School Officials Force Christian Teen to Change Pro-Abstinence T-Shirt

and the school's excuse is that her shirt was sexually explicit or contained sexual innuendo??? Really?

And in some of our schools preteens are being indoctrinated with the gay agenda. But this girl cant wear an abstinence t shirt.

15 year old 8th grader!? Shouldn't she be a sophomore by that age?

Nothing like the sweet smell of Christian victimization! Look, schools are highly restrictive about what they allow kids to wear. At the high school my wife teachers at, students aren't allowed to wear anything Fresno State (a local group a dumb ass gangsters that call themselves the Bulldogs adopted the University's athletic logo), or anything featuring sport team logos (no Raiders or 49ers stuff allowed except on special days). Lots of schools tell kids when they can or can not wear shorts or even tell them what kind of shoes they're allowed to wear. There is a local school district that even forbids male students from having long hair (my cousin graduated valedictorian from one of their high schools, he almost got suspended his senior year because his hair could touch the top of his ears and he refused to cut it). Considering most of the other stuff they forbid, it doesn't surprise me a school would take issue with the wearing of cloths with reference to sexual activity, pro or con. It has nothing to do with her religious beliefs and everything to do with school anti-sex reference policy. The use of shame (making her wear a t-shirt announcing she got dress coded) was a bit extreme, most schools just tell students to go put on a PE shirt or provide a blank t-shirt.

That said, I agree with the content of the shirt. I sincerely believe the world would be a better place if there was a lot less drunk, unprotected sex.

Bryant wrote:15 year old 8th grader!? Shouldn't she be a sophomore by that age?

Nothing like the sweet smell of Christian victimization! Look, schools are highly restrictive about what they allow kids to wear. At the high school my wife teachers at, students aren't allowed to wear anything Fresno State (a local group a dumb ass gangsters that call themselves the Bulldogs adopted the University's athletic logo), or anything featuring sport team logos (no Raiders or 49ers stuff allowed except on special days). Lots of schools tell kids when they can or can not wear shorts or even tell them what kind of shoes they're allowed to wear. There is a local school district that even forbids male students from having long hair (my cousin graduated valedictorian from one of their high schools, he almost got suspended his senior year because his hair could touch the top of his ears and he refused to cut it). Considering most of the other stuff they forbid, it doesn't surprise me a school would take issue with the wearing of cloths with reference to sexual activity, pro or con. It has nothing to do with her religious beliefs and everything to do with school anti-sex reference policy. The use of shame (making her wear a t-shirt announcing she got dress coded) was a bit extreme, most schools just tell students to go put on a PE shirt or provide a blank t-shirt.

That said, I agree with the content of the shirt. I sincerely believe the world would be a better place if there was a lot less drunk, unprotected sex.

That was just a long, drawn out way to let us know that you are ok with the trampling of individual's rights based on the supposed belief of a "common good".

Common good, like common sense, doesn't exist. These are things that must exist commonly (read found among all). If it does nt or cannot exist among "the common" (read all people) then it isn't common and cannot exist.

That is exactly what is wrong with the progressive movement. They trample the innocent because of the criminal. Take care of the criminal.

Marconius wrote:

Bryant wrote:15 year old 8th grader!? Shouldn't she be a sophomore by that age?

Nothing like the sweet smell of Christian victimization! Look, schools are highly restrictive about what they allow kids to wear. At the high school my wife teachers at, students aren't allowed to wear anything Fresno State (a local group a dumb ass gangsters that call themselves the Bulldogs adopted the University's athletic logo), or anything featuring sport team logos (no Raiders or 49ers stuff allowed except on special days). Lots of schools tell kids when they can or can not wear shorts or even tell them what kind of shoes they're allowed to wear. There is a local school district that even forbids male students from having long hair (my cousin graduated valedictorian from one of their high schools, he almost got suspended his senior year because his hair could touch the top of his ears and he refused to cut it). Considering most of the other stuff they forbid, it doesn't surprise me a school would take issue with the wearing of cloths with reference to sexual activity, pro or con. It has nothing to do with her religious beliefs and everything to do with school anti-sex reference policy. The use of shame (making her wear a t-shirt announcing she got dress coded) was a bit extreme, most schools just tell students to go put on a PE shirt or provide a blank t-shirt.

That said, I agree with the content of the shirt. I sincerely believe the world would be a better place if there was a lot less drunk, unprotected sex.

That was just a long, drawn out way to let us know that you are ok with the trampling of individual's rights based on the supposed belief of a "common good".

Common good, like common sense, doesn't exist. These are things that must exist commonly (read found among all). If it does nt or cannot exist among "the common" (read all people) then it isn't common and cannot exist.

