Christian school complains 8-year-old girl isn't girly enough

[Donjeta]

Nova, I think the Matthew quote might have been chosen there to emphasize the first part (God made them male and female) and goes along with the principal's idea that girls should dress and behave like girls (whatever the heck that means) as God saw fit to make them female.

"Additionally the principal wrote, "We believe that unless Sunnie as well as her family clearly understand that God has made her female and her dress and behavior need to follow suit with her God-ordained identity, that TCS is not the best place for her future education.""

Perhaps there is a history of divorces in the family or something but otherwise the part about the cleaving and putting asunder doesn't seem to have anything to do with an eight year old as they've got no business cleaving to anybody at that age.

It's quite possible that the principal's interpretation of what those quotes were meant to say is totally off in a historical context but my point was that I think bringing those quotes forward and saying that somehow something in your child or your family violates the Christian values of the school, exemplifed by those quotes, and endangers the Christian education of other children in the school clearly establishes an accusation that there is something sexually immoral going on.


It seems hypocritical. If you're brave enough to stand for the religious values of your institution or stupid enough to discriminate against an innocent child because you think she or her family are sinners, why aren't you brave or stupid enough not to lie about it and deny that's what you did?

The Church and the School are limited in what can be related about this situation. With all due
respect, the facts are not as S.K.'s great-grandparents have portrayed them. This matter is far
beyond a simple ‘hairstyle and tomboy issue’ as inaccurately portrayed. It is not about that at all.
At no time did the Church or the School state or imply that S.K. was sexually immoral or the
like. Yet, reports like this have appeared in the media.

This statement from the school is a bald-faced lie. (Wasn't there something in the Bible about people not being supposed to lie?) Presenting those quotes in the context of great concern that this child and her family somehow aren't conforming to Christian values is a clear implication that there is sexual immorality "or the like".

 

[Linda7NJ]

Abbott says they never made any accusations of sexual immorality but these are the Bible passages that according to the principal Bowman are being violated by the direction this poor child is heading:



Leviticus 20:13.







Romans 1:21-27



Matthew 19: 4-6





1 Corinthians:







If Bible quotes about fornication and unnatural lust are not an accusation of sexual immorality I don't know what is.



Clearly they think the clothes and the hair and whatever they find objectionable about her behavior are a symptom that this poor child is going to grow up lesbian or transgender and that's why they threw her out of the school.



(I know the school says it was completely her family's decision but they did send them a letter asking them not to re-enroll her so I would tend to consider that a lie.)



But yeah, she's probably better off in any other school.

IMO that child would be better off being educated by wolves....anything is better than being stuck in that school.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Linda7NJ]

I may get flamed- but as a private school, they have every right to decide on a dress code and hold students accountable for it. They also have every right to decline enrollment to students who decline to adhere to it.

If it were a private Muslim school, and the girls declined to cover her head - she would be denied enrollment.

They may have the right to be stupid, hateful and intolerant.
Everyone else has the right to point it out and call them out on their ridiculousness. All IMO


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Jacie Estes]

This isn't about religion it just happens to be a religious school. This is about an 8 year ol girl who is being made an example of because she isn't 'girly' enough for the school. Sunnie is not cross-dressing,she is a child. The school's letter doesn't even address how she is dressing but rather, other student's confusion about if she is a boy or girl.

Timberlake Christian is part of Jerry Falwell's ministry and most students from Timberlake go on to attend Liberty University.

****
STUDENT RECORDS

Accurate and complete individual, permanent, and cumulative records shall be maintained for each student. All data (cumulative and confidential) maintained on an individual student shall be considered the student's official school records and will be filed in the school office. The administrative, teacher, and office scholastic records shall be limited to data needed by the school to assist the student in his/her personal, social, educational, and vocational development and in his/her educational and vocational placement.

(The school has a responsibility to protect the rights and privacy of the student and his/her parents. The school, therefore, adheres to State and Federal statutes designed to safeguard information in scholastic records. Parents, guardians, or eligible students (18 years of age or attending a post-secondary institution) have the right to inspect and challenge the content of these records. Copies of school records or transcripts may be transferred to other schools or agencies upon the receipt of a valid written request for release. Transcripts will not be forwarded if the financial accounts are outstanding or if satisfactory payment arrangements have not been made with the school.)
http://webcache.googleusercontent.c...4u.org/handbook.doc+&cd=5&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us

Students from Timberlake do receive Federal Financial Aid as they advance into Liberty University. http://www.liberty.edu/financeadmin/financialaid/index.cfm?PID=24072

****
I am just happy that Sunnie has loving adults who support her and advocate for her, no matter how she looks. It is sad that, at 8 years old, she is bearing the brunt of discrimination but it is better for her to be out of such a judgmental environment. IMHO
****

 

[giagreen]

What blows my mind is that with all the bad in this world and its a hard enough struggle to make sure our kids grow to become good people with education that this school is worried about all the wrong things. I would pull my kid from this school.

