Christian School Threatens Student With Suspension/Expulsion for Attending Prom

As an agnostic\atheist my moral code is as follows:

1.) Touch kids inappropriately.
2.) Hate people for their sexual orientation
3.) Maintain the sanctity of divorce by ruining my marriage.
4.) Kick puppies.
5.) Become a Jazz fan.

 

San Marcos Baptist Academy?

 

It seems like a silly rule to me, but it's what they believe. If agreeing to obey their rules is a requirement for admission, then they are justified to enforce them imo.

To me the issue here is really that the people who don't like it don't like religion or don't like the rule itself. If it was a private institution that was non-religious suspending someone for violating their morality codes the response would be different.

I feel for the kid and think the school should move beyond the rule, but it is their rule and their right to establish the rules they want.

 

RR, I'm not an atheist or a Christian, but I'll say this... a person's morals are their own business. As long as that person does nothing to harm someone else by their actions, it's no one else's business and certainly not mine. In that case it is a person's inner morality that counts, not the "morality" attempted to be forced upon them by law, by intimidation, or by other forms of public pressure.

 

I want to believe that's possible Deck, but some people just don't have that inner morality or have long learned to push it aside when it counts.

That applies to religious and atheists.

 

Of course! The world is populated with "moral" people and with "immoral" people... some claim to be religious, but it is only a claim (self-rightous Bill Bennett, for example, who's made a killing in the children's book market with books promoting "morality," and lost several million dollars gambling while he was doing it. And that's documented). Some say they aren't religious, but are moral. All we have to go by are the person's actions. The important thing to remember, in my opinion, is to not to judge a person's morality based on your own definition (your religion, a book you read, what your parents taught you, wherever you get your personal sense of morality). Base your opinion on their actions. And that's dicey in and of itself, because what one person might consider harm, another might consider perfectly fine.

It's why we have millions of people arguing about this stuff 24/7, all over the world.

 

Aren't we told in Psalms ''Praise ye the Lord. Sing unto the Lord a new song.
et them praise his name in the dance.''

And it was King David-- King David, who we read about in Samuel.

And what did David do? What did David do?

''David danced before the Lord with all his might...leaping and dancing before the Lord.'' Leaping and dancing!


Ecclesiastes assures us...that there is a time for every purpose under heaven.
A time to laugh...and a time to weep...A time to mourn...and there is a time to dance. And there was a time for this law, but not anymore.
See, this is our time to dance.

It is our way of celebrating life. It's the way it was in the beginning.
It's the way it's always been. It's the way it should be now.

 

I like to dance!


edit: So does Brooks!!

 

Isn't a contract signed by a minor non-enforcable? I would think his parents might have something to say about him graduating.

DD

 

Who cares about a contract in this case? The school has rules and they are allowed to enforce them. The signing of the contract isn't important in whether they are allowed to enforce their own rules as a private institution. Could they not suspend a student for cheating if he signed a doc saying he understood the academic honesty policies?

 

Yeah, I'm assuming they're not relying on contracts rights for their authority...though they may use it as a moment to suggest to the kid that when you sign something saying you're going to do something (or not do something, as the case may be) then you should live up to your word.

 

Yeah, I think they are likely to use it as a "let this be a lesson to you, when you sign something it should mean something" kind of deal, but I just don't get the comments in this thread about a minor not being eligible to sign a contract. Minors are forced to comply with school rules all the time, and very often, ESPECIALLY and private schools, they are obligated to sign something that says they understand what the rules are and what constitutes a violation. It isn't really a contract as much as it is proof that the kid was given the rules.

 

yep...my older boy takes piano lessons. his teacher has him sign a covenant about showing up for practice and practicing at home. it makes him take it a lot more seriously. she's not using it to enforce in court, but to be able to hold him accountable if he starts slacking.

 

It makes sense to me. His signature is required for the other school to allow entrance. He: (1) Wanted to give the kid a chance to make the right choice and/or (2) Wanted to give the kid a chance to choose to take his lumps to attend the dance, if he wants to go badly enough.

 

This sounds like a very very evil high school student. There is little doubt he will go straight to hell. I can't believe he would even imagine going to a prom. Hopefully the evil in this child will be driven out before it's too late.

 

But the point is that THIS IS ON HIS TIME....not on SCHOOL TIME......

The School has no rights to enforce anything on the young man when he is doing something on his OWN time.

Right, Mr. Hand?

DD

 

I don't know that this is accurate. I've heard of private schools that have "good citizenship" standards. If they find out you use drugs or whatever they can expel you. I think I remember a California court ruling a school could suspend a girl for being a lesbian even though she wasn't doing it on campus.

 

That makes sense to me but it still seems to me like he wasn't signing in good faith if he knew that the kid would be suspended if he went.

 

One thing I'm curious about is if the student didn't sign the agreement would he have been allowed to go to the school?

The signature on the agreement to me doesn't seem to matter either way since i'm guessing he wouldn't be allowed to attend if he didn't sign it. Them holding it over his head saying he voluntarily chose to abide by these rules seems questionable since that was probably a condition of attending the school in the first place.

 

When one goes to a private institution, only a foolish parent would think there aren't rules their child will have to abide by that they wouldn't at a normal school. It is voluntary. If you don't like the rules the school makes you abide by, go to a different one.