By: Skeptic

Skeptic — Sat, 19 Dec 2009 03:45:50 +0000

It’s undisputed that the school reacted to a picture of a crucifix and excluded the child from school, would not allow the child’s return from school until the child had a psychological evaluation at the low-income-family’s own expense, and is so-far resisting the family’s requests to transfer the boy to another school away from the teacher and principal who have upset him by their reactions.
The “complications” are about the difference between an exclusion and a “suspension”, and whether the drawing shown to the press was the actual drawing that caused the ruckus.
Also, the father at one point mentioned to reporters that he felt the school owed them a money because of their hassle, couching it in terms of religious discrimination. The local press seem to have interpreted this as reimbursement for expenses, and the local Mayor has been pretty insistent about that happening. The Boston press and many blogs have insinuated that he is seeking to reap a cash windfall.

By: reuven

reuven — Thu, 17 Dec 2009 15:32:10 +0000

If I were to draw a picture of J*sus on the cross when I was in grade school, I would have expected to be evaluated by all sorts of people. Then again, I went to a Jewish day school.

Comments on: December 16 roundup

By: Skeptic

By: reuven