Mass. 2nd-grader sent home for crucifix drawing
 

TAUNTON, Mass. (AP) — An 8-year-old boy was sent home from school and ordered to undergo a psychological evaluation after he was asked to make a Christmas drawing and came up with what appeared to be a stick figure of Jesus on a cross, the child's father said Tuesday.

Chester Johnson told WBZ-TV that his son made the drawing on Dec. 2 after his second-grade teacher asked children to sketch something that reminded them of the holiday.

Johnson said the teacher became upset when his son said he drew himself on the cross. Johnson, who is black, told WBZ he suspects racism is involved. He said he thinks the school overreacted and wants an apology.


Johnson told the Taunton Daily Gazette, which first reported the story on Tuesday, that his son gets specialized reading and speech instruction and has never been violent in school.

An educational consultant working with the Johnson family said the teacher was also alarmed when the boy drew Xs for Jesus' eyes.

A call to Johnson was not immediately returned.

link

"Johnson, who is black, told WBZ he suspects racism is involved."

GTFOHWTBS :rolleyes:

Ummm...so...he got in trouble for drawing "Jesus" on the crucifix because it reminds him of Christmas?

Uh...:confused:...what's wrong with what he drew?

The stick figure looked more like Michael Jackson. :o

Kid got his holidays mixed up? That is the only thing I see wrong and this isn't even my religion.

I'm confused....read that again....did he draw Jesus or himself?

Himself, FTA.

I'm guessing the racism charges would arise from the fact that the figure on the cross was a black person and black Jesus is too much for some folks to handle.

Oh, I thought the "himself" was as a typo or something.

He drew "himself" on the crucifix? Maybe he was drawing how Jesus died on the cross for him? Idunno. Certainly not disciplinary action-worthy. What ever happened to talking to parents about what their kids did (just in case there's an issue there) and letting the parents talk to the kids?

So wait...since religion is not 'allowed' in school, there is a ban on Christ drawings?

Rhetorical question time.

So, did he draw himself or did he just say he drew himself because he drew a Black Jesus (and the kid's Black)?

Kinda like "I...am...Malcolm X."

how do we know that Jesus is Black?

Exactly. I see a stick figure drawn in black ink/crayon/marker.

There shouldn't be. I'm confused by this.

I'm reading that he was drawing himself on the cross, but the teacher was thinking black Jesus.

Maybe I'm reading in or misreading or not reading or something?

Let's try this one on for size

see this here:
Chester Johnson said his son made the drawing on Dec. 2 after his second-grade teacher asked children to sketch something that reminded them of the holiday. The assignment came just days after the family had visited the holiday lights display at the National Shrine of Our Lady of La Salette in Attleboro, where Johnson said his son seemed taken with the religious statues he saw there.
"When he seen the crucifixion of Jesus on the cross, that's what he drew," Johnson said. "He liked that. That drew his eye."

I don't know.

If the teacher was thinking Black Jesus and thought that was disciplinary action-worthy, assuming that Jesus on the crucifix itself wasn't the issue, that is DEFINITELY a race issue.

My interpretation was that whoever (the parents?) was complaining about racism assumed it was because the dude on the cross was black. And yeah, that'd be a no brainer.

But the teacher, who is saying nothing, more than likely had no racial motivation and was simply discriminating against the kid because of the kid's religious expression, not race... equally dumb though.

The teacher is a jackass either way.

Exactly.

The teacher could have talked to the parents first. But suspending a 2nd grader with special needs for drawing a picture of, what appears to be, Jesus on the cross, is ridiculous... no matter what the assignment is.

I find it interesting that this is the same school that told a 6-year-old boy to walk home by himself a month ago..

http://www.wpri.com/dpp/news/local_n...ne20091112_tro

Yeah.

I would be thoroughly amused if the teacher says "it wasn't about religion OR race...it was a drawing depicting death...I thought it was morbid and feared the child was telling me that he was going to hang himself or someone else."

You're sure you're not a lawyer?

I read about this earlier and that article said it was the X over the eyes of Jesus that disturbed her. Now when I google that I only get this link http://www.thenewamerican.com/index....-jesus-drawing

FWIW it was mobile news on my phone so I never had a link.

The way NPR is reporting it is that he drew the crucifix (with Xs for eyes), and when the teacher pressed him about it and about who he had drawn (I would have thought that would be obvious, but hey), he said he had drawn himself. His father, who works as a janitor at the school, thought perhaps the kid was afraid he'd get in trouble if he said he'd drawn Jesus.

There are just so many things wrong with this scenario, but I don't think thta the kid was responsible for any of them.

because that kid just drew us a picture.

Umm, this is a special needs kid. Even without that, I don't think an 8 year old's going to get all the eyeball nuances that Rembrandt would.

And it's a stick figure drawn in pencil, duh. What other color is it going to be other than black? I agree, this teacher is the idiot, and the kid is thinking WAY deeper than most people do.

That's what I thought; it looks like the kids just picked up a pencil or whatever crayon was handy. It's not like there are ANY colors in the picture! The wood of the cross is black also, are they going to say now that there are issues because he drew burnt wood?

