Suspended if he goes to prom?

[fairy86]

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

This is the craziest thing I've ever read! This kid's fundamentalist Baptist school is planning on suspending him if he attends his girlfriends public school prom!

[Greenify13]

That seems nuts, I had to double look over it. So he hasn't gone yet? The boy deserves the honor of the cap and gown, if he earned them then something like "going to prom" should not have any effect on his intellectual achievements!

[fairy86]

Greenify, I had to have my sister read over it too just to make sure I wasn't crazy!
I understand that there are school rules; however, I don't think they should apply to activities outside of the school.

[MattW]

Nothing says tolerance like your own religious community persecuting you for things you might do.

[Greenify13]

Greenify, I had to have my sister read over it too just to make sure I wasn't crazy!
I understand that there are school rules; however, I don't think they should apply to activities outside of the school.
That's what I am thinking, this is ridiculus! I do hope at some point in time they do an update on what action the school took on this situation. So far it sounds like they take things too far.

[blacbird]

Welcome to the world of the Christian Far Right. Enjoy your stay, brief as it may be.

caw

[mscelina]

as long as the parents have given the boy their permission to attend his girlfriend's prom, the school should not assume the power to penalize him for a decision that his family approves of. It's absolutely ridiculous. If he'd put a stink bomb in the ventilation vents of the school (like an unnamed Tennessee valedictorian did a week before she graduated) then he should be suspended from school and all the activities of that school for that week (like prom, which I didn't mind missing all that much anyway). BUT, the school has no right to dictate what happens off-campus when the child has the permission of his parents to go and aboslutely no right to withhold his graduation honors from him.

I smell lawsuit, settled hurriedly out of court.

[bettielee]

Good God in Heaven. Does anyone hear this stuff, and it's like this is NOT what Jesus would do, people!

[dgiharris]

Welcome to the world of the Christian Far Right. Enjoy your stay, brief as it may be.

caw

as long as the parents have given the boy their permission to attend his girlfriend's prom, the school should not assume the power to penalize him for a decision that his family approves of..

I gotta disagree. If this were a public school, then you are absolutely right. But i'm assuming that this religious school is a private school.

And that the family signed some sort of 'contract' with the school. Religious school are more than just schools, they are communities with rules and laws that EXTEND BEYOND THE CLASSROOM.

What if a student at a religious school was a pole dancer at night? Using your logic this should be o.k. right?

Do I think the school is overreacting? Sure. But it is a religious school with beliefs that I do not have so why should this particular belief be different or ignored?

If you don't want to follow the rules of a private school then don't go to said school, you do have a choice.

In this case, as ridiculous as it sounds, I have to side with the school.

Mel...

[backslashbaby]

Yep. Certain kids at a religious High School where I lived had to go get exorcised every so often on Friday nights at the priest's house. No Friday Night Exorcism = suspension from school.

It's the parents' own choice [sigh].

[mscelina]

According to the story, the student signed the agreement--not the parents. As the boy in question is 17 years old, unless the parents signed the agreement as well (and there is no indication that they did) then the school is trying to enforce an illegal and non-binding contract with a minor.

On top of that, how do they intend to enforce these rules? What if the kid goes to the prom but doesn't dance? The school says that if he is involved with alcohol or sex at the prom, he will be expelled. Do you mean to tell me that they're going to send spies to a high school prom in order to monitor this child's behavior?

The minor cannot be bound by the agreement he was forced to sign by the school. The parents have given their permission for him to attend the prom, and the boy showed remarkable respect for the school's rule and maturity by taking the consent form to his principal in the first place. Then the PRINCIPAL decided to bring it up before the board of members--after he'd already signed the consent form for the kid to go. The rules listed in the article are unenforcable by the school anywhere other than their own campus. This situation should be no different.

[katiemac]

I find it bizarre the kid needs a signed permission slip from a school to attend another school's prom. Shouldn't that in of itself just be a parental sign-off?

