RSS

Good for Timberlake Christian School

28 Mar

Sunnie Kahle, 8. (Photo: Screen Grab via CBS 12)

Sunnie Kahle, 8. (Photo: Screen Grab via CBS 12)


Does the above child look like a little girl to you, in dress and overall appearance?

She doesn’t to me, either.

And we’re not alone; and because of the confusion caused by the contrast between her boyish appearance and her actual sex, her private Christian school decided to bar her from continuing to attend so long as she looked and dressed in such a way as to cause confusion, which her great-grandparents (initially misidentified in the media as her grandparents), who seem to be her legal guardians, bitched to the media about, blaming the school for rejecting her solely on her clothes and haircut.

Despite being a private school, who have the right to choose who they will allow to attend, the school received much flak for their decision. They have now issued an explanation, one which seems entirely reasonable to me.

With all due respect, the facts are not as S.K.’s great-grandparents have portrayed them. This matter is far beyond a simple ‘hairstyle and tomboy issue’ as inaccurately portrayed. It is not about that at all. At no time did the Church or the School state or imply that S.K. was sexually immoral or the like. Yet, reports like this have appeared in the media. The School has never told S.K. she cannot return to school.

The Church and the School have a responsibility to all students, their parents, and guardians. Parents and guardians send their children to the School because of our Christian beliefs and standards. We have a duty to create an environment that is supportive of these Christian values. We cannot have conflicting messages or standards because such conflict will confuse our students and frustrate the parents and guardians who have entrusted the education of their children to us. When elementary children and their parents or guardians express concerns regarding use of the restroom and other matters arising from the sensitive issues here, the School has a duty to address those concerns and to ensure that all interests are heard and protected in accordance with the Christian mission of the School. While we welcome all students, parents and guardians are made aware of the School’s Christian mission and beliefs. We not only have a right, but we also have a duty to uphold these Christian standards.

Indeed. Imagine being a little girl, and not understanding that a little girl entering the little girl’s room is also a little girl like yourself, and feeling uncomfortable, as a result. An entirely understandable reaction; and since one’s clothing and hairstyle are matters of choice, there’s no reason why, in a civil society, one even as young as eight shouldn’t be expected to adhere to such norms, for the benefit of all. Of course, today we do live in a time when transsexuals scorn us ‘cis-sexuals’ for our ‘cis-normativity’, and demand access to whichever washroom or changeroom they want to use, regardless of how others might feel about having to use the washroom with those who by birth were of the opposite sex, even if they had surgery to make them each seem like the sex opposite the one they were born as. And while this is a different matter, it is related, at least tangentially. And Christians should not be about challenging sex roles and ‘stereotypes’ – shame on the churchian great-grandparents for not raising their little girl to be one, for not either conforming to the school’s requests or just going away and finding another school quietly, instead making a big fuss. Shame on them!

 

21 responses to “Good for Timberlake Christian School

  1. Eric

    March 28, 2014 at 9:40 pm

    I’m glad that at least one school isn’t caving into these punks. But I’m willing to bet the Liberal Establishment isn’t going to let this one go; they’re in for some serious harassment, both legal and otherwise.

    On a related note: has anyone besides me noticed this disturbing trend in all American institutions recently? There seems to tacit purge going on: it’s like there’s an unspoken undercurrent that ‘conservative/traditional values are no longer welcome here.’

     
  2. Will S.

    March 28, 2014 at 10:06 pm

    It’s a private school, so there may not be anything they can do right away. Long-term goal, though, will be to deny accreditation to schools that fail to pass prog litmus tests for ideological correctness on the homo issue. They’ve tried that up here in Canada, with mixed results; no doubt they’ll do it Stateside, too…

    Yes, it’s quite apparent that the velvet gloves have come off, to reveal the iron fists beneath, ready to crush oldthinkers who bellyfeel doubleplusungood about Amerisoc.

     
  3. edwin calais

    March 28, 2014 at 10:10 pm

    I’m glad of the grade sixer who sued her school over them snooping in her facebook outside of school time.

    More people should be doing this. Helps to pay for that useless college degree!

    One of the most disappointing aspects of Christianity to me, over time, has been the willingness of them to condemn and destroy their own, while cow-towing and letting the leftards condemn and destroy the church. It’s one or the other people. Remember Peter’s denials three times before the dawn. Same shit, different pile.

