Would anyone's opinion change if the mother wanted to send him to Lucifer's Satanic School for Wickedness and Sin, and the son were all gung-ho for that?

Could the dad not want the son to go to St. X because of the cost? Perhaps the father doesn't want to pay?:creepy:

Lucifer's Satanic School for Wickedness and Sin,

Would the St. X fans consider that to be Trinity?

I have an ex-wife and my two sons were 6/3 when we divorced. Since that day all decisions were based on those two boys and what they wanted (to a certain degree) and needed. They picked schools THEY WANTED when they were 14. This a sad story, hope it works for the the boy and he can attend X.

 

Atheist don't believe in God....but God believes in them.

Could the dad not want the son to go to St. X because of the cost? Perhaps the father doesn't want to pay?:creepy:

 

If money is really an issue why would he initiate a lawsuit? I don't know the in-and-outs of divorce, but I would think that there are options to resolving such an issue without tying up the courts. Arbitration? Is mom willing to foot the bill for something she feels strongly about?

 

I think it's less about money and more about getting ones way.

This case is so layered in "issues".

 

On the one hand, the boy has been raised as Catholic, and obviously if not a perfect Catholic, at least has no objection to learning in a Catholic environment. The mother is obviously committed to educating her son in the Catholic tradition, but has allowed him to look at other options and choose for himself if he'd like to continue in that vein. The father (to me) seems less concerned about the fact that education in a Catholic high school is less about learning the cathechism, as it is about making decisions, looking at life, historically, presently and in the future in a way that reflects the values, ethics, and teachings of the Church.

 

IMO, the judge was wrong. If the father is that against it, he should have pursued his "rights" from the outset. Now, the child has been reared and inured in the Catholic Church's teachings. I simply can't fathom that this case is more reasonable now, than when the child was entering grade school.

 

At this age, a child has reached an age where he/she can begin being expected to make rational decisions and be held responsible for them.

 

On another hand, even as an athiest, why would a parent object to a child being educated in a tradition of eXcellence (spelling intneded, for my X friends )? Regardless of the fact that the child may be required to take some classes that teach sound decision making in a tradition of a faith. There are many upsides to the education that child will receive, and the committment of the school to his education academically as well as ethically.

 

Then, to the argument that a child can learn as much in a non-religiously affiliated school, if the child continued to practice Catholocism, what exactly was the point of denying him a high school education in a Catholic school?

 

I'll be honest....these are only a few of the conundrums I'm wrestling with right now....this is perplexing, to say the least.

Would anyone's opinion change if the mother wanted to send him to Lucifer's Satanic School for Wickedness and Sin, and the son were all gung-ho for that?

 

 

What does that have to do with this? As an athiest, if Mr. Ryan doesn't believe in God, he doesn't believe in Satan, and I would assume that he would object just as strongly.

What does that have to do with this? As an athiest, if Mr. Ryan doesn't believe in God, he doesn't believe in Satan, and I would assume that he would object just as strongly.

:thumb:

Atheist father sues to keep son out of St. Xavier High School

 

 

 

To me, this isn't about what the father is compelled to do. This should be about what the son wants. He isn't forced to send his child to a Catholic school, his soon is choosing to attend a Catholic school.

 

 

 

So sad an 8th grader must be drug through this. Mr. Ryan does not get my vote for father of the year.

 

While I would agree with you, the son isn't of legal age and cannot make that choice. It will come down to some sort of agreement between mom and dad through a judge/arbitrator.

The kid has been in Catholic school since day one, wants to go to a Catholic high school, he should be allowed to keep that trend.

Very interesting case.

 

RM keep us updated on how this turns out.

 

The way things are going in this country, I would not be surprised, disappointed yes but not surprised, for the courts to rule against the Catholic education.

Tim Feely is an excellent judge. Though this is not an initial custody determination, KRS 403.270 does state that the child's wishes is one of many factors to be considered in determining what is in a child's best interests. Clearly, the father cannot be compelled to pay for the parochial tuition, but it is a very interesting question whether he even has standing to invoke his son's First Amendment protections as his "Next Friend," when he is only 1/2 of a joint custodian.

 

I personally think that Feely will allow the child to attend St. X at the mother's expense, and leave the constitutionality of the issue to the Court of Appeals and Supremes. Of course, by the time they decide it, he will already be a St. X alum.

Tim Feely is an excellent judge. Though this is not an initial custody determination, KRS 403.270 does state that the child's wishes is one of many factors to be considered in determining what is in a child's best interests. Clearly, the father cannot be compelled to pay for the parochial tuition, but it is a very interesting question whether he even has standing to invoke his son's First Amendment protections as his "Next Friend," when he is only 1/2 of a joint custodian.

 

I personally think that Feely will allow the child to attend St. X at the mother's expense, and leave the constitutionality of the issue to the Court of Appeals and Supremes. Of course, by the time they decide it, he will already be a St. X alum.

 

 

I'm not trying to say Feely isn't a good judge. With regard to my questions about him, my main question is why he thought it would be better for Mr. Ryan to wait until high school to pursue his legal "rights".

 

Regarding who pays the tuition, nothing in the article indicates whether Mr. Ryan has been paying tuition up to this point, or is expected to pay tuition in the future. Which brings up another question:

 

If a parent is paying child support, can he/she object if it (in whole or part) is used to pay tuition?

In the right courtroom, I could see the following thoughts garner support.

 

In court papers, Ryan has said that "Any parochial school controlled by the Catholic Church will teach and attempt to indoctrinate my son into a belief system which I reject."

 

Ryan said his son's choice of St. X is to be expected, given that "his frame of reference is the Catholic school system."

 

said that Michael would be better off with a secular education, rather than one whose catechism teaches that his father's beliefs are sinful.

 

I could see certain judges say that you couldn't do the above. Schooling shouldn't have one of the parent's lifestyle labeled as wrong.

 

I 100% that the child should be allowed to attend.

 

You can make the argument that the quality of education is not necessarily better at St. X than some of the other choices.

 

Ryan testified that his comparison of student-teacher ratios and other factors at local high schools showed that that Kentucky Country Day or South Oldham High School would be better for his son.

 

So, it could come down to the Catholic religion being the deciding factor, if the education levels are equal, and I am afraid with the mantra in government and courts on the separation of church and state, the church would lose.

 

I hope, really hope, they win this and turn the courts a little back in favor of Christianity in this country but won't be surprised if they don't.

I'm not trying to say Feely isn't a good judge. With regard to my questions about him, my main question is why he thought it would be better for Mr. Ryan to wait until high school to pursue his legal "rights".

 

 

On this, a question for edification.

 

Does Jefferson County have open enrollment at the MS level like they do HS level?

 

If not, maybe his choice of public MS would be such a bad choice that the parochial school is an obvious better academic placement.

 

Now that it is at the HS level and he can choose good academic settings at the HS level, the academic argument of parochial loses some of it's strength in arguing for St. X.

 

That is just an educated guess, totally.