God forbid the kids have fun

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090508/ap_on_re_us/us_school_dance_flap

This is nothing new, so it must have been a slow news day at Yahoo.

Where were you and your righteous indignation when Heritage (and other associated schools) were doing this 30 years ago? Seriously.....people making an issue of this does nothing but cause these schools to dig-in their heels even more. Press coverage validates their stance, their resolve and encourages them to ramp-up their "us versus them" approach to indoctrination.

As stupid as this practice is, it's their school, and their policies are spelled out very clearly prior to enrollment. It doesn't justify their ass-backwards, antiquated world view, but if you didn't want the school riding herd on your kids, you shouldn't have paid the tuition to send them there to begin with.

I just wanted to point out that this happened in Ohio, not in the Bible Belt.

That is what is frightening. However, in 1947, there was a Landmark Supreme Court decision that stated no one is obligated to any religion in its orthodox form. The boy is under 18, and therefore can not legally make a contract. I assume his parents are paying the tuition, ergo, he is not there by choice. Also, the boy's actions, are not in violation of the Ohio civil code. That the church mentioned expulsion for "sexual activity", indicates some form of voyeurism, not to exclude sexual assault and battery, on a regular basis( he does not have to go to her prom to indulge), on the part of the church. The crux of it, is, who, is legally permitted to sign a contract. This is not a spiritual deal, as money has changed hands, in the form of tuition. Actually, this seems to be a test case. Islam is gaining ground and their push for Sharia. Someone wants to end that debate, now.

Most (but not all) Christian schools have a prohibition about going to dances. He agreed to the rule and he needs to abide by it or suffer the results. The "rightness" of the rule is not the issue here but rather, his previous willingness to abide by the school's standards of conduct. It doesn't need to be a "binding contract" but it is a requirement to abide by the standards of conduct if he is to continue as a student at the school.

Guess he'll end up going to a public school instead of a nutty Christian one, oh darn...

And being under 18, his parents still get to make contractual decisions on his behalf, so, the contract stands....unless you'd like to make a case that the parents aren't entitled to make decisions of this nature for their minor children.

Actually, the Findlay High School plays a role in this drama. They are the ones who demanded a form signed by the principle of the other school. I am from Eastern Ohio. In the past, no one was ever held accountable for religious contracts. In this case, money has changed hands. If he were in violation of the Ohio civil code, the church might have a case. He is not dancing on school property. Ultimately, this would be seen as a form of extortion, something which the state of Ohio has always taken a dim view of.

Too bad for the kid, then.

I think just about ANY* religious school is a step up from public school.












* Within reason.

If we could do it without the indoctrination, I'd be with ya.

The problem with religious schools is that any educational advantage they might provide is more than offset by the religious indoctrination. They might be awesome in math and to a certain extent in history, but they're severely handicapped when it comes to science thanks to their insistence that religion be taught alongside real science.*





*The above is a generalized rant about creationism being taught alongside evolution in science class, as is being done in the local religious schools in my area and has been attempted to be forced on public schools but was thankfully overthrown in court.

I assume these were Protestant religious schools? You'll probably find a much higher quality of education in Catholic schools.

It's not a religious contract. It's a business contract entered into by a religious-based school and a parent.

30 years ago I attended one of the schools which belong to the loose association of Christian Schools of which Heritage is a part. The extra-curricular behavior stipulations weren't ever something which was arbitrarily sprung onto students and their families, but were clearly laid out, and if anything, over-emphasized prior to being enrolled. You knew going-in that this was going to be the kind of thing which you were in for if you attended one of these schools.

It has nothing to do with religion, and everything to do with their code of conduct. It may stick in your craw because it's obvious that the code of conduct springs from the religious beliefs of the church to which the school was associated, but it's all about behavior, not about the tenets of the denomination.

You'd have a legitimate axe to grind if, for instance, the school forbade attending worship services in churches of other religious denominations, and that would be a "religious contract". The prohibition against attending dances isn't. Oppressive and indicative of some fear, yes, but religious in nature, no.

And since these schools are forthright and unapologetic about these policies before the kid ever takes a seat in a classroom, parents and students have no room to bitch when the school makes good on their promise to act. If you don't want religious indoctrination, don't send them to a religious school. There are lots of comparably priced private schools which aren't affiliated with churches, and some which are, but are much more liberal in their codes of conduct.

Now here's a real stickler: This year, many Ohio school districts put provisions into their codes of conduct which held students accountable in school for their behavior out of school, and not limited to extra-curricular activities. Many (but not all) of these provisions involved punishments for behavior which, if discovered by the authorities, would result in criminal charges. However, it wasn't required for charges to have been pressed or filed in order for suspensions and expulsions to be handed out as punishment. Basically, if (what the school considers to be) a reliable source turns in a kid for, let's say, getting high in his basement, the school is within it's right to take punitive action.