    Good for this school.

    However, in the early 1990’s, I attended a Christian college that went to the Supreme Court over not hiring homosexuals… and they lost. Yet, that didn’t stop them from starting up Kangaroo Courts in-house to punish those who didn’t believe in other modernist bullshit, like feminism, and believing all the bullshit lies that feminism spewed into society, so my sympathy with their plight is severely limited.

     
  4. Samson J.

    March 28, 2014 at 10:14 pm

    @Will:

    Long-term goal, though, will be to deny accreditation to schools that fail to pass prog litmus tests for ideological correctness on the homo issue.

    Yes, I’m keeping an eye on events surrounding the new B.C. law school.

     
  5. Will S.

    March 28, 2014 at 10:26 pm

    @ Edwin: Ah yes; I remember the Delwin Vriend case…

    @ Samson: That’s what I was thinking about, too.

     
  6. Eric

    March 28, 2014 at 10:33 pm

    Will:
    A case like that actually happened here in Seattle recently. No sooner had this Libtard city elected its first (openly) gay mayor than a vice-principal at Eastside Catholic School was fired for revealing publically he’d secretly married his fag lover. A totally-orchestrated demonstration—with Mayor Murray pulling the strings behind it—led to the school’s removing the entire administration. That’s an example of the ‘purge mentality’ I referenced earlier.

     
  7. edwin calais

    March 28, 2014 at 11:01 pm

    I just think if you are going to claim to follow the Bible, then DO IT! You Chicken Asses!

    The church has always been against gay marriage… but, history can well prove they aren’t against the slutification of the congregation, which is equally, if not more so, condemned in the Bible.

    Just recently, BC passed new legislation (which I’ve already told you about), and there was not a PEEP from Christians about it, even though this legislation pretty much makes marriage into NOTHING – you could marry a donkey in BC and have it considered legit. The church only whines about gay marriage.

    Gay marriage is the LEAST of the church’s problems.

    Their total denial of Biblical instruction in the face of Political Correctness is their problem.

    The whole gay thing is simply the last bastion for them. They’ve already cowed on all the previous arguments they SHOULD have stood up for before.

    There are so many “red lines” the church should not have allowed to be crossed in the past, issues like this are almost not an issue at all. It’s their own fault. They did it to themselves.

     
  8. Will S.

    March 28, 2014 at 11:12 pm

    @ Eric: Indeed. Not surprising it happened there.

    @ Edwin: Agreed; it’s just that it’s the last thing they still have any integrity on, so if they cave on that, too…

     
  9. infowarrior1

    March 29, 2014 at 6:58 am

    @Will S. edwin

    It seems that churches that do not uphold God’s word will be destroyed:
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=air8ZEdiAj0

     
  10. Will S.

    March 29, 2014 at 8:27 am

    Indeed, they will.

     
  11. edwin calais

    March 30, 2014 at 12:12 am

    The thing about the church that pisses me off – on a personal basis – is that NOBODY was better equipped to resist this crap than the Church. I mean, they had religious freedom and the constitution to back them up… and that’s about 10,000 times more potent than what anyone else has.

    Even today, if the church grew some balls, they could press these issues. But, they don’t.

    They have all the legal and constitutional backing they could ever hope for – but they give up and quit before the fight begins.

    If religious rights are constitutionally guaranteed, while for the non-believer, rights are less guaranteed (Ie. a non-Christian married man has less claim to the veracity of the Bible than Christians do), and the Christians won’t even stand up for Bible, but try to make excuses for it and minimize its message… good grief, that religion is on life-support.

    One thing that I hope will happen, in our modernity, is that more Christian sites like this one will emerge, or like the link Infowarror linked the video to, and a NEW Church will arise.

    God never commanded us to congregate with other believers to engage is set, strict, church services in a big fancy building like the ones churches are giving today. He really only told us to congregate with other believers to rejoice in God and discuss his teachings… which is kinda what we are doing right here, on the internet.

    Perhaps the new church will be an online one.

     
  12. Chris

    March 30, 2014 at 12:54 am

    Edwin, religious rights are not guaranteed. There is no constitution in NZ, the code of rights and responsiblities weakens absolute freedom of religion in Australian and Canada, and the UK is a theocracy. Seriously. The Anglican Church is the established religion, with the Queen at its head.

