Did you hear about the 8-year-old boy who was ordered by his school to go to a psychologist because he drew a picture of Jesus on the cross?
While there are many facts in dispute between the boy’s parents and school officials, there is no doubt in my mind that the school is in the wrong. The boy’s father said that he drew the cross when asked to draw something that reminded him of Christmas; the school denies that. It’s unclear whether the boy meant to draw himself or Jesus on the cross. The school says they didn’t actually suspend the boy but just forced him to have a psychological evaluation before he could return – seems like the same thing to me. They even disagree on whether the drawing the boy’s father has been showing to the media is the one the boy drew.
But even if you interpret the evidence in the way that is the most favorable to the school, what happened to this boy is unjust. It’s just like what I posted about last time – people need to let other people be. A school’s job is to teach kids facts about math, writing, grammar, history, science, computers, and other subjects. It shouldn’t be a school’s job to meddle in students’ lives or to push value judgments on them. Kids should be able to draw whatever they want, and teachers and superintendents shouldn’t psychoanalyze their drawings and send them to shrinks for anything different or unusual.
The father in this case has been criticized for being too willing to speak to the media and for demanding that the school reimburse his son for his suffering and pay for tuition to a private school since the boy is too traumatized to go back to the same school. But I agree with him! The school officials violated the boy’s rights and should compensate him for his suffering. I don’t blame him for wanting to go to a different school. Being singled out and sent to a psychiatrist would be traumatic, and drawing a picture, even if it is of yourself on the cross, does not merit that.
As Pink Floyd said, teachers need to leave kids alone! Schools should teach facts and skills, not psychoanalyze kids’ drawings and single them out for psychotherapy for every little thing. Kids should be able to express themselves without being labeled as mentally ill.
How tolerant and accepting liberals are. Not!
They just took over the presidency, the Senate, and the House, and now they’re throwing fits because Obama picked one slightly conservative person to speak for a few seconds at his inauguration. Obama’s choice of pastor Rick Warren to give the invocation at his inauguration was a gesture of inclusion and a way of saying that Obama actually values conservatives. Now, liberals are saying Obama’s choice was bigoted because Warren opposes gay marriage. Apparently, being inclusive means doing whatever it takes to avoid anything that might even remotely be considered offensive to gays and lesbians, even if it means completely excluding all conservatives. Well, I think that conservatives are just as important as gays and lesbians. I approve of Obama’s decision to bring some actual diversity to his inauguration by choosing someone conservative. A group of people who all think identically and believe the exact same things isn’t very diverse.
On another note, Merry Christmas!
Probably just about everyone has heard about Barack Obama’s comments about “bitter” working-class Pennsylvanians who “cling to guns and religion.” I think I’m going to have to side with Hillary Clinton and the other Obama detractors on this one. Clinton said that people support the Second Amendment because they “believe it’s a matter of constitutional right” and that people are religious because they “believe it’s a matter of personal faith.” I completely agree with her. People don’t support gun-ownership rights and believe in God because they feel threatened and blindly stick to what is familiar. They believe what they believe because they think it’s the right thing to do. Obama shouldn’t dismiss people who disagree with him by saying that they are just “bitter” and need “a way to explain their frustrations.”
Here is the excerpt in question from Obama’s speech:
“You go into these small towns in Pennsylvania and, like a lot of small towns in the Midwest, the jobs have been gone now for 25 years and nothing’s replaced them… And they fell through the Clinton administration, and the Bush administration, and each successive administration has said that somehow these communities are going to regenerate and they have not…And it’s not surprising then they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren’t like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations.”
Source: CNN
In my opinion, anyone who is protesting Pope Benedict’s visit to Turkey ought to knock it off. Numerous people in the mostly Islamic country are calling the pope an enemy of Islam, and maybe he has a reason to be. After all, Muhammad did condemn celibacy, while Jesus was celibate himself, as is Benedict and all of his predecessors. I think Benedict should go to Turkey and kick some Turkish butt!
I figured I’d weigh in on Pope Benedict’s comments about Islam. I don’t think there’s anything wrong with his decision to quote a Byzantine emperor who said, “Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached.” Although it was qiute classy of the pope to show his sadness that Muslims are angry at his remarks, it’s great that Benedict did not apologize, as he has no need to. No disrespect intended to Muslims, but I find it impossible to sympathize with the teachings of a religion that condemns celibacy. Additionally, both Benedict and the Byzantine emperor were right on when they said that Muslims have attempted to spread their faith through violence. If conquering Spain, Portugal, and almost France and then turning them into Muslim countries isn’t spreading one’s religion through violence, I don’t know what is. Good job Benedict!