Sent from my Z796C using Tapatalk

 

[gitana1]

Abbott says they never made any accusations of sexual immorality but these are the Bible passages that according to the principal Bowman are being violated by the direction this poor child is heading:

Leviticus 20:13.



Romans 1:21-27

Matthew 19: 4-6


1 Corinthians:



If Bible quotes about fornication and unnatural lust are not an accusation of sexual immorality I don't know what is.

Clearly they think the clothes and the hair and whatever they find objectionable about her behavior are a symptom that this poor child is going to grow up lesbian or transgender and that's why they threw her out of the school.

(I know the school says it was completely her family's decision but they did send them a letter asking them not to re-enroll her so I would tend to consider that a lie.)

But yeah, she's probably better off in any other school.

This just shows how crazy the school officials are. This is a little kid they are talking about. She's a baby. She's not "fornicating" or lying with "mankind" or committing "adultery". Poor thing.

 

[jjenny]

She is better off in another school.

 

[Nova]

Donjeta, I hope it was clear I knew you were giving us the school's rationale, not your own.

I don't mind Christians (or members of other faiths) deciding that thanks to the invention of refrigeration, it's now okay to eat pork and shellfish, but then they should refrain from insisting the passages they do keep are "God's law". (I'm not questioning their legal right, just their moral soundness. And, as we see here, not all Christians do so, by any means.)

Long story short: I don't have much respect for people who insist on a literal interpretation of texts they can't even read without a translator. Doing so betrays ignorance of language, translation, history and God, if you ask me.

But that's why such people have to push out an 8-year-old (for pity's sake!) who represents any sort of challenge to their views: because their views aren't logically defensible.

(Again, as threads such as this one repeatedly demonstrate. My remarks are NOT directed at all Christians. I salute those who actually use Jesus as a role model; I don't see how they could do better.)

 

[K_Z]

It doesn't surprise me at all that a conservative Christian school would demonstrate intolerance about gender identity issues.

I do believe this case is fundamentally about gender identity, not current or future sexual behavior. Several articles comment about the gender counseling the child is receiving. I suspect this is secular counseling, not faith-based counseling, by the tone of the administrator's comments. Increasingly, legislators are banning "Pray away the gay" camps and counseling for minors, finding this "therapy" to be more harmful than helpful. It's possible that therapists are supporting the child in choosing a masculine identity. Not surprising that a conservative Christian school would have a problem with that.

Certain religious groups (all over the world, not just here) will never, IMO, be tolerant of homosexual or transgender people. If this were a public school I'd be more concerned. But this is a private religious school, which reasonable people (IMO) should not expect to be tolerant of those who are different. True diversity is not valued, or encouraged in these environments, IMO.

Embracing and enforcing intolerance is simply a fact of life, and a mandatory, for inclusion in many religious faiths. It's central doctrine to what some believe. The best we as a society can do is to shun the intolerant, and work to enact legislation that cripples and criminalizes their hateful actions. IMO.

This child is better off, IMO, in public school, where she can be herself as she grows. Even with all of the problems and issues of public education, it's a far better environment for her. At least she has a chance in public school. She had no chance at inclusion, tolerance, thriving, excelling, or any kind of normalcy at the private school, from what it sounds like.

If she is gender dysmorphic, she has a very tough road ahead-- that is the reality. With the right adults in her life helping her, she will grow up confident and secure. Right now should be about learning to read, math, etc. She needs to be somewhere that gender issues can be secondary to her learning process at school, not the primary focus. IMO.

I'm glad she's out of that school. I wonder if any other families left because they disagreed with how the school handled this?

 

[CHERIE.T]

I wouldn't want my child in that school.

 

[K_Z]

Some links about bans on "Pray away the Gay" therapy.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/...ay-away-therapy-now-punishable-in-California#

Conversion therapy - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

http://www.nerve.com/love-sex/7-stories-from-pray-away-the-gay-camps

http://articles.latimes.com/2014/feb/26/local/la-me-ra-can-homosexuality-be-cured-20140226

So far, only two states have outlawed the practice among licensed professionals such as therapists, psychiatrists, psychologists and doctors. California was the first. Gov. Jerry Brown signed the law into effect in 2012. “These practices have no basis in science or medicine and they will now be relegated to the dustbin of quackery," Brown said.

The second state was New Jersey, whose Republican Gov. Chris Christie signed the law the same year he vetoed a marriage equality bill. He said the law would protect children from “critical health risks, including, but not limited to, depression, substance abuse, social withdrawal, decreased self-esteem and suicidal thoughts.”

At the moment, the legislation has been introduced in a handful of other states, including Hawaii, Illinois, Maryland, Massachusetts, Minnesota, New York, Vermont, Washington and Wisconsin, and the District of Columbia. A dozen or so others are preparing bills.

MN Rep Michelle Bachmann has led the crusade for "pray away the gay" therapy. Her husband has a business that conducts this "therapy". Thankfully, she is not running for re-election. But I suspect she isn't done with politics yet.

