anyone else find this obscene?

callmeslick · Post by **callmeslick** » Thu Mar 27, 2014 4:52 pm

http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/too-tomboyis ... m_facebook

what a sorry-ass excuse for 'Christians'
'

CUDA · Post by **CUDA** » Thu Mar 27, 2014 5:57 pm

Yep a lot of us out there. good thing we have Grace to cover up all of our flaws HUH???

flip · Post by **flip** » Thu Mar 27, 2014 6:33 pm

Because of the Son's blood, the whole world has God, who is a spirit, poured out on them. Murderers, prostitutes, homosexuals, liars, thieves....etc all have the Spirit of God on them giving them His Testimony about the Son. Those that have the Spirit of Christ, those that have the Father and Son married as one in their flesh do not sin.

EDIT: Plus, name changes in the Bible are always significant. Jacob becomes Israel, Cepheus become Peter, Saul becomes Paul. That name change at Antioch signifies the Romanization of the Way and the subsequent spiritual famine that followed.

vision · Post by **vision** » Thu Mar 27, 2014 8:59 pm

callmeslick wrote:what a sorry-ass excuse for 'Christians'

Agreed. This is the western equivalent of putting women in burqas. God commands you look as pretty as possible without looking like a slut! It's bad enough girls in the West grow up with body image problems thanks to Hollywood and the media, but now we have their church (and presumably God) telling them how to look as well. Sick, sick, sick. I call that psychological and emotional abuse and I hope there is a civil lawsuit against the school.

woodchip · Post by **woodchip** » Fri Mar 28, 2014 7:01 am

I find this to be just as reprehensible as telling kids they can't wear American Flag t-shirts on Cinco de Maya day as ordained by the PC Pastors in the Church of Liberalism

callmeslick · Post by **callmeslick** » Fri Mar 28, 2014 7:04 am

woodchip wrote:I find this to be just as reprehensible as telling kids they can't wear American Flag t-shirts on Cinco de Maya day as ordained by the PC Pastors in the Church of Liberalism

explain what violence led to THIS decision, and I'd agree. Otherwise, just more conservative bitterness on your part. And, might I add, the third blatant deflection of subject in the last 24 hours by you on three different threads.

woodchip · Post by **woodchip** » Fri Mar 28, 2014 7:20 am

what violence led to the banning of the t-shirts?

callmeslick · Post by **callmeslick** » Fri Mar 28, 2014 7:42 am

woodchip wrote:what violence led to the banning of the t-shirts?

the previous year's Cinco de Mayo at that school was marred by violence, if you read the article that was posted. That was the ENTIRE justification for
the ban on flag shirts and the like in the current year.

woodchip · Post by **woodchip** » Fri Mar 28, 2014 8:19 am

First off slick, there was no violence the previous year:

"According to court documents, the incident occurred amid "ongoing racial tension and gang violence within the school, and after a near-violent altercation had erupted during the prior Cinco de Mayo over the display of an American flag."

The American flag was displayed because the Mexican flag was being displayed...and "near violent" is not the same as violence occurring. Secondly, while the American flag t-shirts were being required to be removed:

"Although the appeals court acknowledged that other students were permitted to wear Mexican flag colors and symbols, it ruled that the school was allowed to forbid the American flag apparel out of concerns that it would cause disruption, even though no disruption had occurred. "

So the Mexicans can wear their colors but Americans cannot. So which is worse, a private school requiring a certain look be adhered to or a school pandering it's dress code against Americans but not Mexicans? Really slick, your complete lack of knowledge on issues is embarrassing.

callmeslick · Post by **callmeslick** » Fri Mar 28, 2014 8:25 am

still dodging, Woody? Once again, I ask: what relates, and how, to what this so-called Christian school did to that little girl? Where
was the 'ongoing' tension? Where was a near-violent(thanks for parsing for me)event that led to the decision to judge her. Where is
the Christianity in their actions? You seem to be hell-bent on any means possible to dodge real questions and turn them into your
soapbox over tired subjects we've debated before........why?

woodchip · Post by **woodchip** » Fri Mar 28, 2014 9:02 am

Did you skim the part where I said the christian school's action was reprehensible?