There was no such thing in my community when it was time for prom. You wanted to bring someone not from the school as your date, you just bought an extra ticket.

[dgiharris]

According to the story, the student signed the agreement--not the parents. As the boy in question is 17 years old, unless the parents signed the agreement as well (and there is no indication that they did) then the school is trying to enforce an illegal and non-binding contract with a minor.

On top of that, how do they intend to enforce these rules? What if the kid goes to the prom but doesn't dance? The school says that if he is involved with alcohol or sex at the prom, he will be expelled. Do you mean to tell me that they're going to send spies to a high school prom in order to monitor this child's behavior?

The minor cannot be bound by the agreement he was forced to sign by the school. The parents have given their permission for him to attend the prom, and the boy showed remarkable respect for the school's rule and maturity by taking the consent form to his principal in the first place. Then the PRINCIPAL decided to bring it up before the board of members--after he'd already signed the consent form for the kid to go. The rules listed in the article are unenforcable by the school anywhere other than their own campus. This situation should be no different.

Sorry, you are still wrong here.

Whether he is 7 or 17, the parents MAKE THE DECISIONS FOR HIM by law. A contract signed by a parent is by definition binding since minors CANNOT SIGN CONTRACTS.

As for enforcement, you are thinking too much like a lawyer. The burden of proof isn't on the school, it is actually on the student here. Religious schools can follow whatever procedures that they want. Guilt by association, guilt by inference, guilt by sheer proximity, etc.

The school would simply 'ask' the student and I'm sure the school also has an honor code so the student can't lie. Similarly, I'm sure with the schools upbringing that the kid isn't going to lie about it. Or put another way, if he were going to lie about it, he would have just forged the signature to begin with right?

I can tell this is driving you crazy. Yes, it is crazy. Religion often is. And this is why so many wars have been fought over it :)

Mel...

[rugcat]

If you don't want to follow the rules of a private school then don't go to said school, you do have a choice.In some ways I agree with this, but a school's decisions have ramifications that go beyond just the school. If you don't graduate, how are you going to be accepted into college. Or get a scholarship, which you may have been counting on.

It's not clear from the article if one of the school rules was that students cannot attend proms in other schools, or whether this was a judgment call on the part of the principal.

You ask, what if the student from a religious school was a pole dancer at night? Well, what if after spending four years at the school, the principal suddenly decides that any student who eats meat, even outside of school, will not be allowed to graduate?

Or that television has now become so wicked that any student caught watching it at home will be denied a diploma, using a general "morals"clause. You can't use the cover of religious or private school rules to arbitrarily control a student's life outside the school and deny them the opportunity to continue their education.

[bettielee]

dgiharris, I find no fault in your logic. It's still stupid. I don't see why a place you pay tuition to gets to tell you how to live your life. It's a free country. Allegedly. And I question the vague nature of the "agreement". It seems like touching your toes is questionable behavior to these people. (You can't think about what God wants when you're bent in half!) And... committees deciding they know God's will? No committee anywhere knows God's will, unless God is sitting on the committee.

I'm going to watch Ocean's 11 on TBS. Way less upsetting. Carry on folks.

mmmm. George.

[mscelina]

Sorry, you are still wrong here.

Whether he is 7 or 17, the parents MAKE THE DECISIONS FOR HIM by law. A contract signed by a parent is by definition binding since minors CANNOT SIGN CONTRACTS.

As for enforcement, you are thinking too much like a lawyer. The burden of proof isn't on the school, it is actually on the student here. Religious schools can follow whatever procedures that they want. Guilt by association, guilt by inference, guilt by sheer proximity, etc.

The school would simply 'ask' the student and I'm sure the school also has an honor code so the student can't lie. Similarly, I'm sure with the schools upbringing that the kid isn't going to lie about it. Or put another way, if he were going to lie about it, he would have just forged the signature to begin with right?

I can tell this is driving you crazy. Yes, it is crazy. Religion often is. And this is why so many wars have been fought over it :)

Mel...