We get pictures at my school like this all the time, but then again, I teach at a Catholic school. And Jesus died on the cross, and dead people are drawn with Xs for eyes. Was the kid supposed to draw Jesus looking at you?

ETA: I think this is a pretty darn good picture for a 2nd grader who's not used to looking at crucifixes every day.
My thoughts...when they saw the shrine, they probably saw the nativity as well as the ccrucifix, and the kid put 2 and 2 together that the baby in the manger and the man on the cross were the same person.

If the teacher didn't like the response, she shouldn't have asked the question! What's she doing asking kids to draw something that reminds them of the holiday season, anyway? I thought that wasn't allowed? <rolls eyes>

I guess he was supposed to draw a picture of the Festivus Pole.

I'm still not hearing any "reason" for the kid to be sent home. Is that like a suspension? I would think there would have to be a rule broken for that, but they aren't saying what rule he broke. I don't get it.

My thought exactly. If I asked someone to draw something that reminded them of Christmas, and they drew a picture of a man on a cross, I probably wouldn't ask, "Hey, who's that?" The teacher was drawing attention to something that wasn't that big of a deal in the first place.

Why is this not allowed?? I don't understand why people are getting all bent out of shape about minor things. Remember the days when you could have holiday parties in school? And tell people "Merry Christmas!" ... yea, that's not allowed anymore.

But that's a different argument for a different thread.

Would have been my first choice! :D

Notice my "<rolls eyes>"? Yes, it's ridiculous that on one hand there isn't supposed to be religion in school nowadays (so we hear - "winter break," "happy holidays," etc.), and yet a teacher gives an assignment like this and gets huffy when a student draws a picture of Christ, the person for whom CHRISTmas is named. I guess I'd be more offended by drawings of things like Santa Claus or presents than I would Christ, because those things aren't REALLY what the Christmas holiday was about. If she didn't want any photos of anything Christmas related, she should have just asked the kids to draw a picture of winter.

Slightly off topic, but does anybody else catch the irony that separation of church and state is such a fundamental part of the law of this country, yet Christ Mass (yes that was intentional) is a federal holiday.

Ah, I see. I took your eye-rolling to mean something else :):p

SLOW DOWN!

The story that is posted in the OP and the story in the link are saying 2 different things. The school is saying that the boy was never suspended and the picture is not the one he drew.

Also, for the record: Teachers cannot suspend students, only administrators. But, as the district says, the student was never suspended.

...interesting...they updated the story...



I just wonder... does Taunton only smell bad on the outside?

Is this the original story?

http://www.tauntongazette.com/news/x...awing-of-Jesus

The one where the school principal refers the reporter to speak to the superintendent's office, because that is required by the staff at the school? Where the district says that they can't speak about what happened to reporters because, oh I don't know, there are strict privacy laws that don't allow districts to speak about students to the public?

But, of course, the parent couldn't be stirring up issues and making a mountain out of a molehill. Only teachers and school officials do that. :rolleyes:

Not from the link but that is one variation I read.

DaemonSeid-

Just to clear the air, I was not intentionally attacking you or suggesting that you were purposefully not reporting the facts correctly. If it appears that way in my post, I apologize. I just felt that the teacher was being unfairly attacked for something that was taken out of her hands.

It was taken out of her hands because she handed it to someone else. We know that teachers don't singlehandedly place such disciplinary action on students and request psych evals before students can return to school.

It started with her and, therefore, it is first her fault for getting the ball rolling, and then the dumb administration's fault for seeing it through. If she had just spoken with the parents (like teachers used to do--and some still do--before school violence started getting attention outside of the "inner city") the parents and teacher could have addressed this.

I knew it! The son "had created a violent drawing," and I am thoroughly amused as I predicted I'd be.

YES YOU WERE!!


Nah...we're cool...I went back and looked and saw that the original source had indeed changed.

But...let us proceed:

This just gets better and better, thanks LaneSig:

link

TAUNTON, Mass. (AP) — A Massachusetts school district on Tuesday night denied a father's claims that his son was suspended for drawing a stick figure of Jesus on a cross.

The Taunton School District said in a written statement that the second-grade student was never suspended over the sketch and that a drawing circulated to reporters by the boy's father, Chester Johnson, is not the same one that was discovered by the teacher.

The district also denied that the boy and his classmates had been assigned to draw something that reminded them of Christmas or any other religious holiday.

Johnson, who had said his son was ordered to undergo a psychological evaluation after the drawing was discovered, did not return multiple phone messages from The Associated Press on Tuesday night about the school district's statements.

"This incident occurred nearly two weeks ago, it was handled appropriately, and the school staff and family had been working together in a cooperative and positive manner," the district said in a statement posted on its Web site.

School officials did not specify any action they took, but said they followed "well-established protocol," including reviewing the child's records and consulting with school psychologists.

"It is unfortunate that the actions of our district staff have been classified as "religious" in nature when, in fact, they were based solely on the wellbeing of the student," the district's statement said.



Somebody's story is starting to look shaky

Oh well...if the school's lying then WOMP. If the parents are lying then WOMP.

Actually, it's kind of the opposite of "ironic" - it's pragmatic.