>> “So you are going to place yourself in the place of God, to determine the sincerity of their faith?” <<
.
Total strawman.
We have God’s word that tells us what Yeshua said during his life, and nothing in the school’s statements, nor actions are in conformance therewith.
A private school is no more private than a grocery store. Both advertise and charge for their product.
Well, your theology is as weak as your arguments. And if you are advocating that the student sue the school, then YOU are in direct contradiction with Scripture.
A private school is no more private than a grocery store. Both advertise and charge for their product.
In one sense, you are correct - since neither the grocery store nor the Christian school are owned by the government, they are both private businesses. I don't know where you get the idea that advertising and charging for their services have anything to do with whether they are a public or private business.
I think you are confusing this with a "public accommodation", particularly dealing with civil rights laws. However, this is not a civil rights case. There was no discrimination based on race, sex or religion - the rule applied equally to all students. Her parents chose to send her to a private school; they signed a contract which included certain requirements on the student's part, and specified certain consequences for breaching the contract. The contract was breached by the student's breaking the rule in question, and the consequences have been applied. If the parents objected to the rules or the consequences, they could have sent their daughter to a public school (where she could have "graduated" illiterate, pregnant and addicted to drugs).