Going too far...

[CoachR64]

"FINDLAY, Ohio (May 11) -- A northwest Ohio teenager has been suspended by his Christian school because he attended another high school's prom.
Officials at Heritage Christian School in Findlay had warned 17-year-old Tyler Frost that he would be suspended and prohibited from attending graduation if he went to the public school dance over the weekend with his girlfriend.
Frost says he didn't think going to the dance was wrong even though his fundamentalist Baptist school Ohio forbids dancing, rock music and hand-holding.
Frost didn't go to school Monday. Instead, he and his girlfriend are heading to New York for a Tuesday morning TV interview.
The teen says he's now getting Facebook and e-mail messages from around the world."



Ok, so now rock music, dancing, and holding hands are prohibited for high school kids? Man, this school, and probably the church affiliated with it, are way way legalistic here and out of their minds!

It doesn't technically bother me that the kid was suspended, because both him and his parents new the rules. If they had a problem with the contract of the school, they should have sent him somewhere else.

My problem is that the school has this as a rule in the first place. Trying to prevent kids from being kids and enjoying things that are NOT sinful is pretty lame.

Coach

 

[lostaquarium]

But scripture doesn't even forbid those things. On what basis does the church decide they're wrong?

 

[trOlliJokinen]

My school (private of course) once told me I would get suspended over what I ate a lunch (I was on the end of a joke by my friends) and that we couldn't go to the waffle house after school because people smoked and the school couldn't tell if it was us that was smoking or not. The first incident was resolved by me telling the principal she could mind her own business and march her happy tail back into her office and leave me alone. We still went to the waffle house. This ain't nothing new for private schools.

 

[JonMiller]

He signed saying he would do it.

The principal is correct as far as following the law is concerned.

I disagree with the policy, and think that the principal should show mercy.

JM

 

[CoachR64]

I agree it's not new. I worked at a private school for 3 years, but our rules were not near as legalistic here. We did, however, remove students for getting pregnant (and the father if applicable) and students who were caught drinking alcohol and using drugs outside of school.

So, I do understand private parochial schools having contracts and different standards for their kids. I am just floored that some organizations this day and age can still be so legalistic and go after teenagers for simply being teenagers and having some good, clean, moral, legal fun.

Coach

 

[LostFound1986]

I'm surprised about removing pregnant people plus their fathers as well though to be honest. Surely its better to make them feel welcome, loved, and to help them out? Can't be easy.

 

[Balugon]

lol. it doesnt surprise me. A dead church making dead rules, thats often how it goes. Then of course u have to figure out where the line is drawn when "dead church" starts to become a cult.

Either way, the kid didnt sin, and im glad he went, and im glad that this got publicity. I bet the school is gonna have a hayday with people doing stuff for this kid if it gets and/or stays highly publicized.

 

[mina]

I don't feel sorry for the kid. He went there for four years and he and his parents probably knew they weren't lenient in their enforcement of rules.
I think the rules are stupid, but no one is forcing people to send their kids there. It's a free choice. If it's in the handbook the school is openly telling the parents and kids their position on such topics. They aren't hiding it. I feel that private schools can have whatever rules they want within the law. If i were a parent and wanted a private Christian school education for my child, I would read the rules and regulations BEFORE enrolling them there. If I disagree strongly with any of them, then it would not be the best fit for my child. I love how the dad is quoted in one article complaing about school rules trying to govern a student outside of school, but i'm like it's a BAPTIST FUNDEMENTAL HIGH SCHOOL!!! WHAT DO YOU THINK THEY ARE GOING TO BE ABOUT??? YOU SENT YOUR KID THERE FOR FOUR YEARS AND NOW YOU ARE SURPRISED ABOUT HOW THEY WORK???? jmo

In short, I think the rules are constricting and stupid. And i think it makes kids want to do anything you forbid, MORE.

 

[CoachR64]

Mina, I understand and don't disagree. The kid and his parents knew the rules....

I am just talking about the legalism and stuff that so many churches get caught up in versus serving Christ. That is what floored me.

