Massachusetts Second-Grader Suspended, Ordered to Under Psychological Evaluation Because He Drew a Picture of Jesus on the Cross....
A Taunton father is outraged after his 8-year-old son was sent home from school and required to undergo a psychological evaluation after drawing a stick-figure picture of Jesus Christ on the cross.
The father said he got a call earlier this month from Maxham Elementary School informing him that his son, a second-grade student, had created a violent drawing. The image in question depicted a crucified Jesus with Xs covering his eyes to signify that he had died on the cross. The boy wrote his name above the cross.
“As far as I’m concerned, they’re violating his religion,” the incredulous father said. He requested that his name and his son’s name be withheld from publication to protect the boy.
The student drew the picture shortly after taking a family trip to see the Christmas display at the National Shrine of Our Lady of La Salette, a Christian retreat site in Attleboro. He made the drawing in class after his teacher asked the children to sketch something that reminded them of Christmas, the father said.
“I think what happened is that because he put Xs in the eyes of Jesus, the teacher was alarmed and they told the parents they thought it was violent,” said Toni Saunders, an educational consultant with the Associated Advocacy Center.
“When I got that call, I was so appalled that I had to do something,” Saunders said. “They weren’t looking at the fact that this is an 8-year-old child with special needs,” she added. “They made him leave school, and they recommended that a psychiatrist do an evaluation.”
What would have happened if a Muslim boy drew a picture of Mohammed with his sword?
26 comments:
they would have asked the rest of the class to say alah is great and pay him jyzza.
Teach him to sing Obama's praises. That should cure him.
The insanity goes on and on. Common sense has been unofficially but very effectively outlawed in our state.
The kid is "special needs", not specified. So he's taken to La Salette, which has a gorgeous Christmas light display, but of course being a Catholic shrine it also has crucifixes. The shrine's lights register on the kid, and so do the crucifixes. He's asked to draw something that reminds him of Christmas so perhaps being literal minded he interprets that to mean the Shrine so he draws something he saw there. WHAT IS THE PROBLEM? So he drew "x" on the eyes, it's the way little kids draw dead people. He does not need a psych evaluation for being a kid.
At worst, perhaps the cross made him feel sad and his parents could talk with him about that. Otherwise, all the idiot teacher needed to say was, that's Good Friday, try Christmas.
Pastorius,
Why would this kid need to undergo a psychological evaluation? Couldn't he just a rather religious little boy? It seems that's how his parents raised him, does it not?
As for your question, "What would have happened if a Muslim boy drew a picture of Mohamed with his sword?" I don't know the answer, but it would probably involve death threats from Jihadists, in addition to the boy being accused of being an "Islamophobe."
Damien,
1)The authority overreacted, indeed.
2)True Jihadists don't kill kids, old people, women & Priests (if they really follow the Teachings of the Prophet Mohamed).. but the Jihadists these days follow their heart, sigh.. I believe to go for Jihad (fight for Islam), you don't have to kill Jews & other Infidels, unless it is really really necessary.
Other form of Jihad is to improve yourself financially, physically, spiritually, so that you can develop the Muslim Society (or the UMMAH as RRA put it succinctly). This form of Jihad is often ignored by Muslims these days :-( ..
Pastorius,
Why no news on the Italian PM Berlusconi being attacked? Because the assailant wasn't a Jihadist?
Oh for heaven's sake. I fixed that for you, abdooss.
"What would have happened if a Muslim boy drew a picture of Mohammed with his sword?"
If it happened to a Muslim boy, the teacher and school officials would be labeled Islamophobes, but why is it no Christian can call them out that they are the obvious Christianphobes here?
Personally, it's just stupid to care what a child draws, unless if it's promoting violence against a school official is another story.
Abdooss,
How much of the Koran have you read?
Damien,
From your extensive knowledge on Islam, I believe you have read BOTH the Koran & Hadith(sayings by the Prophet Mohamed)? We rely on both, not just the Koran (on the meaning of Jihad).. if it is not covered by both, then we rely on the words by Learned Scholars (Ulama').. Some Ulama' chose the Extreme Ways, while others the Middle Path (non-violence).. As for me, I try to follow the middle path.
Or are you saying I'm wrong?
Abdoos,
That won't fly here.
The Hadith are even more insane and extreme than the Koran.
We aren't gonna buy that stuff.
Pastorius,
I am a follower of the edicts that say Suicide bombers are not the way of Islam & Violence is not the only way to settle conflicts.
Yet you say to the Contrary; true Islam IS Extreme & Violence.
As I'll never renounce my religion, should I change my way & follow your words? You tell me..
"As I'll never renounce my religion, should I change my way & follow your words? You tell me.."
Wow, that's really childish. Save the bargain basement taqiyya for all the inattentive, disinterested infidels out there who might still imagine that even a murderous death cult ought to comprise at least a few salvagable elements.
Pastorius (and the others),
I'm sorry for my sarcastic remarks as you are one of the few reasonable voices out there.. however, the sweeping generalization to all Muslims and Islam is unacceptable.. if Islam is really advocating violence, wouldn't we be having WW3 by now?
Abdoos,
I understand the definition of Jihad. Jihad means to struggle for the sake of Islam.
Stuggle can mean a personal struggle to become a better human being.
However, it is most often used, in the Koran, to mean slay the Infidels wherever you find them.
Abdoos,
You said: if Islam is really advocating violence, wouldn't we be having WW3 by now?
I say: On 9/11, 19 Muslim terrorists used the most extreme means they could to kill as many Infidels as they could, and to do as much damage as they could to the American economy.
If the Infidels hadn't figured out what was going on, and taken the one plane down in Pennsylvania, it is likely they would have taken out the White House too. In other words, they were trying to kill the President, the man people often call the most powerful man in the world.
