Posted on 09/26/2005 10:31:48 PM PDT by Bonaparte
Daughter of lesbian couple expelled By Mason Stockstill, Staff Writer ONTARIO - A Chino couple plans to picket a Christian school in Ontario on Monday because officials expelled their daughter after learning her parents are lesbians. Tina Clark said the superintendent of Ontario Christian High School gave her a letter explaining that 14-year-old freshman Shay Clark was being kicked out because her parents' sexual orientation is "inconsistent with a positive Christian life style." "My sexual orientation should have nothing to do with her getting an education," Tina Clark said. "I'm the one that's gay. My daughter's not. Why should her civil rights be infringed?" Shay was crushed by what happened earlier this week, which she said came as a surprise. "I knew that I might have problems," Shay said. "But I never thought it would go that far." Principal Tim Hoekstra and Superintendent Len Stob did not return repeated calls Thursday and Friday seeking comment. Phone calls to several school trustees also were not returned. Clark and her partner, Mitzi Gray, have been together for 22 years. They didn't expect Shay would experience discrimination at the school because her older sister had attended Ontario Christian schools from sixth through ninth grade. Additionally, Shay said her friends knew she lived in a home with two mothers, and "it was never a problem." On Tuesday, however, that changed. Gray said when she went to an unrelated parent meeting that Clark was unable to attend, school administrators were confused by her different last name. The next day, both women were called in and asked point-blank if they were gay, Clark said. When they said they were, Shay was expelled. "These are the same people that patted me on the back the Friday before that and asked me how my week had gone," Clark said. The family's situation is not unusual, said Johnny Chagolla of the Rainbow Pride Youth Alliance, a gay-rights organization in San Bernardino. Often, he said, students at religious schools are more likely to face discrimination. "In cases like this, there's a concern," Chagolla said. "A lot of (religious school officials) say they're very open and affirming, and then you see this, and it contradicts what they're saying." A similar situation arose earlier this year at a Catholic school in Costa Mesa, when parents pressured administrators into barring gay parents after a gay couple enrolled their twin sons at the school. Ontario Christian is affiliated with the Christian Reformed Church, a denomination that considers homosexuality a "condition of disordered sexuality," according to the Web site of the Christian Reformed Church of North America. The church considers the act of homosexual sex to be a sin, which "must be condemned as incompatible with obedience to the will of God as revealed in scripture." However, according to the group's Web site, the church should help gay Christians and "give them support toward healing and wholeness." As the family gathered outside the school for a news conference Friday, students and staff peered at the scene out of the windows. Receptionist Cory Overstreet said administrators would not be available to comment. According to the letter signed by Stob, school officials were not aware of Clark and Gray's relationship at the time Shay was admitted. But both women said that question was never asked, and that both of their names were included in all of the required paperwork. "Had we known they were against homosexuality, we would never have sought this school out," Gray said. "It wasn't like we announced it to the world, but it wasn't a secret, either. We've always been a family." Shay's educational future is unclear. At first, Clark had hoped there was a way Shay could return to Ontario Christian. But now, no one in the family backs that idea. The family is looking for another private school Shay can attend, but the admissions process is typically long, and she might not get in anywhere this year. Public school will probably be the answer for now, Clark said. After she gets to a new school, the family may consider legal action, Clark said. The expulsion was difficult for Shay, who said she is upset about being separated from her friends. As for the school's leadership, "They should be embarrassed," Shay said. - Mason Stockstill can be reached by e-mail mason.stockstill@dailybulletin.com , or by phone at (909) 483-9354
Women plan to protest outside Ontario Christian school
The student in question is not homosexual, her mother is. It's the hypocritical behavior of the Christian school that's in question to guys like me.
So, the child shares the homosexuality of the parent?
If you want to play the semantics game, go back to the original post I replied to. Hint: "sort of".
Can a person be held accountable for the wrongdoing of another?
My son winds up killing his girlfriend's father because he's been told he can't see her anymore. And in spite of everything my wife and I have done to raise the boy right and in spite of the fact that my wife and I have done nothing wrong, we lose everything in a wrongful death lawsuit. Because of our association with own son, we share in the liability.
So it's real clear that a person can be held liable for the wrongdoing of someone else, isn't it?
Now before you say, "But Bonaparte, we're talking here about a child being held responsible for the misbehavior of adults!", consider this...
You might say at this point, "But Bonaparte, the people who repossessed that house don't claim to subscribe to Christian principles! They have not placed themselves under any obligation but their own financial self-interest!" Well, that's true enough. So the question becomes "What are these Christian principles?"
