Mass. 2nd-grader sent home for crucifix drawing

[DrPhil]

Originally Posted by Kevin

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?

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.

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by DrPhil

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.

[ASTalumna06]

Originally Posted by Kevin

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

[DrPhil]

Originally Posted by Kevin

The teacher is a jackass either way.

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."

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by DrPhil

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?

[VandalSquirrel]

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.

[MysticCat]

Originally Posted by VandalSquirrel

I read about this earlier and that article said it was the X over the eyes of Jesus that disturbed her.

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.

[RU OX Alum]

Originally Posted by DaemonSeid

how do we know that Jesus is Black?

because that kid just drew us a picture.

[33girl]

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.

[WinniBug]

Originally Posted by 33girl

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.

[PeppyGPhiB]

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.

[AGDee]

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.

[ASTalumna06]

Originally Posted by MysticCat

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.

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.

Originally Posted by PeppyGPhiB

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>

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.

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

Would have been my first choice!

[PeppyGPhiB]

Originally Posted by PeppyGPhiB

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.

Originally Posted by ASTalumna06

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.

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.

[Psi U MC Vito]

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.