(OT) Kid told not to draw a cross in art class...

Apr 05, 2008 18 Replies

In a school that teaches Hinduism...



formatting link



A recent lawsuit arising from an incident in Madison, Wisconsin raises a variety of legal and moral issues. The gist of the situation is that a high school student received a zero on an art class assignment because he included religious elements (a cross and a ?John 3:16 A sign of love?) in his work.


The assignment was to draw a landscape. The teacher, Julie Millin, had set a policy for the class that prohibited violence, sex, and religious beliefs from the work. Allegedly, she told the student that by signing the policy he had ?signed away? his constitutional rights. Hence, the grade of zero on the work. Demonic images apparently do not count as religious works-some students did drawings of demons (or devils) and these were accepted without any problems.


Some art teacher. I suppose she thinks this is a publicity shot for a new restaurant:

formatting link

What if the landscape happened to be graveyards that Americans who landed on D-day are laid to rest? Would he have to put circles at the top of the sticks where the crosses and Stars of David are? What if the landscape included a church?

There is a huge difference between not teaching religion and letting kids express themselves.

Jeff

The teacher in this case was correct to give the student a zero, because the student failed to follow the instructions and prohibitions that the teacher set forth. Demons are not necessarily objects of religious importance. You can be un-religious and still think demons exist.

"mack".

I disagree - demons are associated with Satan, who does have worshippers. It's no different than drawing angels, the antithesis of demons.

The kids who drew demons should have gotten zeros too.

Natalie

Ya know, there *are* situations where students completely fail to comprehend instructions, and it's not that unusual.

Funny. But you DID actually know what I meant, didn't you?

I knew. But still, the kid did not follow instructions. No different than if the teacher said "landscape" and the kid drew a portrait.

You can be non religious and still thisnk crosses exist:

Main article: crucifixion an important method of capital punishment, particularly among the Persians, Seleucids, Carthaginians, and Romans from about the 6th century BC to the 4th century AD.

From Britannica online

On Sat, 05 Apr 2008 21:43:53 GMT, Hachiroku ???? wrote: (SNIP)

Never been proven!!!

Oh c'mon, witless, don't tell me you don't believe that Rhett Butler or Baron Munchausen doesn't exist. Or any character of fiction doesn't 'exist'. Of course demons and devils exist....also in fiction. (pardon me, bible thumpers.)

Ooooh! He called me "witless"!

Just look at your equally-clever company, mack.

Laugh it up, buddy. Your logic is flawed when it comes to religious symbolism. The kid didn't follow instructions.

That was his only offense.

The teacher and school don't understand the principles of separation of church and state.

Sure, If you're retarded. Demons are as real as Santa Claus. It is amazing that in this day and age, people still believe in this BS. Demons were real popular over

100 years ago, when people didn't understand mental illness and conjured up explanations. If you want a good explanation on demons and demonic possession, watch the Penn And Teller show "BS" that they did on this subject.

If it's as good as their bottled water episode, I have to find it. :-)

You obviously haven't understood my previous comments on the First Amendment.

I think I skipped class that day...

Join the Discussion

Have something to add? Share your thoughts — no account required.

Didn't find your answer?

Ask the community — no account required