Taunton second-grader suspended over drawing of Jesus
A Taunton father is outraged after his 8-year-old son was sent home from school and required to undergo a psychological evaluation after drawing a stick-figure picture of Jesus Christ on the cross.Got that? This kid - who has never been in trouble - was not only sent home from school for drawing a picture about Jesus, but required to undergo counseling before he could return. For drawing a picture about the son of G-d. For practicing his religion.
The father said he got a call earlier this month from Maxham Elementary School informing him that his son, a second-grade student, had created a violent drawing. The image in question depicted a crucified Jesus with Xs covering his eyes to signify that he had died on the cross. The boy wrote his name above the cross.
Why did he draw a picture of Jesus, you ask?
He made the drawing in class after his teacher asked the children to sketch something that reminded them of Christmas, the father said.
THE SODDING TEACHER ASKED HIM TO. The teacher assigned the children the task of drawing something that reminded them of CHRISTmas, and this child drew a picture of Jesus. SHOCKING! He's on the cross, yes, but isn't that the most enduring image of Jesus?
I hope this family sues. I hope the school district has to lay off teachers to settle this. This is beyond heads needing to roll - up to and including the superintendent for allowing such doltish teachers be hired - this needs to send a clear message to WAKE THE HELL UP and stop overreacting to every little thing. "WAH! He has 'X's over his eyes! It must be violent! ZOMG COLUMBINE!!!1111"
As difficult as it might be, we need to start using some damned common sense again.
That is all.
20 comments:
When I heard this story, the first thing I wanted to suggest was to have the teacher also sent in for psychiatric evaluation, to help determine what he saw in the drawing that caused such alarm. If the kid has to talk about what he drew and why, then the teacher should also have to talk about what he saw and why.
And if I was the dad, then I couldn't wait to sit down with the teacher/principal/supernintendo and have a chat with them, too.
This makes my head hurt. So, this kid was suspended, and his parents were forced to pay for a psychological evaluation because the kid was given an assignment to draw something that reminded him of Christmas and he drew a picture of Christ? Do I have that right?
Here's my solution. Fire the Superintendent. Fire the Principal. Fire the Teacher. Vote the School Committee out of office at the first opportunity.
Stupidity like this is not an abbaration, it's organic to the school system. Radical surgery is indicated.
I dont know if they realize it or not, but they are causing more issues with these kids than they are stopping.
These kids are going to become repressed individuals who are scared to speak out for fear of getting into trouble, and are MUCH more likely to 'snap' when they get older.
My hope is that these children are allowed ways of venting this bullshit and taught that the school system is ignorant and not correct.
I know that I have done a poor job of typing my feelings on this due to the fact that they are VERY strong as I was one of those children in school but for different reasons than this...
Michael Graham is talking about this right now (Tue 12/15, 10:40am) on 96.9 FM radio. He's just asked for those in favor of zero-tolerance policies to call in.
.
.
.
.
(crickets)
I'm appalled. OTOH, FWIW, in Minnesota the teacher would've been under fire by the non-Christians for using Christmas in class at all.
It says a lot for this young man's upbringing in is faith so far. Not only to use an image of Jesus, but to use what probably should be closest to the "right" image. From a Christian theological point of view, it's the image of the cross, and subsequent resurrection that defines Christianity. The nativity is just the prelude.
Insightful of the little guy, whether it was intended or not.
I'm an atheist and this STILL pisses me off with it's massive level of stupidity.
The issue is the maze of rules that the education bureaucracy has set up - I expect that the teacher had little/no leeway.
The solution is to sue those responsible for enforcing the rules - the School Board. Sue them individually and collectively, along with the school district and town. Sue the Mayor and Selectmen individually and collectively.
Make it "up close and personal", and you'll get less "our hands are tied" next time. Even if you don't win.
I commented more in depth in a post.
Borepatch,
Nice analysis. When I saw this story, my thinking was more along the lines of HULK SMASH...
Given that I have an 8 year old son who I happen to be bringing up as a Christian and all that...