-- 1 Corinthians 5:9-11
You see the problem here, radioman? If the school keeps the girl, they are still associated with the "parents," who are unrepentent sinners in violation of the contract with school. They can't very well enter into a separate, legally binding contract with a 14-year-old, can they? And even if they could, they would still be associated with the "parents" through the necessity of communicating with them about their child's performance, needs, activities, permissions, etc. That's why the contract is with the whole family and if one goes, all go.
You might say at this point, that the school has a higher Christian obligation to "help" the girl by keeping her on but that doesn't skate either -- the girl can get all the Christian help she needs from Christian outreach workers regularly coming to the home. And she can get all the education she needs by attending another school that doesn't require moral behavior from her parents.
I'm almost done, so bear with me if you will.
In all the years this girl has attended OCS, how successful has the school been in their efforts to instill Christian values in her? How receptive has she been to their teaching? Apparently, not very. She has come out publicly in support of her "parents'" unrepentent sin. (It's right there in the posted article, if you doubt this.)
What it all boils down to is this: It isn't up to you to decide what Christian precepts this school will obey. As is their right, they have chosen to listen to this --
Ok, my bad, you didn't actually call homosexuality an ethnicity. But are you actually saying that the school needs to put their religious principles on the back burner, and forget the agreement falsly entered into by the girls "parents?"
The Christian school needs to keep a kid being raised by two homo-perves in the school for what? To expose the other students to the same crap teaching that their parents put them in private Christian school to avoid? That homo-perves are "normal" and their lifestyle is "acceptable?" No thank you. They can get the same PC feel good garbage in a public school that doesn't have steep tuitions.
Good post, detailed analysis. I think the key here is "unrepentant", as you noted.
You don't give any evidence of having thought through one thing that Bonaparte said. You don't interact with any of his substance. Your position is visceral, not rational; and certainly not Biblical.
Dan
You are condemning the school's behavior because they subscribe to Christianity rather than Deism?
If your answer is "yes," you would seem to be insisting that they be hypocrites in order to secure your approval. Didn't you say in your post 240, "It's the hypocritical behavior of the school that's in question to guys like me"?
I have to admit I'm puzzled, radioman.
First you say, their hypocrisy is what bothers you. Now you appear to say it's their lack of adherence to deism that bothers you.
Which is it?
The expulsion was difficult for Shay, who said she is upset about being separated from her friends. As for the school's leadership, "They should be embarrassed," Shay said.
She does not appear to be upset about being removed from her Christian environment. She's going to miss her friends.
At the beginning of each and every school year, we receive copies of a Student Code of Conduct. Hubby and I go over it with our boys, then we sign it. I'll bet you anything this young lady signs something very similar--maybe she even has to sign off on the admissions policy agreement. If that is the case, then she knowingly lied.
As I said in the other thread on this topic: What the school did violates the tenets of Christianity, foremost of which is the need to minister to the spiritually needy. I'd call the teenaged daughter of lesbians as spiritually needy as they come.
The proper response would have been to intervene and minister to her. To get her to understand the evil and sin that her mother was committing. If they were worried about the appearance to the other children, they could have explained that the girls parents were sinners and that the girl needed their prayers and support. It could have been an excellent teaching moment, but instead turned into an un-Christian rejection of Jesus teachings.
A real Christian never turns his back on a sinner, and certainly doesn't turn his back on someone because they're forcibly associated with sinners. Our duty is to spread the light and the Word.
However, it's rather common and widely advocated.
In post 240, you say it's the school's failure to follow their own Christian precepts that bothers you. IOW, it's their hypocrisy (as you see it) that is the problem.
But in your post 247, you seem to say just the reverse, ie. that it's the school's failure to follow the precepts of Deism that bothers you. Deism, which does not subscribe to a providential God, is anathema to Christianity. If this is your position, you would be requiring the school to act hypocritically in order to be in your good graces.
You see the contradiction here, radioman?
And BTW...
It is to love God.
2) The school has been ministering to this girl for years and by her statement in the article, she has failed to accept and apply their spiritual counseling
and
3) Jesus Himself rejected unrepentent sinners who were proud and defiant in their sin. He referred to some of them as a "generation of vipers." Others he threw out of the temple -- just as God threw Satan out of heaven and just as OCS threw this unrepentent family out of their school.
You don't sound very familiar with Jesus' earthly mission, if I may say so.
His "examples" of criminal behavior are just a lame attempt to justify the disgusting attack on a child.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.