callmeslick · Post by **callmeslick** » Fri Mar 28, 2014 9:09 am

woodchip wrote:Did you skim the part where I said the christian school's action was reprehensible?

well, I read it, and then watched you segue into yet another tired rant about a subject you already have beaten to death, which had utterly no relation.

callmeslick · Post by **callmeslick** » Fri Mar 28, 2014 9:15 am

oh, and by the way, equally obscene was this:
http://www.today.com/moms/girl-who-shav ... 2D79450757

so, it's not just a 'Christian' school thing.......what are these sorts of decisions based upon(beyond sheer stupid insensitivity)?

snoopy · Post by **snoopy** » Fri Mar 28, 2014 9:28 am

callmeslick wrote:oh, and by the way, equally obscene was this:
http://www.today.com/moms/girl-who-shav ... 2D79450757

so, it's not just a 'Christian' school thing.......what are these sorts of decisions based upon(beyond sheer stupid insensitivity)?

(I think that was woody's original point... it isn't really confined to any particular group other than "humans.")

I'm going to continue with the "we all have an inner desire to make everyone conform to our will." Little people feeling that they wield big power makes for trouble the majority of the time.

woodchip · Post by **woodchip** » Fri Mar 28, 2014 9:31 am

I think slick, stupidity by those with a college degree is nothing new. Here is another example of supposedly educated people knowing what is best and taking a child away from her parents (note: this is about the girl with mitochondrial problems)

http://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/2013/1 ... story.html

callmeslick · Post by **callmeslick** » Fri Mar 28, 2014 9:34 am

woodchip wrote:I think slick, stupidity by those with a college degree is nothing new.

interesting comment. You realize, of course, that denigration of higher education and intellectuals was the cornerstone of both Fascist and Maoist dictatorships, right?

woodchip · Post by **woodchip** » Fri Mar 28, 2014 9:47 am

As did Stalin when he purged the communist party and the military...whats your point?

callmeslick · Post by **callmeslick** » Fri Mar 28, 2014 10:16 am

my point is (and, it's completely tangental to the thread topic) that such anti-intellectual thinking is a core of the American right-wing, and that core can be easily traced back to Ronald Reagan. You chose to bring it, why, again? Because both of us know that stupidity is hardly some hallmark of college education. If anything, higher education makes such stupidity FAR less prevalent. Snoopy, I think, hits on a core issue around people trying to control others who don't conform.

Sergeant Thorne · Post by **Sergeant Thorne** » Fri Mar 28, 2014 11:33 am

I find the link to not have enough information. The letter from the school indicates that it was an on-going issue that had been addressed before. Right off-hand I don't find it obscene at all. Why should a Christian school go through all of the trouble to exist as a separate institution if they aren't going to require that certain pre-defined standards be upheld to their satisfaction? I find it ironic that she was put from there into a public school. I think that says a lot about her grandparents. They may have liked the idea of a Christian school, but apparently it didn't mean the same thing to them that it does to the school, or the other parents sending their children there.

It's just like a business, Slick. You have to maintain certain standards in order to allow your business to exist as it is intended to, and this doesn't always bode well for personal relationships. Everyone comes in knowing the ropes, and a lot of people think things should be a lot more flexible than they really can be. Someone has to have their eye on the bigger picture while everyone else is focused only on their feelings...

Sergeant Thorne · Post by **Sergeant Thorne** » Fri Mar 28, 2014 11:44 am

BTW I have personally seen examples of just why the college educated can be "stupid". A college education is higher learning, and if a person focuses on that as all-important and all-encompassing without acquiring a necessary degree of common-sense and an understanding of life, human behavior, and relationships, then for all of that higher learning they can be really inept or just downright stupid. Higher learning also has a degree of pride associated with it, and when you think you know something you can make some really major fumbles due to what you didn't suspect that you still don't know.

I am a highly intelligent person, if I do say so myself, and I've had to learn a lot from people less intelligent who just have a lot of common sense and life experience. Higher learning is great, but it certainly has its blind spots when it decides it's everything (and it usually does).