Sorry, but I'm still not wrong here.

According to the article, the minor signed the agreement, not the parents.

Frost, a senior at Heritage Christian School in northwest Ohio, agreed to the school's rules when he signed a statement of cooperation at the beginning of the year, principal Tim England said.


The minor, therefore, cannot be bound to that code of conduct save on school grounds and if his parents give him permission to attend the prom, that authority supersedes that of the school officials.

According to the article, the parents have given their child permission to attend the other prom and do not believe he should be punished by the school for it.


Frost's stepfather Stephan Johnson said the school's rules should not apply outside the classroom.
"He deserves to wear that cap and gown," Johnson said.


This indicates to me that the parents were unaware of any such stipulations of behavior on the part of the school with consequences that severe. If they had been aware of it, they would have had second doubts about giving their son permission to go in the first place.

According to the article, the penalties that will accrue upon the child for partaking in an activity outside the school grounds are unnecessarily severe.


The teen, who is scheduled to receive his diploma May 24, would be suspended from classes and receive an "incomplete" on remaining assignments, England said. Frost also would not be permitted to attend graduation but would get a diploma once he completes final exams. If Frost is involved with alcohol or sex at the prom, he will be expelled, England said.


Bolding mine. Now then, how precisely is the school going to enforce this last bit? Unless they send representatives TO the prom and to all other activities involved with the prom, how can they be certain what other activities the boy undertakes that night? Let's take it a bit further. This boy has a girlfriend, right? Well, does the school suspect him of kissing her or holding her hand while they're off school grounds? If so, do they have the right to suspend him for that?

So no, I'm not wrong. I'd be willing to bet that if this came up before a judge, the judge would see it in much the same light. That signed agreement for the code of conduct would be chucked out the door and the parental authority supersedes the school board's authority.

[Don Allen]

Sorry, you are still wrong here.

Whether he is 7 or 17, the parents MAKE THE DECISIONS FOR HIM by law. A contract signed by a parent is by definition binding since minors CANNOT SIGN CONTRACTS.

As for enforcement, you are thinking too much like a lawyer. The burden of proof isn't on the school, it is actually on the student here. Religious schools can follow whatever procedures that they want. Guilt by association, guilt by inference, guilt by sheer proximity, etc.

The school would simply 'ask' the student and I'm sure the school also has an honor code so the student can't lie. Similarly, I'm sure with the schools upbringing that the kid isn't going to lie about it. Or put another way, if he were going to lie about it, he would have just forged the signature to begin with right?

I can tell this is driving you crazy. Yes, it is crazy. Religion often is. And this is why so many wars have been fought over it :)

Mel...

You're Right, and this is another example of why I predict religions will burn themselves out of followers in the very near future.
If you read this article one of the quotes from the church leaders is that "one must choose between pleasing self or pleasing God", which is complete bullshit, and even more complete bullshit in this case as no where did God drop down out of the sky and condemn this child for going to a dance. Instead we have a bunch religious hypocrites who sat in a meeting and passed judgment on a future action of a young man based on their twisted set of right and wrong beliefs.

Where religions continue to trip over their own private parts is by interpreting the thoughts of God as THEY SEE FIT and applying them others. People are getting tired of the double standards and this is another case where the cause and effect of stupid people enforcing their beliefs on another will cost them followers in the end.

[rugcat]

Where religions continue to trip over their own private parts is by interpreting the thoughts of God as THEY SEE FIT and applying them others. People are getting tired of the double standards and this is another case where the cause and effect of stupid people enforcing their beliefs on another will cost them followers in the end.I'd have to disagree with your generalization here. What you're describing is not what religions teach, but how certain people interpret it.

We see quite a few examples of religious hypocrisy and intolerance, but let's not lose sight of what's really happening -- individuals are playing out their own authoritarian pathologies, using religion as the vehicle which enables them to give their pathologies expression.

If they didn't have religion they'd simply find other ways to assert control over their fellow citizens.

