domain and not having something stick onto you, it's just not going to happen.

This very crucifix, while none has mentioned to date, has probably already turned around the heart of someone. Why do we seem to lose that aspect of the crucifix. All symbols, words, displays, anything having to do with God and his Kingdom causes things to happen in the physical natural earthly realm for that's a spriitual law. Wearing a crucifix has a power of it's very own, eventually even causing the most hardened to submit and come unto the Lord.

There was never a school shooting until the ten commanments were taken out of the public school system. I firmly believe anyone, including children and students who day after day read the commandments like "Thou shalt not kill", it does have an effect. It accomplishes what it has been set up and set out to do. God says' "My word doesn't leave me and come back void" That means when you read or hear any of his word, it is constantly impacting in the present and the future to come. For the Word will be here til the ends of the Earth, it shall never pass away.

So it just amazes me how so very hard lost people try to make it so because it's not going to happen. Thanks everyone for giving me an ear. Back to silence while I read the intelligent discussion between you two lovely youthful ladies.

ETA: I just scrolled up and read sandraladeda's post, just more confirmation the things of the spirit realm are powerful and alive here on Earth, can and do accomplish the things of God. Thanks sandra, inciteful post, I just said it Biblicly.

 

[sherri79]

I do not think this has anything to do with religion at all nor is our right to wear a cross protected at school.
The reason this is prohibited is not to stifle religion, it is to stifle gangs. have you ever been exposed to gang activity? We have them here in SoCal and had several gangs right where my kids went to school. It is nasty business. Trying to keep order at our high school of 3500 kids isn't easy. If banning accessories helps maintain order at the school I am all for it. Our gangs killed other kids. If not wearing a cross can save any kid and puts down gang activity in any way..I am all over it. There is a greater good than *me* in our community the greater good is *us*.

why should a low level government employee be allowed to decide what is a matter of faith and what is not. as a parent of course you have the right to choose for your child what they may wear. as a country we would be safer if we did away with all muslims. simple deport anyone we catch praying 5 times a day. we would be safer as a whole. it would be harder for terrorist to blend in with honest innocent muslims. of course we could not do that because we have freedom of religion. that freedom protects us on matters small and large.

you speak of how many gangs are in your area and from listening to you it seems to be alot. you also speak of banning so many things yet the gang problem still exist. it would seem to be a feel good measure that actually offers little protection instead of something of substance to keep our kids safe. kinda like the sex offender registry. hey we make the freaks sign in so you will feel safe instead of keep them in jail where they belong.

 

[JBean]

Where I grew up if you wore a pendleton shirt and khaki pants you were probably very affluent.
Where my kids are growing up if you wear a pendleton shirt and khaki pants you will probably get suspended.
Is it right? heck no! Is it the reality? yes. Because if we keep the gangs from wearing their monikers and clothing it does take some of their power away.
I didn't mind that my kids could not wear the clothes we enjoyed for several hours during the day because they have that freedom everyhwere else. To make the sacrifice to hopefull bring some safety to the masses, I have no probelm encouraging my kids to put their personal rights aside for the best interest of the whole.
The problem with the crucifix is that it has more meaning than clothes in our world. but it has the same meaning in gang world. It is a moniker for their gangs and has nothing to do with religion.
I don;t like it you guys. I think it stinks. But I have also seen what gangs can do to real living people. by taking their identifiers away it deflates them. But when they take our religious monikers away it does not deflate us because our meaning for the crucifix is so much more deep and profound.
I don't like any of this one bit either. but I get what is happening.

 

[JBean]

why should a low level government employee be allowed to decide what is a matter of faith and what is not. as a parent of course you have the right to choose for your child what they may wear. as a country we would be safer if we did away with all muslims. simple deport anyone we catch praying 5 times a day. we would be safer as a whole. it would be harder for terrorist to blend in with honest innocent muslims. of course we could not do that because we have freedom of religion. that freedom protects us on matters small and large.

This doesn;t even make sense to me as it relates to this issue Sherri sorry.

you speak of how many gangs are in your area and from listening to you it seems to be alot. you also speak of banning so many things yet the gang problem still exist. it would seem to be a feel good measure that actually offers little protection instead of something of substance to keep our kids safe. kinda like the sex offender registry. hey we make the freaks sign in so you will feel safe instead of keep them in jail where they belong.

But it does help Sherri and that is the point.

 

[sherri79]

This doesn;t even make sense to me as it relates to this issue Sherri sorry

the issue i was speaking about in that post was your statement on if the item was about religion or about gangs. the low level employee was the principal. i was saying i did not feel he should be allowed to decide my child's cross is worn due to gangs and not to my child's faith.

as for my comments on Muslims it was in response to your comments on There is a greater good than *me* in our community the greater good is *us*. each person in our country has rights. i used muslims as a example due to the fact we are currently faced with a war in a muslim country. we could take away the rights of the law abiding muslims and claim it is for our own safety. so what if a few "me" suffer to protect "us". we all know that would be wrong. i do not think it is ok to give up small rights so i see it as a fair comparison.