    The US has the right in the first amendment, but the judges have taken care of that…

    Within the church the issue of reform is basically around divorce and remarriage and toleration of living in sin (the latter is huge) which has led to the marriage == bridezilla party which feral wimmen of both sexes love while the rest of us alternate between nausea and rage at the waste of time and effort.

    The remnant will have to be actively countercultural.

     
  13. infowarrior1

    March 30, 2014 at 7:10 am

    @edwin calasis

    God is sovereign and I trust in his providence. What we are seeing unfold is the judgment of god. This strong delusion of feminism is God’s weapon to perfect his church:
    http://empathological.wordpress.com/2013/09/13/into-the-maw-of-the-matriarchy

     
  14. Will S.

    March 31, 2014 at 11:23 pm

    What the Chris and infowarrior1 have said.

    Our society did indeed have it good, and had it right.

    Then we pissed it away.

    If one examines the Old Testament, the same thing happened to God’s people back then, under the Old Covenant – they lost God’s favour, repented, regained it, lost it again, and so on.

    So, what the West is going through is analogous.

     
  15. edwin calais

    April 1, 2014 at 1:16 am

    “The Anglican Church is the established religion, with the Queen at its head.”

    You are precisely right, which is why there is no separation of Church and State within the Commonwealth.

    “Separation of Church and State,” within the USA, was intended so that church leaders, like the pope, could not also run for President while at the same time holding the office of pope… and influence his followers to vote for him. In fact, it is for this reason that in many common-wealth countries, women got the vote before Catholics!

    (This is the result of the centuries of Protestant Kings persecuting Catholic subjects, then Catholic Monarch persecuting the Protestant subjects… which is really what separation of Church and State is about – read the Federalist Papers.)

    In the Commonwealth, however, the head of state is not prohibited from holding religious office – like being the pope. Queen Elizabeth is not only the Head of State in Canada, but she is also the head of the Church of England, and thus, holds both religious and political supremacy – over the entire Commonwealth!

    Canada, for example, was never designed to be separate from religion. How could we, with a Queen supposedly appointed to absolute rule (at least in the past), which means she is God-appointed – according to history.

    There is no separation of Church and State in the Common-Wealth – including New Zealand.

    We are intended to be a Christian, God-fearing country. That is what our constitutions are based upon. And this is different from the USA, from the aspect of us honouring the Royal Family as our (technical) rulers.

     
  16. edwin calais

    April 1, 2014 at 1:37 am

    You really have to take history into account here.

    All throughout the Reformation, there were Catholic Monarchs and then Protestant Monarchs, each alternating each-other (Bloody Marry and Queen Elizabeth 1, for example), each time the monarch changed, the other religion had to run like the wind to escape persecution. One decade, being a Catholic would be legal while being Protestant was illegal, and the next, it was reversed, keeping the people running like the wind in regard to religion.

    THIS is the world the US Founding Fathers referred to when declaring they were free from religion. In the Federalist Papers, as well as George Washington’s farewell address, it is perfectly clear that the USA was intended to be a Christian State, rather then expressly secular. They went after secular to remove the aspect of Head of State also being Head of Religion… but they also made it expressly clear that the US Constitution was meant to work in tandem with the Bible and Christan morality.

    The British, and their common-wealth, however, never went through such a Constitutional transformation… and therefore, we are not intended to be separate from religion, but rather, were founded as Christian States. If you read Canada’s Articles of Confederation, you will quickly see that we were founded as Christians from the get go… at the behest of the Monarch, who was also the head of a major religious body.

    There is no separation of Church and State in Canada or anywhere else in the Commonwealth. If there were, we would not have Queen Elizabeth II as our head of state.

     
  17. The Bechtloff

    April 3, 2014 at 10:16 pm

    I thought that little girl was Andy Milonakis when I first saw her.

     
  18. Will S.

    April 3, 2014 at 10:23 pm

    I don’t know who that is.

    Now I’ve looked him up; yeah, I see some resemblance, indeed.

     
  19. The Bechtloff

    April 4, 2014 at 8:25 pm

    He’s a talentless unfunny little turd, so I don’t blame you for not knowing who he is, I wish I didn’t either.

     
  20. Will S.

    April 4, 2014 at 10:47 pm

    LOL! 🙂

     

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s