I know plenty of devout religious people who are as offended and disturbed by the type of thinking shown by this school as is any non believer.

[jodiodi]

How did the school find out he was attending the other prom in the first place? Surely, he wasn't required to ask their permission. What he does on his own time, as long as it's not illegal or bringing dishonor to his school and family, is no one's business. If anyone has any say in what proms the boy attends, it's his parents. NOT a bunch of administrators in a school--any school, public, private, religiously affiliated, or non-affiliated.

[dgiharris]

In some ways I agree with this, but a school's decisions have ramifications that go beyond just the school. If you don't graduate, how are you going to be accepted into college. Or get a scholarship, which you may have been counting on.

It's not clear from the article if one of the school rules was that students cannot attend proms in other schools, or whether this was a judgment call on the part of the principal.

You ask, what if the student from a religious school was a pole dancer at night? Well, what if after spending four years at the school, the principal suddenly decides that any student who eats meat, even outside of school, will not be allowed to graduate?

Or that television has now become so wicked that any student caught watching it at home will be denied a diploma, using a general "morals"clause. You can't use the cover of religious or private school rules to arbitrarily control a student's life outside the school and deny them the opportunity to continue their education.

I sorta see your point. My point really is, if the family signed an agreement that list the schools' policies and code of conduct, then the school is in the right.

However, if it is not clearly defined in the rules/agreemeent that has been signed, then I can lean more your way.

The bottom line is the school has policies and the parents had to know what they were getting into. This can't be the first time this has happened at this school. Egomaniacs love to pull this shit all the time.

I went to a college that had a strict code of conduct and honor code. People from the 'outside' were always so quick to talk about how ridiculous our rules were. But we made the choice to go and thus follow th ose ridiculous rules.

I blame the parents in this instance. I would never put my child at risk with a school like that. What risk? Putting my child's future in the hands of egomaniacs that have abnormal power over life outside the school.

You're Right, and this is another example of why I predict religions will burn themselves out of followers in the very near future.

Sorry, even though this is an example of how religion can go wrong. Religion does a lot of stuff right. Volunteer work, charities, helping those in need, etc, etc. There is a lot of good that religion institutions provide. I know it is sexy to bash religion when these wierd things come up (and I'm guilty of it to). But if I had a choice between a world with religion or one without it, I choose the world with it in a heartbeat.

True, we have our problems, but without religion (especially in the dark ages) I doubt the human race would still be around :)

Mel...

[Romantic Heretic]

Why do I get the feeling that if the kid was attending a private school with an atheist philosophy telling the kid that if he went to church he would be suspended and expelled if he prayed the people saying that 'The school has that right,' in this case would be going 'How dare they!'?

[Lyv]

Why do I get the feeling that if the kid was attending a private school with an atheist philosophy telling the kid that if he went to church he would be suspended and expelled if he prayed the people saying that 'The school has that right,' in this case would be going 'How dare they!'?
Well, since you asked, I can only speculate why you would get such a silly feeling.

What is an "atheist philosophy?" I'm atheist and I don't believe in any god or gods. That's what puts me into the atheist category, but I don't know what atheist philosophy you mean.

Personally, I would think it wrong, and I bet many other people here would, too. But I can't even imagine such a scenario. If you look at freethinkers' summer camps, for example, exploring and learning is encouraged, even learning about religion.

[Romantic Heretic]

Well, since you asked, I can only speculate why you would get such a silly feeling.

What is an "atheist philosophy?" I'm atheist and I don't believe in any god or gods. That's what puts me into the atheist category, but I don't know what atheist philosophy you mean.

Personally, I would think it wrong, and I bet many other people here would, too. But I can't even imagine such a scenario. If you look at freethinkers' summer camps, for example, exploring and learning is encouraged, even learning about religion.
I get that feeling because people are people and most people use their philosophies as an excuse and not a guideline.