Tunnelcat · Post by **Tunnelcat** » Fri Mar 28, 2014 11:52 am

You know boys, when I was in public school in the 1960's, all the girls had to wear dresses or skirts. Being the "tomboy" that I am and was, I hated it to my very core. Dresses are impossible to really play in, and I played like a good tomboy rough houser. The dress code didn't change until I was in High School in the 1970's, and only then did they relent to the point that girls could wear white jeans, not blue jeans, several days a week. I jumped at the chance to wear pants by wearing those white jeans whenever I could in protest to their old ways of what they thought was gender appropriate. Even that practice was changed a few years later and blue jeans were finally allowed for all students, all days, even the boys. Thank you for the sexual revolution.

That Christian School is living in the ancient past. I'm glad that girl's parents had the presence of mind to pull their little girl out of that repressive place. However, being a private school, they can do what they see fit and forcing them to change their rules isn't really fair to them. They can force girls to wear appropriate female attire if they so choose, because people choose to go there freely. But this dress code in my mind is the equivalent of having to wear a burqa or veil to denote one's gender to everyone else within this private Madrasah. Fortunately, more informed parents can just a easily take their little girls out of this school because they don't like that ancient sex stereotypical idea of what's gender appropriate for girls to wear.

vision · Post by **vision** » Fri Mar 28, 2014 12:20 pm

Sergeant Thorne wrote:Why should a Christian school go through all of the trouble to exist as a separate institution if they aren't going to require that certain pre-defined standards be upheld to their satisfaction?

The message here of course is "God is superficial." People applying a arbitrary thing like a dress code and attributing it to Christian values, which is a product of God's will. What a disgustingly immature "supreme" being.

flip · Post by **flip** » Fri Mar 28, 2014 2:18 pm

Vision, how inconsistent and hypocritical you are. You have no problem with throwing aborted human remains into a fire for use as an energy source, but get all riled up when someone tries to encourage modesty. I can't even say what I think I about you.

vision · Post by **vision** » Fri Mar 28, 2014 3:15 pm

flip wrote:You have no problem with throwing aborted human remains into a fire for use as an energy source...

Please explain to me what we are supposed to do with human remains besides dwell on them?

flip · Post by **flip** » Fri Mar 28, 2014 4:05 pm

How would me trying to explain to you anything about human dignity be anything but a waste of my time? Seeing as how people like you don't see yourselves any more than highly evolved animals, it really comes as no surprise. In the right atmosphere, you will do the atrocious.

Spidey · Post by **Spidey** » Fri Mar 28, 2014 4:57 pm

Lol, another silly topic.

How can this not be Christian, are not Christians all about conformity?

Second a private school can set its dress and conduct standards any way they want, and you have the option to go somewhere else…as the student did.

Also, these rules only apply to time spent in school, the girl can dress and behave like a tom boy all she wants after school, and weekends, so suck it up and behave!

A big tadoooo… over nothing, that’s what I call “obscene”.

callmeslick · Post by **callmeslick** » Fri Mar 28, 2014 5:09 pm

the attitude of the school is obscene, as is that of the public school in my other example.

Spidey · Post by **Spidey** » Fri Mar 28, 2014 5:17 pm

Breaking the rules to support a friend, then paying the price for it…I see nothing wrong here…isn’t that what all of those protesters did back in the 60s?

Girl broke the rules…I guess “rules” are relative, she should have gotten permission first.

Again, they let her back in…another big tadoooo over nuttin.

callmeslick · Post by **callmeslick** » Fri Mar 28, 2014 5:29 pm

each to their own, Spidey. I guess I just am sensitive to adults messing with kids in an educational setting.

Krom · Post by **Krom** » Fri Mar 28, 2014 6:36 pm

flip wrote:but get all riled up when someone tries to encourage modesty

At what point was the child in question being immodest?

flip · Post by **flip** » Fri Mar 28, 2014 6:54 pm

I didn't even read the article until now. Doesn't diminish one bit what I said. So, Vision gets all upset over a girl not being able to wear boys pants, which is against the schools belief and Biblical tradition. Yet, has no problem with ..................whatever. Just delete me

Ferno · Post by **Ferno** » Fri Mar 28, 2014 7:06 pm

I almost forgot why I don't post here much. This thread reminded me why.

vision · Post by **vision** » Fri Mar 28, 2014 8:41 pm

flip wrote:How would me trying to explain to you anything about human dignity be anything but a waste of my time?