 

[JBean]

the issue i was speaking about in that post was your statement on if the item was about religion or about gangs. the low level employee was the principal. i was saying i did not feel he should be allowed to decide my child's cross is worn due to gangs and not to my child's faith.

I think this is the misunderstanding all around. the principal isn't accusing the kids of boasting gang monikers, but rather than trying to decide who is and who isn't it is just banned all around.
For example. I might take a tweezer on an airplane to use to pluck my eyebrows when I get to my destination. But some people take them on board to gouge out the eyes of a flight attendent while they hijack a plane. How does the airline know who is who? they don't. So we are all banned from bringing them on board. It is annoying that I cannot exercise my personal freedom to bring whatever innocent items on board that I want. but the FAA has decided that instead of having a low level employee figure out who is innocent and who is evil, let's just not let anyone bring them on board at all. They are not accusing me of being a terrorist, but if they let me go and not the guy behind me the you know ther all kinds of issues that will come up with that! So I understand that the reality is I cannot bring my tweezers(or whatever) on board. I get it.

as for my comments on Muslims it was in response to your comments on There is a greater good than *me* in our community the greater good is *us*. each person in our country has rights. i used muslims as a example due to the fact we are currently faced with a war in a muslim country. we could take away the rights of the law abiding muslims and claim it is for our own safety. so what if a few "me" suffer to protect "us". we all know that would be wrong. i do not think it is ok to give up small rights so i see it as a fair comparison.

If my kids right to wear khakis, crosses, pendltons,sneaker, cuffed pants..or whatever else was taken away from them in general, not just in school, I would agree with you. But in this case we forget how hard it is to keep order among thousands of children in one location;school. if this helps i am with the program.

 

[JBean]

Actually in thinking about this, the airline bans, searches and restrictions are a perfect analogy to this and illustrates my point of view very well.

 

[sherri79]

I think this is the misunderstanding all around. the principal isn't accusing the kids of boasting gang monikers, but rather than trying to decide who is and who isn't it is just banned all around.
For example. I might take a tweezer on an airplane to use to pluck my eyebrows when I get to my destination. But some people take them on board to gouge out the eyes of a flight attendent while they hijack a plane. How does the airline know who is who? they don't. So we are all banned from bringing them on board. It is annoying that I cannot exercise my personal freedom to bring whatever innocent items on board that I want. but the FAA has decided that instead of having a low level employee figure out who is innocent and who is evil, let's just not let anyone bring them on board at all. They are not accusing me of being a terrorist, but if they let me go and not the guy behind me the you know ther all kinds of issues that will come up with that! So I understand that the reality is I cannot bring my tweezers(or whatever) on board. I get it.
If my kids right to wear khakis, crosses, pendltons,sneaker, cuffed pants..or whatever else was taken away from them in general, not just in school, I would agree with you. But in this case we forget how hard it is to keep order among thousands of children in one location;school. if this helps i am with the program.

the difference would be that you do not have a fundamental right to carry tweezers. the founding fathers could have said they will make no law stopping the state from allowing you to do anything you desire but did not. they knew the government would need to be able to infringe on our rights to keep order. in turn they did list some rights so sacred that the government would not infringe on them. religion is one of those rights.

 

[AlohaGal]

Somali leader says Islam, Christianity
Posted: January 4, 2007
Muslims are demanding a private room to pray at the Minneapolis-St.Paul International Airport, saying there will be problems if they have to share an existing "quiet room" with people of other religions."Where you have Christians and Muslims praying at the same time, it
will create a problem," said Fuad Ali, a Somali leader who spoke at a meeting with airport officials, according to the St. Paul Pioneer Press.

 

[JBean]

the difference would be that you do not have a fundamental right to carry tweezers. the founding fathers could have said they will make no law stopping the state from allowing you to do anything you desire but did not. they knew the government would need to be able to infringe on our rights to keep order. in turn they did list some rights so sacred that the government would not infringe on them. religion is one of those rights.

Oh I didn't realize that they were infringing on their religion. I thought they were asking them to take off their crucifixes as they could possibly be indicative of gang behavior and that rule had no bearing on religion.

 

[SieSie]

Here in CA even the most innocent looking items can be gang related or even certain color combinations. that is why they are not allowed. It has nothing to do with religion or anything else..just gang activity. my kids couldn't CUFF THEIR PANTS!. How innocent is that? yet it has some gang meaning and so it wasn't allowed.
I don't question this stuff anymore it just is the way it is.

