Any contagious disease would metaphorically do, I suppose, but historically, lepers were often confined against their will in leper colonies, and in Medieval Europe were required to carry a bell to identify their presence. In Old Testament times, they were considered to be "unclean," and were separated from the rest of society and quarantined.
I'm reminded of that sort of thing when I read stories like this one:
The principal of a Katy, Texas, junior high school was recently placed on administrative leave all because — according to parents of students at the school — she posted a link to a Christian website article in a school e-newsletter.
Oh, my [CENSORED]! Red alert! Sound the alarm! Can the Christian theocracy be far behind?!?
Seven Lakes Junior High School principal Imelda Medrano was actually reinstated to her position on Friday, but administrators at the suburban Houston school district have remained tight-lipped about why she was abruptly placed under administrative review and removed from her post last week.
That would be because everybody already knows why Principal Medrano was "abruptly" - more like reflexively - suspended and then just as abruptly reinstated. A school official strays onto the "leper colony," gets "contaminated," and must be "quarantined" less the "contagion" spread, and then the "lepers" raise a stink about it, attract unwanted publicity that makes the school district look like the Christ-haters they are, as well as really, really foolish, and they back off to make the kerfuffle go away - until the next time, of course.
And, sure enough:
According to the Houston Chronicle, parents surmised that Medrano came under scrutiny because she linked to an article titled “Nine Most Dangerous Apps For Kids” in a January 9th e-newsletter sent to parents.
The article, which draws awareness to how sexual predators use web apps such as Snapchat and Tinder to target children, was published on the Christian parenting website, Crosswalk.com.
“Sexual predators can target your children even when your child is in the room down the hall,” the article warned. “And sexual predators aren’t the only problem. Cyber-bullying and exposures to sexually inappropriate content are additional concerns.”
Proselytizing? No. Bible-thumping? No. "Forcing their beliefs upon everybody else"? No. Protecting children against sexual predation? Yes. How could a link to this article possibly be construed as objectionable? Because it was on a Christian website. And Christians are officially "unclean".
Or so I am forced to conclude from the punchline:
But the site was apparently too extreme for the school district, which sent a follow-up email to Medrano’s e-newsletter asking parents to disregard the article.
“On Friday, January 9th, you may have received an eNews containing an article titled ’9 Most Dangerous Apps for Kids’ which was obtained from a website that had not undergone a thorough review and approval process for content distribution. Please disregard that article and content,” the email read, the Houston Chronicle reported.
The school district referred parents instead to an entry on the Katy Independent School District’s website about cyberstalking.
But days after that, the school district’s police department published a link to the article on social media, touting it as “great info for parents regarding Apps kids are using on their phones.”
The social media post has since been deleted. [emphases added]
So the Katy School District instructed parents to "disregard an article and content" that provides "great info for parents regarding apps kids are using on their phones". All, evidently, because it is from a Christian website.
So what are we to conclude from this? Apparently, that Christianity is "officially" considered more dangerous for and to children than sexual predators and cyber-bullies, and that it is better for children to be kidnapped and sold into sex slavery than for them to even be exposed to the Gospel of Jesus Christ, and, heaven forbid, actually choose to follow Him. And Principal Medrano, as an accessory to this "child abuse," had to be punished for it. Or at least until enough parents raised a stink about it that it became yet another district-embarrassing national story.
And if she had linked to a Muslim website? Oh, wait, they actually endorse sexual predation of children, don't they? That probably would have earned her a commendation and bonus.
Exit question: Given that Principal Medrano is Hispanic, does her suspension not constitute a hate crime? Or does the "official" endorsement of Christophobia cover that sin?
No comments:
Post a Comment