Well gee flip, you took the time to comment, twice, (and mention me a third time) that I was somehow insensitive to human dignity, but you can't give me one good thing to do with human remains, no matter how small an effort? You're a fraud. And why are you talking about animals like we are better than them? Animals are awesome! There are so many different kinds and they do so many cool things! Most animals are way more interesting than people. Sure we have opposable thumbs, but man, I would trade them for wings any day.

Top Gun · Post by **Top Gun** » Fri Mar 28, 2014 9:35 pm

flip wrote:So, Vision gets all upset over a girl not being able to wear boys pants, which is against the schools belief and Biblical tradition.

NO ONE wore pants in biblical times. A girl doing so today has nothing to do with the Bible either way. If the girl in this story wasn't violating any sort of dress code, which she wasn't, then the action taken against her was ridiculous.

flip · Post by **flip** » Fri Mar 28, 2014 9:46 pm

You guys always miss the forest for the trees here. There were however clothes that were made specifically for men and clothes made specifically for women, which is the crux of their argument. Of course we are gonna argue about pants here though.

I got an idea Vision. Lets grind them up and mix them into hamburger patties. Why not? The world's biggest problem is not energy right now, it's starvation. As soon as the majority becomes as desensitized as you that is exactly what's gonna happen.

vision · Post by **vision** » Fri Mar 28, 2014 10:13 pm

flip wrote:I got an idea Vision. Lets grind them up and mix them into hamburger patties. Why not?

So that's all you have, you small thinking man? You have absolutely nothing to offer on what to do with dead bodies, but you just don't want them used in any way that benefits other living things? Get back to me when you finally have a comprehensible thought in your head. Oh wait, you are "indoctrinated" and above justifying any of the random nonsense that spills out of your tiny brain and through your fingers to the keyboard. Time for a new doctrine because this one makes you look like an idiot.

flip · Post by **flip** » Fri Mar 28, 2014 10:16 pm

Top Gun · Post by **Top Gun** » Sat Mar 29, 2014 12:01 am

flip wrote:You guys always miss the forest for the trees here. There were however clothes that were made specifically for men and clothes made specifically for women, which is the crux of their argument. Of course we are gonna argue about pants here though.

Gender-specific clothing is just a social construct, though, and it varies fairly rapidly. A few hundred years ago, upper-class European men wore hose and high-heeled pumps. For a long time, pink was the color associated with boys, and blue with girls. Even a hundred years ago in this country, young boys wore clothes that we'd label as "girly" in an instant today. So long as we're not talking about super-revealing clothing or anything, which we're not, what the hell does it matter what a kid likes to wear?

woodchip · Post by **woodchip** » Sat Mar 29, 2014 6:04 am

vision wrote:
flip wrote:I got an idea Vision. Lets grind them up and mix them into hamburger patties. Why not?
So that's all you have, you small thinking man? You have absolutely nothing to offer on what to do with dead bodies, but you just don't want them used in any way that benefits other living things? Get back to me when you finally have a comprehensible thought in your head.

You and Hannibal Lecter seem to have a lot in common.

vision · Post by **vision** » Sat Mar 29, 2014 12:01 pm

woodchip wrote:You and Hannibal Lecter seem to have a lot in common.

Just like flip, you have nothing. NOTHING to offer. I offer a way for human beings to be useful after they have died by allowing their organs to be used, their bodies studied for science, their remains used for nourishment of other living beings or to be used as a green energy source and all you morons come up with is "don't be a cannibal." Why? Why not be a cannibal? I'm sure you would make exceptions for starving people and surely you should make exceptions for religious reasons because why would one culture's fairy tale be any worse than another's? Transubstantiation is essentially cannibalism, so I can't see why Christians would complain since it's Ok to eat Jesus.

I should call you lazy. There is no reason people can't be useful after death instead of being some bleak effigy of their former selves slowly rotting away with no purpose other than to prolong grief. Personally, I hope every inch of my body goes to use after I'm dead even if it is just used for artistic purposes (maybe a cool bone sculpture!).