I'm not up on gang stuff, live in a really small town and cannot imagine the things I'm reading. I don't quite know how to word this, I'm not trying to create problems, but I truly do not comprehend...

I'm an adult now (sort of, lol) but still feel like I'm 18 at times (rebel), and this is one of those times. I don't understand why us adults are "allowing" the gangs to have their "colors". Hear me out - let's say I'm back in high school and in a gang and I decide that wearing a ponytail is going to be our "symbol". Does this mean everyone else in the world should stop wearing ponytails or else they'd be associated with my gang?? Isn't that exactly what schools and communities are doing when they say their kids can't wear "red shirts" or "crucifixes" or "cuffed pants" or whatever. We're actually GIVING the gangs the power of their symbols. That's how I see it, anyway. :doh:

Maybe it's because I have no idea about gangs and their prevalance and stuff, but if I lived somewhere where the color pink was symbolic to a gang, I would suggest everyone in the town start wearing pink to "take back" the item. Why stop wearing something (or worse, be forced to stop wearing something?!!!!) just because a certain group wants to "claim it". ??

As for this specific crucifix incident - it'll be a cold day in h*ll before ANYONE (there's the rebel in me, lol) tells me I can't wear a cross around my neck. I would die for this right, believe it or not. I haven't taken the cross from my neck (except willingly for x-rays, etc...) since my husband gave it to me 22 years ago - it is symbolic to me in more ways than one. I don't know what these kids intentions were, but it IS a religious symbol and they have the RIGHT to wear it. JMO.


ETA: Getting offline for a bit, not ignoring responses - I'll check back later tonight. Have a great day, e1.

ETA 2: I haven't read the whole thread yet, will catch up later, but just saw this:

- that is so sad. we now say the government can make any rule and dont question it. a gang picks a color and it now belongs to them. all innocent people may no longer wear it. they pick a brand name of clothing and innocent kids are forbidden to wear it. they pick a fashion statement and innocent people must step aside because it now belongs to them. now gangs own god but we just keep on allowing them to dictate how the innocent act. what is the line that we would not allow them to cross?

:clap: :clap: :clap:
Okay, really, I'm signing off now. LOL.

 

[KatK]

Gang members are not above killing or severely beating a person flying their colors if they are not a member though. I've seen that firsthand. Be careful wearing a Dallas Cowboys t-shirt (blue) in some places in Wichita, you can get a beat down laid on your butt for it. And, you can arrest the ones that beat you and lock them up for a short time (if you can find them) but there will be others out to do the same thing, and once gang members get out of jail they resume their way of living as if nothing had interrupted it.

 

[SieSie]

Gang members are not above killing or severely beating a person flying their colors if they are not a member though. I've seen that firsthand. Be careful wearing a Dallas Cowboys t-shirt (blue) in some places in Wichita, you can get a beat down laid on your butt for it. And, you can arrest the ones that beat you and lock them up for a short time (if you can find them) but there will be others out to do the same thing, and once gang members get out of jail they resume their way of living as if nothing had interrupted it.

I don't get out much, but for an example, my brother travels a lot. How is he (or any other person not from an area) supposed to know what not to do and where? My brother has gone to California recently - what if he didn't know that you can't cuff your pants there? If we ever went to Wichita as tourists, how would we know that we shouldn't wear blue shirts? :waitasec: I'm now starting to worry about my brothers and dad's traveling (other than the flight). Sheesh.

 

[KatK]

Blue, red, green and I think black around here. But with the black it is specific items worn in a specific way. (The gang is known as "The Family") The Mr. and I are safe enough wearing black jeans and t-shirts. I'm not sure if yellow is also to be avoided or not, it might be now.

Keep in mind, I live in a tiny, podunk town a good chunk of the residents live at, or below poverty level. In this town, you don't want to wear either red or blue, ESPECIALLY if you go down on the East side of town. (The slum.) Our friend and his girlfriend (now wife) got mugged at gunpoint in broad daylight in that neighborhood, and he lived/grew up there! He was one of the few white boys who could semi-safely walk through that area. Still, he got chased out of the tenament by thugs (gang members) armed with HEAVY WEAPONS some years back. I am not kidding, and he is not the sort to lie about that. This town is on a major drug route. (There are also a *LOT* of meth cookers and meth addicts here.) I'm not kidding when I say if the Mr. and I go out walking at night we wear chains, and carry knives. Any sane person would. More than once we've been followed by a fellow, just casually walking behind us you know. Until he saw the chains, then he went off elsewhere to find someone easier to mug. (ETA: Thankfully here, if you can put on a good "threat display" to the would-be mugger, that is enough to deter them.)