Posted on 05/21/2002 12:07:48 AM PDT by JohnHuang2
She presses her nude body against the pole and slides down slowly and seductively to the loud, throbbing music. A middle-aged father slouches in his chair, his eyes filled with desire. Young men hoot and holler as her body arches and falls to the beat. An older man in the back allows his mind to succumb to fantasies of what it would be like to have her.
This is the stripper mom, and she just doesn't understand why she can't partner with a local Christian school.
Last week, the nation took notice as the mother of a kindergartner enrolled in Capital Christian School in Sacramento, Calif., complained to the press that her daughter had been expelled because of the mother's job. "How unfair," she cried. "How un-Christian."
Somehow, somewhere, there is a disconnect. Although the mother announced Monday that she would temporarily quit her stripper job so her daughter could remain in school for the remaining three weeks, she has made no commitment to stop stripping permanently. When explaining why she won't send her daughter back to the school next year, she said, "I want to find a school less concerned with image and more concerned with the welfare of children."
Unfortunately, it's not just the thought processes of the dancing-naked mother that have blown a fuse, but also those of political pundits, talk-show hosts and even a lot of Christians who were quick to criticize the school.
If the school administrators were concerned about PR, they certainly would not have taken the politically incorrect action of sticking to their principles. They took a lot of heat from folks that didn't think through the various issues of religious freedom, the rights of private institutions, parental responsibility and the Christian principle that families are the bedrock of society.
Let's focus, for a moment, on any one of the thousands of private schools that require uniforms. Imagine that a mother absolutely refuses to dress her child in the appropriate clothing, and sends her child to school, day-after-day, wearing whatever she chooses. Would there be a public judgment that the school is at fault if they no longer let the child attend?
Of course not. American society at large, and the parents who choose private schools in particular, understand that private schools get to set their own standards regarding uniforms.
Don't they also get to set their own standards regarding behavior? Shouldn't we be supportive of a Christian school that has the courage to say the behavior described above is immoral and unacceptable for partners of the school?
It's important not to confuse the mission of Capital Christian Church with that of its Christian school. It is quite clear the church is a place for the "saint" and "sinner" alike – it is an institution that opens its doors wide for all seeking truth or comfort. But as with most religious schools, the educational branch of the church is designed for the children of families who have already accepted and embraced the core religious beliefs.
In the stripper mom's mind, the government should order the Christian school and the 1,200 other families to change their standards to accommodate her personal immoral and behavioral choices.
Five-year-old girls look to their mommies with adoring, trusting eyes for guidance in how to live their lives. Why are so many Americans unwilling to flatly tell the mom that she – not the school – holds the responsibility for how her daughter is raised?
This mom doesn't believe she should be accountable to a contract she previously signed to partner with the school in support of its moral values. This mom is in denial that her decision to make easy, quick money playing on the lusts and desire of men who view women as nothing more than raw meat, will impact her daughter's life.
Although her case is extreme, we shouldn't be surprised by the mother's blindness.
How many parents have abdicated their responsibility of instilling moral values in their children? How many times have moms and dads decided that the school, or the church, or a grandmother, or the government must be required to take care of America's sons and daughters while the parents pursue the almighty dollar?
While we are all grateful for those institutions and individuals that step in and rescue children who are neglected by their own moms and dads, not every institution is structured to support such a calling. Some develop a mission to strengthen children through forming a partnership with parents. America and the Christian faith need both approaches.
Capital Christian School offered to waive tuition so the little girl could remain a student. They offered to walk "hand-in-hand" with the mother and help her leave a job that preys on the lusts of rabid men and requires mom to strip herself of both her clothes and her dignity. They offered to assist her in finding a new job and to support her efforts to build a better life.
But this mother refused. She chose to fulfill her desire to dance naked in front of men over the well-being of her own daughter. Let's hope her new decision to leave the strip-joint becomes a permanent one. Let's pray that she comes to realize that in offering mercy and demanding accountability, the school really did do what was best not just for the daughter, but for the mother too.
What a pathetic moron. She's had her 15 minutes of fame. Thank God it's over.
Why wouldn't she wait until the time was right to take maximun advantage of the situation? If the little girl had been expelled at mid-term, there wouldn't have been nearly so much sympathetic outrage over the school's action. No outraged reaction, no publicity. How many times have you read on all these threads how cruel and heartless the church was to expel her when she only had 3 weeks left to go?
OK, let's assume you are partially correct. Maybe she didn't plan this thing way ahead of time, maybe she thought up the idea of running to the nearest TV reporter after she learned the school was on to her deception about her job. Once the story went national big-time she could easily see the potential for "career advancement" in the national publicity she has recieved. If she is so enthralled by the notion of big money that she will perform the nude act on stage as it is described in the article, she certainly wouldn't be blind to the opportunities that kind of publicty can open up.
As for how this all turns out, I am willing to wait and see. But if she isn't the feature centerfold for one of the major adult magazines in the very near future I will be greatly surprised. I will also be surprised if she isn't starring in a XXX video within the next few months. The woman has given ample proof that she has the morals of an alley cat and that she will do virtually anything for money. So we can be quite sure she would have no objections to performing in porno films. The publicity from all this has already given her a considerable amount of notoriety, and that kind of salacious publicity always attracts the interest of millions of immature men, both old and young, who patronize the porn industry. The sleaze industry isn't going to ignore that ready-made notoriety, it's money in the bank. She will get offers, and who is willing to say she won't accept?
I think this topic has been thoroughly beaten to death on numerous threads the last couple of days without a single mind having been changed in the process. I propose we let it die the merciful death it so richly deserves.
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.