Jay;
I hope you follow this story to the end. Keep us posted.
Home Schooling?
From another story:
"Johnson said the teacher became upset when his son said he drew himself on the cross."
Sorry, guys, but if a kid is showing signs that they might possibly have themselves confused with the almighty God and savior of humanity you might want to have them visit a shrink. Obviously it was nothing as he was cleared but I'd say that it warrants taking a 2nd look at.
Just checked the bin of common sense and linear logic processing, it's stone empty except for some mouse turds over in a back corner.
Strictly speaking, the First Amendment is only binding on the U.S. Congress, as it's first word indicates. Even so, it does set a mark for all others to toe, even if only in spirit. I think in this case, the school is acting as an agent of the State, and the U.S. govt by linkage through funding. Note that my qualifications as Constitutional scholar match those of home veterinarian and home gunsmith.
NECN has a story up now that quotes the school as saying the story has been grossly distorted.
Where the truth lies, I have no idea.
It's so sad that the father's story is believable (even if it proves to be false) :(
"Where the truth lies, I have no idea."
According to the father the teacher didn't make a big deal of it until the kid start saying he was the one on the cross. Thinking you're Jesus is something a whole host of nutters in history have identified with.
So, they checked the kid out and it turns out he's OK.
Justin, keep in mind that this is an 8 year old boy we're talking about. Exactly what he said and/or what he meant is not clear.
After all, we have a 48 year old man in the White House who sees himself as the world's savior. Maybe he needs a psychological evaluation.
And inferring that an 8 year old boy is a "nutter" tells us a lot more about you than it does about him.
I want to know why any parent EVER, EVER consents to having their child undergo a psychiatric evaluation based on what a teacher says.
I'd refuse to do it, I'd make a VERY public stink and I'd sue the living Hell outta the school teacher for practicing psychology without a license.
I would be in the pricipal's office with a lawyer to cover me while I upbraided the jackass up one side and down the other for an hour or more for being an utter fool.
While the school is wrong beyond belief, they only do this crap because parents put up with it.
This is really a case where parents have insisted on the schools being Nazis. The zero tolerance rules etc don't come from teachers' colleges, they come from school board meetings where hysterical parents insist the district "do something" every time there's a headline anywhere in the country.
I will never in a million years have my kid near a public school. I'd scrub toilets to pay for private school before I did. But as stupid as the administrators and teachers are, they are stupid people reacting to what parents are insisting on.
Put the blame where it really lies: The idiot parents who want their little darlings "protected" at all costs, no matter the unintended consequences etc.
I hope this family sues. I hope the school district has to lay off teachers to settle this.
Maybe. But we want the ones responsible for bad decisions to be kicked out. Usually, it seems that they are the ones with enough seniority to be making the decisions about who gets fired/laid off.
Ritchie,
Originally, the Bill of Rights did just apply to the federal government. Wording that would have extended the Bill of Rights to the states did not get enough support to be included in the Bill of Rights.
However, that was later amended.
Amendment XIV
(Ratified July 9, 1868)
Section 1
All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
Perversely, the Bill of Rights has come to be seen as a limitation on the rights of citizens. That is not the way it was intended. The argument against the Bill of Rights was that, if it were enacted, it would lead to exactly the current condition. It was presumed that the federal government had no authority to make laws affecting any of the rights enumerated, or any other potential rights. The federal government was never meant to be large or powerful.
As it is currently interpreted, if the Supremes do not find explicit protection for a right in the Constitution, they reserve that right to the federal government, which pays the Supremes for life. The defense of the Bill of Rights was that some people/states did not feel comfortable ratifying the Constitution without some explicit protections from the federal government, but this was not in any way meant to limit the rights of citizens.
The federal government has been able to expand its authority through the Supreme Court to anything that could remotely be considered interstate commerce by a deeply disturbed individual and to anybody who receives any funding from the federal government.
What a bogus bunch of bullshit! Just saw this here. http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,580282,00.html
Mass is worse then Minn and thats bad.
WTF???? Y'all need to get OUT of that state!
Post a Comment