All I was saying is that it isn't an example of Christian persecution, as the story was trying to make it out as. I didn't say I agreed with dress codes (I was lucky to have gone to a school that didn't care so long as your cleavage and your crack weren't showing).

Bryant wrote:(I was lucky to have gone to a school that didn't care so long as your cleavage and your crack weren't showing).

Dude, I've never browsed your facebook photos or anything, and yet the thought of you showing off cleavage or crack is still rather distressing... :-p

So again, instead being able to talk about faith, they try to remove it completely, which isnt exactly fair to the kids because the same cant be done in real life. To me, this is all about conformity and fitting into "the mold."

Bryant wrote:

Marconius wrote:

Bryant wrote:15 year old 8th grader!? Shouldn't she be a sophomore by that age?

Nothing like the sweet smell of Christian victimization! Look, schools are highly restrictive about what they allow kids to wear. At the high school my wife teachers at, students aren't allowed to wear anything Fresno State (a local group a dumb ass gangsters that call themselves the Bulldogs adopted the University's athletic logo), or anything featuring sport team logos (no Raiders or 49ers stuff allowed except on special days). Lots of schools tell kids when they can or can not wear shorts or even tell them what kind of shoes they're allowed to wear. There is a local school district that even forbids male students from having long hair (my cousin graduated valedictorian from one of their high schools, he almost got suspended his senior year because his hair could touch the top of his ears and he refused to cut it). Considering most of the other stuff they forbid, it doesn't surprise me a school would take issue with the wearing of cloths with reference to sexual activity, pro or con. It has nothing to do with her religious beliefs and everything to do with school anti-sex reference policy. The use of shame (making her wear a t-shirt announcing she got dress coded) was a bit extreme, most schools just tell students to go put on a PE shirt or provide a blank t-shirt.

That said, I agree with the content of the shirt. I sincerely believe the world would be a better place if there was a lot less drunk, unprotected sex.

That was just a long, drawn out way to let us know that you are ok with the trampling of individual's rights based on the supposed belief of a "common good".

Common good, like common sense, doesn't exist. These are things that must exist commonly (read found among all). If it does nt or cannot exist among "the common" (read all people) then it isn't common and cannot exist.

All I was saying is that it isn't an example of Christian persecution, as the story was trying to make it out as. I didn't say I agreed with dress codes (I was lucky to have gone to a school that didn't care so long as your cleavage and your crack weren't showing).

Yes it is. Of course I agree that the percieved persecution against Christians is blown outta proportion by a certain sector, it is minimalized by another. All groups are persecuted against. There are no exceptions.

You original response however was an example of how many shrug off violations to the rights of individuals for a perceived sense of common good.

Tye good of tue common is better served by recognizing individuals rights and forgetting the PC crap that really does trample rghts.

This is a case (imo) of a school administrator using his authority to harass a kid. I think if the school wants to do this, they'd be more fair by introducing school uniforms.

Dennis324 wrote:This is a case (imo) of a school administrator using his authority to harass a kid. I think if the school wants to do this, they'd be more fair by introducing school uniforms.

I don't see any evidence of the student being singled out, nor do I see how this student was treated differently than any other student would be for a similar infraction. She didn't get in trouble because of her faith, she got in trouble because the school has a very strict dress code that prohibits any references to sexuality. Is the schools dresscode reasonable? Probably not. What the shame tactic of the 'dress for success' t-shirt acceptable? Probably not. Was the fact that the student's clothes reflected her Christian faith a factor in her punishment? No.

This is something that annoys me to no end. If I were to break a rule, say constantly talking out of order in class, and get in trouble everyone would be ok with it. No controversy. I got in trouble for carrying on about football when everyone else was trying to learn Chemistry. I think most would agree that me being reprimanded is an acceptable outcome. But now if you had a Christian speaking out of order about how much they love Jesus and they get in trouble its persecution! This is idiotic! Just because a Christian got reprimanded while they are expressing their faith doesn't make it persecution. To be persecuted, you have to be punished because of the religious message in a way that one would not be punished for a comparable non-religious message. In this example, and most of the other instances of so-called religious persecution, all it is is a Christian being punished for being a jack ass, just like anyone else would have been regardless of the theological implications of their disruption.

Bryant wrote:

Dennis324 wrote:This is a case (imo) of a school administrator using his authority to harass a kid. I think if the school wants to do this, they'd be more fair by introducing school uniforms.

I don't see any evidence of the student being singled out, nor do I see how this student was treated differently than any other student would be for a similar infraction. She didn't get in trouble because of her faith, she got in trouble because the school has a very strict dress code that prohibits any references to sexuality. Is the schools dresscode reasonable? Probably not. What the shame tactic of the 'dress for success' t-shirt acceptable? Probably not. Was the fact that the student's clothes reflected her Christian faith a factor in her punishment? No.

