SAYING WHAT HAS TO BE SAID...IN TRUE LIBERTARIAN FASHION



Jessica Bradley Part II


E-mail this post



Remember me (?)



All personal information that you provide here will be governed by the Privacy Policy of Blogger.com. More...



Last week we brought you the story of Jessica Bradley, an Atlanta teen who was asked to leave Covenant Christian Academy after the school administration learned of an inappropriate sexual relationship. Last week we noted that Jessica had been expelled, in reality, it seems young Jessica was simply asked to withdraw. Not that there is much difference.

In response to the school’s actions Jessica’s father filed a $1million suit against the school for invasion of privacy and breach of contract. Jessica’s father argued the child was asked to leave because of a same-sex kiss at a slumber party, the school, however, contends it was more than a kiss, arguing that Jessica admitted to a sexual relationship with a fellow student, who was also asked to leave the school. In the Bradley’s suit, the family argued that the student guidelines are vague and unenforceable. This argument is certainly debatably. According to the handbook, “any behavior, on campus or away which indicates that a student has disregard for the spirit of the school standards, would be sufficient reason to ask for him/her to withdraw from Covenant Christian Academy.”

While it is unclear what denomination Covenant Christian belongs to, there is no Christian denomination that condones of sexual activity for a 14 year old girl. The Bradley’s claim of vagueness is ludicrous. The Bradley’s have since moved to Pennsylvania, where their quest for a sexually provocative Christian school is likely to go unfulfilled. We at the Phalanx will keep our loyal readers updated on the progress of this most frivolous of lawsuits.
http://www.ajc.com/news/content/metro/gwinnett/stories/0117metexpel.html


2 Responses to “Jessica Bradley Part II”

  1. Anonymous KipEsquire 

    So now we're moved from "there is no such thing as vagueness" to "guilty until proven innocent." A vast improvement.

  2. Anonymous The Phalanx 

    "there is no such thing as vagueness," huh? Who said that? And who is it that is guilty until proven innocent? Should we assume that a private school should not have a say over who can and cannot attend? Is that now the domain of the state as well?

    Perhaps churchs, private clubs or even the weekend poker game should also defer to the courts or the legislature when it comes to who is to be accepted as a member.

Leave a Reply

      Convert to boldConvert to italicConvert to link

 


About Us



About the Phalanx Editor:



Previous posts

Archives

Links


ATOM 0.3











Google