[Kathleen42]

How did the school find out he was attending the other prom in the first place? Surely, he wasn't required to ask their permission. What he does on his own time, as long as it's not illegal or bringing dishonor to his school and family, is no one's business. If anyone has any say in what proms the boy attends, it's his parents. NOT a bunch of administrators in a school--any school, public, private, religiously affiliated, or non-affiliated.

My understanding is that his girlfriend's school actually required a signed slip from the principal of students attending from other schools.

Am I the only one who wants a Footloose-style showdown?

[fairy86]

My understanding is that his girlfriend's school actually required a signed slip from the principal of students attending from other schools.

Am I the only one who wants a Footloose-style showdown?

Kathleen42, honestly Footloose was the first thing on my mind when I read the article. . .

[dgiharris]

Why do I get the feeling that if the kid was attending a private school with an atheist philosophy telling the kid that if he went to church he would be suspended and expelled if he prayed the people saying that 'The school has that right,' in this case would be going 'How dare they!'?

Interesting point. But this country was founded on religious freedom so it is anathema to the spirit of the Constitution. Hmmm.... Technically, I think an atheist school (with a contract, code of conduct, agreement signed by parents and students) would be within their rights, but I just don't see this happening.

To me, atheists are more like cats. They aren't pack animals. They aren't a concentrated group of people and as such there really is not 'atheist dogma' that is pushed by any one org. In a nutshell, atheists don't care enough to pull together to form an atheist school and then push an atheist agenda.

But I will concede that there is a double standard as you alluded to. I think the answer is obvious. This is a Christian country founded on religious freedom.


My understanding is that his girlfriend's school actually required a signed slip from the principal of students attending from other schools.

Am I the only one who wants a Footloose-style showdown?

Kathleen42, honestly Footloose was the first thing on my mind when I read the article. . .

Can't believe I didn't think of this. Especially since I saw footloose again a few months ago LOL.

Funny, you mean that in the real world problems can't be solved with a dance???

Mel...

[Williebee]

Actually, at least to some degree, we can take religion out of this completely.

If Frost is involved with alcohol or sex at the prom, he will be expelled, England said.

Frost's stepfather Stephan Johnson said the school's rules should not apply outside the classroom.

In the public school in our school system, underage drinking is a punishable offense, as it is illegal. That can include suspension and expulsion. He's 17. If he's involved with sex with a minor, same thing.

As to the music and dancing, if the parent's signed the school code agreements, then they have bound their son to them, just as any public school kid is bound by their parent or guardian signing any other school code of conduct -- for extracurricular activities or school internet usage.

Bottom line is they shouldn't have put the kid in school there if they didn't want to follow the school's rules.

Is it stupid? Don't know. (Although it is to me.) And it sucks for the kid, but we all sometimes pay/paid for the actions of our parents. (And we'll roll the same thing down on our kids in one form or another.)

[Christine N.]

Kathleen42, honestly Footloose was the first thing on my mind when I read the article. . .

Yeah, I was totally thinking we need some Kevin Bacon in this situation.

I GET what the school wants. The boy was told what would happen if he went to prom, and he's still going. He'll still graduate, although not with his class. He knows the consequences and is willing to pay them. He's made a decision and is sticking to his guns. Good for him. It's not him but his parents that seem to be so upset about him not walking for grad. Both events are once-in-a-lifetime. He'll get a cap and gown and take some pictures in front of his house and remember how he graduated from H.S.

Personally I think the boy has more integrity than the principal. If it was going to be this big a deal, WHY did he sign the permission slip?

[dgiharris]

Yeah, I was totally thinking we need some Kevin Bacon in this situation.

I GET what the school wants. The boy was told what would happen if he went to prom, and he's still going. He'll still graduate, although not with his class. He knows the consequences and is willing to pay them. He's made a decision and is sticking to his guns. Good for him. It's not him but his parents that seem to be so upset about him not walking for grad. Both events are once-in-a-lifetime. He'll get a cap and gown and take some pictures in front of his house and remember how he graduated from H.S.