This is an instance of a school overstepping it's bounds. Barring legitimate, verifiable evidence of abuse or violence, the school has no business whatsoever minding what occurs inside the home of a student. It's reasonable to assert that they should have no concern about student behavior beyond what is observed within school, and reasonably at school-sponsored extra-curricular activities.

I'd be far more concerned about state intrusion into my home than I would be about the silly stipulations that a religious school enforced on my kids that I'd been told about, in detail, before I ever wrote their tuition check.

Sadly, this is correct.

To both of you,

Religious schools are in no way, shape, or form a step up from public schools. Having spent eight years in what was supposed to be one of the best religious private schools around, I can firmly say that there's no conceivable measure by which it was better than average public schools, despite its glowing reputation. Religious schools in general, including the supposedly first rate school I attended, use far more unlicensed teachers who lack expertise in their subject areas than do public schools. Considerably less class time is spent on secular subjects than in public schools because of the demands of religious education. The extreme lack of diversity offers a real social handicap. Most religious schools don't offer meaningful gifted or remedial programs. The secular education you can get in a religious school is distinctly third rate.

What religious schools offer is children with a self-selected group of parents who want to be involved in and supportive of their children's educations. They generally contain fewer poor children, and can reject children who have special educational needs that the schools can't meet. It's these factors, not the public/religious distinction, that drive any perceived difference in educational quality. Children who do well in religious schools would almost uniformly do better in public schools.

Quite possibly he wasn't even born yet?

You say that *now*. But I doubt even you subscribed to the fringe libertarian argument that children are not full citizens and have no rights (except in utero) when you were this kid's age.

That's the problem. Right now they may be still on the right side of the law, but just barely. You say it is a Code of conduct and a business arrangement. Okay. If I were stupid enough to send one of my kids to such an academy, I am not the student. I go to the movies on Sunday. We have no blue laws in my state, but they could make life rough for the kids. They are one step from that.

But it's not a problem, Neon. This has been going on, just as it is, for at least the last 30 years, and it's well within the law, not "just barely". Again.....the parents of these children sign a contract before they are ever enrolled, stating, in clear terms, what the schools code of conduct is. Parents, like it or not, are entitled to make these sorts of legal decisions on behalf of their dependent, minor children. While it's no longer fashionable, it's a kid's lot to do what his or her parent sees fit, regardless of how he or she feels about it.

And being from Ohio myself, it's pretty clear that we're in no danger of the state enacting blue laws.

I haven't been to Ohio in 23 years, so I don't know what goes on there any more.

I can tell you that the craziest of the crazies live in Ohio. Parts of Ohio, particularly Columbus and the extended suburbs, are filled with the kind of religious fanatics that would make even your typical hard core televangelist blush in shame. That the state is, overall, strongly trending blue at this point just makes them even crazier.

Hmmm....I get that it's THEIR school, but this student is going to a dance at another school. Why would they care what he does at another school - he's not representing his ow (Christian) school in an official capacity, is he? Well, I guess he is now, since the cat is out of the bag.

You raise an interesting point. How would the staff at his school know he was attending his gf's prom at another school if some little mealy-mouthed weasel didn't rat him out, and why is it their business anyway?

He had to get a permission slip signed by the principal of the school he attends.

I mean damn.....is this The Army or something? They (school/Army) have total control of your life 24/7 or what?

I'll be damned if I'd ever send my kid to any school where his off-school
(non criminal) behavior is monitored and regulated that close.

Exactly.

Interesting to note who's defending this, though. Clearly all those years of indoctrination in a similar school have left their mark.

What part are you from? I'm from Cleveland. It's crazy, because everyone moved to California, hence, the land of fruits and nuts. What's left? Religious whackos and Uncle Ernie Angley.

Kicking hot lesbians out of school is sin. Thats one great thing about college hot chicks who like each other.

I went to many public schools in the 70's.
Common sense was very, very much in play throughout all of them.
Times were much simpler then.

Oldfella ever saw any hot lesbians in school though?

I've got lots of family in Ohio, mostly suburbs of Cleveland and Columbus. One cousin in particular, who lives in Zanesville, is the craziest person I've ever met, basically Fred Phelps with slightly--but just slightly--better impulse control. He's a professional abortion protester living off of his wife's family's money who believes in the execution of homosexuals, the institution of biblical law in the U.S., and who thinks that even Sarah Palin's guilty of insufficient fealty to the pro-life cause to be worthy of election because

He made it into The Bush Survival Bible as one of the "7 American Politicians More Frightening than Bush."

Anyway, he's crazy enough that I was curious enough to do the research to find out that he chose his place to live appropriately. Family. Watchagonnado?