Now, the lesson to be learned here is that Muslim terrorists REALLY want us dead, and they will do anything that have to do to kill us, and to destroy our nation.
If they had nuclear weapons, they would use them.
Do you think I am taking the wrong lesson from this?
abdoos
one or two questions ..
Do you regard Hadith Book 041 NUmber 6985 as a valid statement? Should it be taught to any American schoolchildren in religious schools?
If the being who wrote the Quran is perfect, and it is uncreated, how do you explain the writings concerning jews?
If god is perfect then is racism acceptable?
If there is no compulsion in Islam then why this Book 019, 4294?
Islam need not be the victim of sweeping generalizations, but ITS generalizations concerning others need to be rectified. That has not happened. The people who rail about crusaders and jews seem to have the religious authority and authentic justifications accepted ..consider Tantawi's long writing concerning jews. Or Qaradawi's popularity.
I could relegate these morons as being some Pat Robertson types, but the Pat Robertson's are not calling for the death of others, or the relinquishment of their religion as being god's desire, or compulsion.
The problem at it's heart as I see it IS the idea that the Quran is the uncreated word of a perfect being, and that the way Muhammad lived is an example all men must follow.
For if racism is evil, no perfect being authored the Quran, and Muhammad despite being a brilliant military and cultural leader for his time, in the end, committed acts of timeless indisputable barbarity and conscienceless crime.
For this MADNESS to all end, it is PRECISELY those issues which must be discussed ..DISPASSIONATELY
Pastorius,
1)Thank You for explaining that you mean Jihadists = Muslim Terrorists, and not all Muslims in general. As you & the Non-Terrorists Muslims can cooperate to prevent another bloodshed (at least to provide info on any Terrorists activities)..
Pastorius, Epaminondas et al
2)Islamic teachings that are misinterpreted can cause great harm not just to Infidels but to other Muslims as well. Cooperation among us is necessary to curb their activities..
Epaminondas,
I'm not an expert on Theology. However, I believe further interpretation of the sayings is necessary to prevent any conflict between us. But if you want to interpret it your way and to believe all Muslims are racists, I cannot stop you from believing what you want.
Abdoos,
The problem is, there are no major schools of Islam that do interpret differently.
Islam contains within it the concept of Ijma. Mohammed said, "My community will never agree upon an error".
So, that opens the door to interpretation of the Koran. However, as long as no major schools of Islam are teaching a non-violent version which opposes death to gays, apostates, and adulterers, equal right to women, and violent Jihad against Infidels and Jews, well then, no consensus will form against those things.
There may be a lot of individual Muslims who are good people, but as long as they are not represented by major Islamic political organizations, academic institutions, governments, and media outlets, then we have a real problem.
Indeed abdoos... I asked if YOU regarded the Stone and the Tree as an exemplar of human behavior. I know of NO islamic tradition by which the behavior of Muhammad can be denigrated. In order to 'interpret' this Hadith as being negative one must regard the behavior and thought of Muhammad as such.
No islamic authority has ever done this?
To all cooperate, THIS IS COMPULSORY.
I have discussed this in detail with many salafis from the gulf. They were all quite kind and quite firm. We actually agree.
If you disagree I think that is a positive step towards 'cooperation'
Muslims are not racists.
Some to many Hadiths are, and the authoritative muslim canonical sources indicate WILLINGLY the Quran is as well BY AMERICAN STANDARDS.
That is the heart and soul of the problem. Either the jews can be damned as a group by god for being jews, or the author of the quran is not perfect. Either the Stone and the Tree is hate speech and racist by american stds, or god has graced it, and it can't be.
If I am wrong please correct me
Epaminondas,
From my own understanding, it will occur on the day BEFORE Armageddon, in a Worldwide War between Evil Infidels (the Only Infidels left) and Muslims. I only hope we won't live to see that day.
Pastorius,
The Muslims Community (the Ummah) is not as united as you think. We do have our own differences and disagreements. I believe you already know that in some countries, Sunnis and Shias are killing each other? Yet they claim they are Muslims! This is to show you that Muslims worldwide are not that preoccupied to wipe out Infidels. We have our own problems to attend to. From the 1.5 billion Muslims worldwide, how many are Terrorists?
Dr Mahathir Mohamad, our previous Prime Minister, may not be the man I support in politics, but he is trying his best to unite the Muslims worldwide through Talks & Conferences. http://muslimunityconvention.blogspot.com/2009/07/visit-to-tun-dr-mahathir-mohamad.html
Pastorius,
Of course, there are around 2 billions Christians all over the World!
Abdoos,
You said: The Muslims Community (the Ummah) is not as united as you think. We do have our own differences and disagreements.
I say: Yes, I am aware of that. However, my point is there is no consensus within the Islamic world on a so-called moderate interpretation of the Koran and Hadith.
On the other hand, Al-Azhar University, Al Jazeera, Saudi Arabia, Iran, the UAE, Dubai, CAIR, the Muslim Brotherhood, the ISNA, the MPACUK, Hamas, etc. all agree on a radical interpretation of Islam.
Mahathir is an anti-Semite, which makes him a bad man in my book.
Mahathir is anti-Semite? I believe he is anti-Zionist. I believe you are aware of the vast differences..
Abdoos, This is what I am referring to:
http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2003/10/17/1066364483615.html
I have a question for you. What is a Zionist?
Abdoos, you are dreaming about Mahathir, his comments before the OIC was about JEWS.
"We are actually very strong. 1.3 billion people cannot be simply wiped out. The Europeans killed six million Jews out of 12 million. But today the Jews rule this world by proxy. They get others to fight and die for them. "
ETC.
Post a Comment