Personally I think the boy has more integrity than the principal. If it was going to be this big a deal, WHY did he sign the permission slip?

You know, I feel like i'm in the Twilight Zone. I think we can't help but think about this from our point of view, I mean, come on, dance is harmless right?

But what about the Muslim world that views women should be covered from head to toe?

What about Jews and Muslims that feel that eating pork puts their mortal souls in danger and therefore it is forbidden?

What about Hindus that do not cut their hair and feel to do so is a mortal sin?

From the outside looking in, many religious beliefs look stupid, but that is not our call.

The principle is the principle of a religious school that has the belief that dance is evil. Therefore, it is actually the principle who has the moral highground here and should be applauded for sticking to his guns.

*cue Twilight Zone Music*

Mel...

[AngelRoseDarke]

We have private schools like that here in TN. No music, dancing, or pants on girls. Those are the rules. If you break them (even outside of school) you can be suspended or expelled. Parents and students are made aware of this before they start attending the school. It's their choice to go or not. We have have a few local law suits over this kind of thing and the schools won. Those are the rules no matter how strange others may think they are. Private schools can do things the way they want.

[Clair Dickson]

Let's just get something straight here-- the kid can still graduate once he finishes his exit exams. He'll be suspended, receive incomplete (and presumably have to come back and finish the classes after his suspension is over) and not be able to WALK at graduation. He can still graduate.

The teen, who is scheduled to receive his diploma May 24, would be suspended from classes and receive an "incomplete" on remaining assignments, England said. Frost also would not be permitted to attend graduation but would get a diploma once he completes final exams.

They truly cannot stop him from graduating if he earns the credits. They can just make it finishing hard and inconvenient.

I think this is a bit strict, but it won't be the end of the world for a young couple to go to prom. (Bias alert: I think Prom is an overhyped waste of time and money that often leads to let-downs and regrets.) The kids and his parents had to have known the schools position on rock and roll and other such modern subversive activities. They chose this school anyway.

Though I do think it rather hypocritical for the school to tell the kids they have to get a permission slip-- sign the slip-- and then weigh some rather heavy consequences if they do decide to go. Just come right out and say that the school doesn't agree with prom and that all who attend it will be punished instead a futzing around pretending there's a chance of approval. That's just a cruel joke, I think.

[Christine N.]

You know, I feel like i'm in the Twilight Zone. I think we can't help but think about this from our point of view, I mean, come on, dance is harmless right?

But what about the Muslim world that views women should be covered from head to toe?

What about Jews and Muslims that feel that eating pork puts their mortal souls in danger and therefore it is forbidden?

What about Hindus that do not cut their hair and feel to do so is a mortal sin?

From the outside looking in, many religious beliefs look stupid, but that is not our call.

The principle is the principle of a religious school that has the belief that dance is evil. Therefore, it is actually the principle who has the moral highground here and should be applauded for sticking to his guns.

*cue Twilight Zone Music*

Mel...

That's all well and fine, but what I'm saying is the boy knows he is going against his school rules, knows what the consequences will be, and is willing to pay them to go to the dance. His parents are the ones fighting, not him.

The principal signed the permission slip, then said 'there will be consequences', then scurried off to tell on the boy. He didn't say "No, I won't sign". Wouldn't THAT have been sticking to his prinicpals?

Personally I would have a problem signing a contract that tried to control my behavior outside of school. But, being a teacher I understand there are some behaviors unacceptable off of school grounds; usually they're already illegal, but some, like pole dancing, are not. However, they did sign the contract. The boy knew what would happen, and he chose to do it. But HE CHOSE, and he is accepting the consequences. He's acting like an adult, IMO.

[Romantic Heretic]

All right. Let's try another metaphor. Or is this a simile?

You take a job, mostly because you really need it. Family to feed and all that. The company insists you sign an employment contract.

Among its stipulations are 'You must go to church on Sundays and it must be affiliated with a particular religion' and 'You may not support this particular political party in any way'. Breaking these stipulations is a firing offense.

