Religious Calgary school threatens to expel "immoral" staff and students

[Senator Clay Davis]

An agreement between a public school board and a faith-based Calgary facility threatens students with expulsion and staff with dismissal if they engage in a “lifestyle of sexual immorality.”

The final deal between Palliser Regional Schools and Heritage Christian Academy inked six months ago doesn’t define the term, but earlier versions say premarital relations, viewing pornography and homosexual behaviour are all offside.

Those prior versions were either provided to the newspaper by board officials or were available on the school’s website within the last two weeks, but have since been changed.

Board officials confirmed students and staff are still required to sign the revised school covenants to attend or work at the publicly-funded school in the city’s northeast.

But associate superintendent Dale Backlin said Thursday that those who break the rules would never be disciplined because that would violate Alberta’s human rights legislation.

“You can’t discriminate on that basis and the Palliser board would never go down that road,” Backlin said.

“The society that runs the school just wants people to know what their expectations are at the outset.”

Also, stay away from "evil" music and entertainment. Spoiler for size (includes original and updated, changed charter)
http://www.calgaryherald.com/news/ca...499/story.html

Spoiler!

Spoiler!

Spoiler!

Spoiler!

Spoiler!

[Tyler]

Your tax dollars at work

[Regulator75]

[You Need a Thneed]

What a rediculously misleading headline... And article.

(I say this as the father of a student at Heritage Christian Academy)

[Major Major]

Misleading how?

[Coach]

As I was reading that, I was imagining slowly ripping it in half in front of their faces.

[You Need a Thneed]

Originally Posted by Major Major

Misleading how?

For the headline at least, it should be quite obvious.

[strombad]

Originally Posted by You Need a Thneed

For the headline at least, it should be quite obvious.

Nope, isn't.

[Dion]

Originally Posted by Major Major

Misleading how?

You can't expell or discipline a student or staff member. The threat means squat!

[Dion]

Originally Posted by strombad

Nope, isn't.

Reread the thread title and the below comment....

"But associate superintendent Dale Backlin said Thursday that those who break the rules would never be disciplined because that would violate Alberta’s human rights legislation"

[TorqueDog]

Reading those pages of the agreement, it stands to reason they must have in their hiring policies 1 Timothy 2:12, and thus they can only hire male teachers.


Right? Or is that one of those "We don't take that part literally" ones?

[OffsideSpecialist]

So the headline is accurate because they still do threaten to expel students or staff, even if they say they won't follow through.

[TorqueDog]

A threat is a threat, why bother making them sign this bullsh*t if it doesn't mean anything and they can't act on it?

[Dion]

Originally Posted by OffsideSpecialist

So the headline is accurate because they still do threaten to expel students or staff, even if they say they won't follow through.

Who is going to take that threat seriously?

[You Need a Thneed]

The headline is misleading because they haven't actually threatened anyone, nor has there been any instance for them where they may have "threatened" anyone.

[Dion]

Originally Posted by TorqueDog

A threat is a threat, why bother making them sign this bullsh*t if it doesn't mean anything and they can't act on it?

I find it odd that the thread title mentions nothing about the school not disciplining students or teachers. If someone didn't read the article they would have gotten the wrong conclusion.

[DownInFlames]

Originally Posted by You Need a Thneed

The headline is misleading because they haven't actually threatened anyone, nor has there been any instance for them where they may have "threatened" anyone.

The line explaining that they can be expelled if they don't comply is a threat, is it not?

[Dion]

Originally Posted by DownInFlames

The line explaining that they can be expelled if they don't comply is a threat, is it not?

With a threat there is usually consequences if you don't comply.

What are they?

[You Need a Thneed]

Originally Posted by TorqueDog

Reading those pages of the agreement, it stands to reason they must have in their hiring policies 1 Timothy 2:12, and thus they can only hire male teachers.


Right? Or is that one of those "We don't take that part literally" ones?

Everything has to be taken in context. Considering there are numerous examples of Women in authority in the Bible (much more than you would expect to find in texts from that era), there's probably more to the story on that verse. Second, note the very first word in that verse, "I" (Apostle Paul speaking). Another pretty good clue that Paul is intending the verse as a response to some local condition to his day.

From the context of the chapter, we know that Paul is talking about a specific place - while the church is gathered in worship. Likely, the verse is a request that wives ask questions to their husbands about what is being said during the worship time - after, back at home, instead of interrupting the service. (This is easier to see in the text from the other similar verses).


Honestly, the text in 1 Timothy 2, especially the end, is a particularly difficult passage to understand exactly what it means. However, we know that it is not a verse to be taken at "face value", since that disagrees with what was actually in practice at the time of writing.

[You Need a Thneed]

Originally Posted by DownInFlames

The line explaining that they can be expelled if they don't comply is a threat, is it not?

No more than any educational institution saying that you will be expelled if you plagiarize.