 

[Jacie Estes]

Fortunately, in our American Indian cultures, 2 spirit people are more widely accepted than they are in the mindset of the Bachmann's of the world.

http://www.dancingtoeaglespiritsociety.org/twospirit.php

Some links about bans on "Pray away the Gay" therapy.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/...ay-away-therapy-now-punishable-in-California#

Conversion therapy - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

http://www.nerve.com/love-sex/7-stories-from-pray-away-the-gay-camps

http://articles.latimes.com/2014/feb/26/local/la-me-ra-can-homosexuality-be-cured-20140226





MN Rep Michelle Bachmann has led the crusade for "pray away the gay" therapy. Her husband has a business that conducts this "therapy". Thankfully, she is not running for re-election. But I suspect she isn't done with politics yet.

 

[Linda7NJ]

Fortunately, in our American Indian cultures, 2 spirit people are more widely accepted than they are in the mindset of the Bachmann's of the world.



http://www.dancingtoeaglespiritsociety.org/twospirit.php

In my atheist world, I couldn't care less about sexual ambiguity, preference, attire, hair length...etc.

I accept and appreciate ( at least try to) people for who they are!




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[LietKynes]

I doubt it. The media is trying to make it sound like it's all about outward apperance, like hair and clothes. But the school has released one or two statments saying, yeah...no...it's about a whole lot more than that. jmo

RSBM

Well, then , since the school is now probably in CYA mode... maybe they need to speak up and say what the main charges are ?
The more articles out there about this, the more I'm convinced that this is less about hair length and more about something else entirely.
:moo:

 

[Linda7NJ]

What could it possibly be? She identifies as a boy? So what? She has a crush on a little girl? So what?

It's disgusting no matter what they use to attempt to throw this child under the bus.

There is no good enough reason IMO.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Karmady]

RSBM

Well, then , since the school is now probably in CYA mode... maybe they need to speak up and say what the main charges are ?
The more articles out there about this, the more I'm convinced that this is less about hair length and more about something else entirely.
:moo:

Imo, it's not about hair length and never was. The school is not the party that tried to make it about hair length. It's always been, from the school's perspective, a gender identity/sexuality (as she gets older) issue, imo. The gp's have taken the girl from the school and it's a private, quite fundamental, Christian school so the school has no need or reason to CYA except maybe to prevent people from harrassing the other students or faculty. I'm sure the vast majority of the families who attend share the school's belief system, so this won't be a problem for them. Probably to the contrary.

There also were no "charges" against the girl. The school was clear about what the issue was in the letter and it's obvious the gp's know this isn't about just a short hair cut (the counseling references, just for example) After all, they know all about what this school's values are since the child was enrolled there by them or other family members. I think it's more than outrageous for the gp's to vilify the school or its policies when they theselves stood for those very policies until what, last week?

all jmo

 

[Linda7NJ]

Imo, it's not about hair length and never was. The school is not the party that tried to make it about hair length. It's always been, from the school's perspective, a gender identity/sexuality (as she gets older) issue, imo. The gp's have taken the girl from the school and it's a private, quite fundamental, Christian school so the school has no need or reason to CYA except maybe to prevent people from harrassing the other students or faculty. I'm sure the vast majority of the families who attend share the school's belief system, so this won't be a problem for them. Probably to the contrary.



There also were no "charges" against the girl. The school was clear about what the issue was in the letter and it's obvious the gp's know this isn't about just a short hair cut (the counseling references, just for example) After all, they know all about what this school's values are since the child was enrolled there by them or other family members. I think it's more than outrageous for the gp's to vilify the school or its policies when they theselves stood for those very policies until what, last week?



all jmo

Not everyone sends their child to a private Christian school for the religion. I sent my own because the quality of education was superior. There are plenty of atheists just like me doing the same.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Karmady]

Not everyone sends their child to a private Christian school for the religion. I sent my own because the quality of education was superior. There are plenty of atheists just like me doing the same.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Certainly. But the religion goes with it and you're charged with the knowledge. I also am an atheist and my daughter attends a privae parochial school. It is not a fundamental Christian school. I'm aware of the religious training she'll be receiving and the rules of the school consistent with that training. Drug testing, purity talks, theology class and a Christian service requirement. Her school does not have a policy against gay or transgendered students. I was kind of surprised, since it's against Church doctrine. But the point is, my child attends there so I know what the policy is, and my decision for her to attend is informed by the school's policies. These family members knew the school policy (it's Jerry Falwell -- as someone else posted - for pete's sake). There's no crying foul once you sign up for that, imo.

 

[jjenny]

This child is 8 years old. I am not sure why school should be concerning itself with any potential gender identity issues just because she has short hair.

 

[Donjeta]

JMO, Christian values and possible gender identity issues notwithstanding, it's absolutely disgraceful to throw around Bible quotes associating an eight year old with fornication and unnatural lust.

The letter could have said that their school is not equipped to properly help a child with gender identity issues and suggested another school with better resources and left it at that.