Is the company stepping over the line?

[Don]

All right. Let's try another metaphor. Or is this a simile?

You take a job, mostly because you really need it. Family to feed and all that. The company insists you sign an employment contract.

Among its stipulations are 'You must go to church on Sundays and it must be affiliated with a particular religion' and 'You may not support this particular political party in any way'. Breaking these stipulations is a firing offense.

Is the company stepping over the line?
You live in a country, mostly because you're born there. Place to live and all that. The government insists they're in charge of your life.

Among its stipulations are 'You must give up 40% of what you earn to support us and our schemes' and 'You must obey the millions of regulations controlling virtually everything you do.' Breaking these stipulations will land you in prison.

Is the government stepping over the line?

[Williebee]

RH, your analogy doesn't hold. Mostly because the employer is paying you for your time and actions. In this case, the parents are probably paying the school.

The kid isn't getting paid either, although he is getting grades. So, if one were to equate pay with grades, you could argue that the school is "docking his grades" if he goes to this dance. This may well effect what college he goes to, what financial aid he gets, etc.

The analogy may hold then, but the employment contract would be contrary to the employment laws of the land.

[Romantic Heretic]

You live in a country, mostly because you're born there. Place to live and all that. The government insists they're in charge of your life.

Among its stipulations are 'You must give up 40% of what you earn to support us and our schemes' and 'You must obey the millions of regulations controlling virtually everything you do.' Breaking these stipulations will land you in prison.

Is the government stepping over the line?

If you hate government so much why not move somewhere where there isn't one? Afghanistan for example. I also hear the Congo is nice this time of year.

"I like taxes. They buy me civilization." - Oliver Wendell Holmes

[Romantic Heretic]

RH, your analogy doesn't hold. Mostly because the employer is paying you for your time and actions. In this case, the parents are probably paying the school.

The kid isn't getting paid either, although he is getting grades. So, if one were to equate pay with grades, you could argue that the school is "docking his grades" if he goes to this dance. This may well effect what college he goes to, what financial aid he gets, etc.

The analogy may hold then, but the employment contract would be contrary to the employment laws of the land.

I think it holds. In both cases an institution is misusing its power to involve itself in an individual's personal life and beliefs.

[backslashbaby]

OK, think of those boot-camps kids are sent to for behavior problems, though. They are entirely legal, but they retrict all kinds of things that would be illegal to restrict normally. I think the attitude of parents on some religious private schools are similar to these boot-camp programs. The legality is probably similar.

In boarding school uber-religious programs, lots of things are restricted 24/7. I believe the idea is that sometimes private schools and programs are allowed to act as a parental substitute, if that's what the parents agreed to.

[Williebee]

OK, think of those boot-camps kids are sent to for behavior problems, though. They are entirely legal, but they retrict all kinds of things that would be illegal to restrict normally. I think the attitude of parents on some religious private schools are similar to these boot-camp programs. The legality is probably similar.

In boarding school uber-religious programs, lots of things are restricted 24/7. I believe the idea is that sometimes private schools and programs are allowed to act as a parental substitute, if that's what the parents agreed to.

Again, not really, because most behavioral "boot camp" type facilities are correctional in nature -- either court ordered, or as an alternative to expulsion offered through the public school system. Public, not private, and not necessarily voluntary.

But it does work in terms of taking religion out of the picture.

If parent or guardian signed their kid into the program, whether they are writing the check directly to it or not, they agreed to be bound by the rules.

That said, I admire the kid for standing up for what he feels is his right. And, as mentioned before by someone else upthread, find it slimy that the school principal would sign off on the kid going to the other school prom, and then threaten him with consequences if he went.

[GeorgeK]

All right. Let's try another metaphor. Or is this a simile?

You take a job, mostly because you really need it. Family to feed and all that. The company insists you sign an employment contract.

Among its stipulations are 'You must go to church on Sundays and it must be affiliated with a particular religion' and 'You may not support this particular political party in any way'. Breaking these stipulations is a firing offense.