Coach

 

[mina]

sorry, i was just sharing my opinion on the whole of the story......
I think it's stupid all the way around. The kid and his parents are sort of stupid, the private school is stupid, and i think the public school is kind of stupid for requiring another school principal to sign a paper for a kid to go to their prom- i think the parent's signature should suffice- because another principal shouldn't be involved in what their student is doing outside of school.
the legalism is nothing new- this has been going on in private Christian schools forever and a day. And it will probably stay that way unless they lose ENORMOUS enrollement, but i think people in charge like this will go to their grave before they change anything that shows them to be less right- even if there are only 5 students left in the school.

 

[Sketcher]

It's pretty dumb.

 

[CoachR64]

Mina,

I don't really have a problem requiring a signature from another school for approval of attending the event of a different school. They probably want to make sure the kid is in good academic standing and in behavioral standing, such as not being on suspension from school or anything. Here, there is also the issue of eligibility which covers all school activities, not just sports, where kids can not participate if they are failing classes.

Coach

 

[mina]

but that's not up to another school to determine- it's not another principal's job to determine if a kid is good enough to go to a dance off campus (unless they are living on campus and parent's have given them that right). I think it's more in the parent's jurisdiction. So , I do have a problem with it and wanted to address it

 

[CoachR64]

Mina,

But, legally here, if the kid is failing, he can not attend those events even if sponsored by another school. They have to get approval to attend events at other schools because of this.

If a kid is suspended, they can not legally attend events either. It is not about deciding if a kid is a good enough, it is following the rules or the school system and the kids get in trouble. The schools can be fined.

Coach

 

[mina]

I still think that's up to a parent to vouch for, sorry- especially in a public school setting.. What about homeschooled students? Who will they be fined by for attending a dance if they are a failing student? Failing students can't attend prom? Is this a NCLB thing? Yes, I think that's stupid and also legalistic in an educational way and constricting. What's even stupider, is that his principal SIGNED it, and then told him of the consequences.

 

[CoachR64]

I disagree that it is up for a parent to vouch for. Sometimes, the parents don't even know the grades of their children, especially outside of report times. The school is in charge of tracking the grades and should vouch for the grades. Our eligibility here is done on a weekly basis.

I have no problem with preventing students from participating in extra curricular activities if they are not passing their classes. Their job is as student first. They should have to earn the rights to participate in the other stuff.

Coach

 

[mina]

ok..... I don't know why you fixated on this one point to argue with me about. I still think a parent's signature for a student from another school should suffice. And i think it's stupid all the way around. If my child was asked to another school's prom as a guest then it's my decsion if they can go or not, not their principal. I would even be for requiring parents of non students to call and talk with the principal of the school that is holding the prom. While I understand the point of not wanting to have disagreeable non students at a dance, if they are a guest it's not up to thier home school to hover over them. I think that is just as legalistic. I've never heard of not allowing a student to go to prom if they are failing- suspended ; yes, but not failing. Do they have a right to do it? I have no idea, but it seems a stupid point to hold another school legally responsible for. I've said all im going to say and i'm not going to go around and around over trival stuff again. My opinion and what I think is that it's stupid all the way around. I don't feel sorry for the kid. I think his private school has a right to have whatever rules they want within the law, no matter how legalistic and stupid they seem to be. I don't know why his principal just didn't refuse to sign it since the school was so passionate about not dancing.

I can see how the no alcohol would hold up, b/c he and his date and everyone at the prom are likely minors.

 

[CoachR64]

Ok, but I was simply discussing my stand, just like you. You don't have to get all defensive and mad every time someone is simply having a discussion with you.

Coach

 

[timbo81]

I was reading up and the school has like 84 people in it.

so i'm guessing it's some isolated rural thing.


I kind of hate when these stories get published because really it's not news worthy, we got people dying, a kid not going to a prom is not news.

it got posted on another forum I read and the usual atheists came out of the woodwork to bash christians. even though I have never heard ever of a christian school that strict before so it's a very isolated case

 

[Inkachu]

My high school was exactly like this. They monitored your clothes, your hair, your makeup, just about everything you did. No dances, ever. We didn't get a prom. It sucked. Atmospheres like this don't create obedient, submissive young adults. They create rebellious, frustrated young adults who run wild as soon as they're able to.