This is something that annoys me to no end. If I were to break a rule, say constantly talking out of order in class, and get in trouble everyone would be ok with it. No controversy. I got in trouble for carrying on about football when everyone else was trying to learn Chemistry. I think most would agree that me being reprimanded is an acceptable outcome. But now if you had a Christian speaking out of order about how much they love Jesus and they get in trouble its persecution! This is idiotic! Just because a Christian got reprimanded while they are expressing their faith doesn't make it persecution. To be persecuted, you have to be punished because of the religious message in a way that one would not be punished for a comparable non-religious message. In this example, and most of the other instances of so-called religious persecution, all it is is a Christian being punished for being a jack ass, just like anyone else would have been regardless of the theological implications of their disruption.

Your post makes a lot of sense, but you must look at this from all angles. Yeah, many if not most of these instances are of one person acting the ass, but there seems to be a double standard these days. People can wear Che shirts or La Raza shirts or many other things and never see repremand. One person wears an NRA t-shirt and all hell breaks loose. It isn't about the persecution ofCChof Christianity, per sea, it is the persecution of all things considered "right wing".

This is inevitable. In trying to stop the persecution of one group, you will always, always persecute another unintentionally. Right now there is a seemingly strong hatred of everything considered "right wing". We even see it here with you and Miles mistakenly believing that somehow right wingers say and do more stupid shit than anyone else. That is a mistaken belief and is a form of bias. That leads to persecution sooner or later.

BTW, VP Biden is a Dem. As long as that remains true, GOP politicians will never say more stupid shit than the Dems. Why??? VP Biden says and does more stupid shit than all other politicians combined.....regardless of affiliation.

Marconius wrote:

Bryant wrote:

Dennis324 wrote:This is a case (imo) of a school administrator using his authority to harass a kid. I think if the school wants to do this, they'd be more fair by introducing school uniforms.

I don't see any evidence of the student being singled out, nor do I see how this student was treated differently than any other student would be for a similar infraction. She didn't get in trouble because of her faith, she got in trouble because the school has a very strict dress code that prohibits any references to sexuality. Is the schools dresscode reasonable? Probably not. What the shame tactic of the 'dress for success' t-shirt acceptable? Probably not. Was the fact that the student's clothes reflected her Christian faith a factor in her punishment? No.

This is something that annoys me to no end. If I were to break a rule, say constantly talking out of order in class, and get in trouble everyone would be ok with it. No controversy. I got in trouble for carrying on about football when everyone else was trying to learn Chemistry. I think most would agree that me being reprimanded is an acceptable outcome. But now if you had a Christian speaking out of order about how much they love Jesus and they get in trouble its persecution! This is idiotic! Just because a Christian got reprimanded while they are expressing their faith doesn't make it persecution. To be persecuted, you have to be punished because of the religious message in a way that one would not be punished for a comparable non-religious message. In this example, and most of the other instances of so-called religious persecution, all it is is a Christian being punished for being a jack ass, just like anyone else would have been regardless of the theological implications of their disruption.

Your post makes a lot of sense, but you must look at this from all angles. Yeah, many if not most of these instances are of one person acting the ass, but there seems to be a double standard these days. People can wear Che shirts or La Raza shirts or many other things and never see repremand. One person wears an NRA t-shirt and all hell breaks loose. It isn't about the persecution ofCChof Christianity, per sea, it is the persecution of all things considered "right wing".

This is inevitable. In trying to stop the persecution of one group, you will always, always persecute another unintentionally. Right now there is a seemingly strong hatred of everything considered "right wing". We even see it here with you and Miles mistakenly believing that somehow right wingers say and do more stupid shit than anyone else. That is a mistaken belief and is a form of bias. That leads to persecution sooner or later.

BTW, VP Biden is a Dem. As long as that remains true, GOP politicians will never say more stupid shit than the Dems. Why??? VP Biden says and does more stupid shit than all other politicians combined.....regardless of affiliation.

I have a hard time imagining a kid getting in trouble at the HS I went to for wearing a NRA tshirt, however the school I went to tended to operate on a principle of 'if theres not a problem, then there is no need for new rules.' I had a teacher who graduated from the same school back in the 1950's. She told us the reason the school even has a dress code is that some students back in the day would show up in coverall - and nothing else. Despite our lax rules, we had a low crime rate and were a California Distinguished School. Who would have thought?

Bryant wrote:

This is something that annoys me to no end. If I were to break a rule, say constantly talking out of order in class, and get in trouble everyone would be ok with it. No controversy.

Eh...well, you know atheist Forest Rangers talk in class alla time I heard. (JK)