Is the company stepping over the line?

Provided the company is not connected with the government and you were not coersed into signing, then no. Private schools, private companies will have more restrictive policies. It could be to require wearing purple sunglasses at all waking hours. It doesn't matter how stupid someone else thinks the rule is, as long as it is not illegal. If you don't like it, go elsewhere. You need a job, but you don't need that particular job. That kid needs an education, but it needn't be from that particular school. Personally I'm glad to hear of these kinds of things, because were I moving to that area and had children of an age to attend such a school I'd know to not bother with that one, and maybe, just maybe not to bother with moving there at all. If his classmates object, they might all give the finger to the principal after they all have their diplomas. If the families object, the school will see a drop in enrollment.

In order for a society to be free. One must be free to fail and free to be an ass (provided they only use legal means, and no disrespect to donkeys everywhere).

[Romantic Heretic]

That's a very interesting viewpoint.

So you're saying that the government, by the people and for the people, has no right to determine your behavior in anyway whatsoever?

But a private institution can impose any limitation it wishes at any time?

[icerose]

That said, I admire the kid for standing up for what he feels is his right. And, as mentioned before by someone else upthread, find it slimy that the school principal would sign off on the kid going to the other school prom, and then threaten him with consequences if he went.

That's the part that bothers me. You want to have rules and regulations? Fine. You want to punish students who agreed to these rules and regulations that they agreed to and are breaking? Fine.

You sign off and give your permission then threaten after the fact? So not fine. If you want to stick to your guns don't sign the freakin slip. But to sign it and then say, well I'm giving you this so you can go, if you go though, mister, there's going to be serious consequences. Do what God wants you to do, not what you want. :Wha:

[James81]

I gotta disagree. If this were a public school, then you are absolutely right. But i'm assuming that this religious school is a private school.

And that the family signed some sort of 'contract' with the school. Religious school are more than just schools, they are communities with rules and laws that EXTEND BEYOND THE CLASSROOM.

What if a student at a religious school was a pole dancer at night? Using your logic this should be o.k. right?

Do I think the school is overreacting? Sure. But it is a religious school with beliefs that I do not have so why should this particular belief be different or ignored?

If you don't want to follow the rules of a private school then don't go to said school, you do have a choice.

In this case, as ridiculous as it sounds, I have to side with the school.

Mel...

I agree with you wholeheartedly.

This is what the private school believes. Nobody should infringe on that belief. Period. No matter how loopy and ridiculous and non-Christ-like the belief may be, it's the PRIVATE school's right to have that belief and enforce it.

If the kid doesn't like it, they should put him in public school or find a private school that matches their belief.

[GeorgeK]

That's a very interesting viewpoint.

So you're saying that the government, by the people and for the people, has no right to determine your behavior in anyway whatsoever?

But a private institution can impose any limitation it wishes at any time?

Try reading the entire post. That is certainly NOT what I said.

[Contemplative]

You know, it occurred to me last night, thinking about this story, that this would be an excellent jumping-off point for a "based (loosely) on a real story" 80's style raunchy teen sex comedy with lots of dancing, rock music, gratuitous nudity, wacky hijinks, underage drinking, cussing and of course the classic sentimental boy-gets-girl/rebel love ending. It's not so often that someone so very reminiscent of the "evil dean" stereotype shows up in real life like this, after all.

If such a movie did get made, they would need to show the (very slightly altered for legal purposes) name of the school frequently, along with lots of very recognizable exterior shots.

...

Well, I can dream, right?

More seriously, my best wishes to the kid, and I hope he manages to disentangle himself from the ugly community he's gotten involved with.

[Greenify13]

I wanted to provide updates about the student:

Situation on Monday (http://www.toledoblade.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20090511/NEWS16/905119942)

News Video and summary below (http://abclocal.go.com/wtvg/story?section=news/local&id=6807505)

Hope that answers questions about "what happened after".