I just read through their handbook. This bit was added just this year (2014-2015 handbook)
Timberlake Christian Schools is a religious, Bible-believing institution providing education in a distinctly Christian environment, and it believes that its biblical role is to work in conjunction with the home to mold students to be Christlike. On those occasions in which the atmosphere or conduct within a particular home is counter to or in
opposition to the biblical lifestyle that the school teaches, the school reserves the right, within its sole discretion, to refuse admission of an applicant or to discontinue enrollment of a student. This includes, but is not necessarily limited to, living in, condoning or supporting sexual immorality; practicing homosexual lifestyle or alternative
gender identity; promoting such practices; or otherwise having the inability to support the moral principles of the school (Leviticus 20:13a; Romans 1:21-27; Matthew 19:4-6; I Corinthians 6:9-20).

I wonder, did it get added AFTER they sent the threatening letter to the grandparents to cover their tracks for targeting one child in the school? This rule was not in place last year when Sunnie was a student there or the year before or the year before that.

All TCS Students:

Must wear TCS uniform shirt from TCS uniform vendors.
May wear an extra tee shirt or turtleneck underneath their uniform shirt that does not have the TCS logo as long as
only the collar and/or sleeve areas show, and the shirt is of a solid color, like a uniform shirt, with no printing.

May wear any official TCS jacket, fleece, sweatshirt, or a solid color sweater over uniform shirt. Students may also
wear a solid color full-zippered sweatshirt or fleece (no pullovers), jacket or sweater over the uniform shirt


Dress code for girls (K-5):

May wear solid navy, khaki/sand, white, brown, gray, or black skirt or jumper or a denim jean skirt that is in good
condition (no patches, no “destructed,” bleached out, or extremely faded fabric). Jumpers must be worn over a TCS
shirt. These items must come at least to the top of the kneecap (grades 3-5). Skirts must have straight hems—no
diagonal or handkerchief hems are permitted.

May wear slacks in khaki/sand/stone, white, brown, navy, gray, or black (no jeans or denim pants). These must be
classic, traditional pants (no warm up or sweat pants). Capri’s, gauchos and culottes are not permitted for regular
school day dress.

May wear casual shoes including tennis shoes. No athletic-sandals, shower/water sport shoes, slippers or combat style boots. Girls may not wear any backless shoes/sandals or shoes with heels over 1 inch.

May not wear make-up.

So, girls can wear slacks or a jean skirt. May wear an extra tee shirt or turtleneck underneath their uniform shirt. She had to wear the uniform shirt, so how did the t-shirt come into play as an issue, especially when wearing t-shirts is allowed? No extreme hair styles or unnatural or extreme hair colors. Nothing noted about length of hair and I can not say her hair style is extreme. They picked on her because adults were uncomfortable. She wore a uniform to school. The other kids would not have had an issue if she wore a uniform. I'm guessing they are picking on how she dressed at home and basically saying, if her home life does not conform to school rules, she can not go to their school, as made evident by this line in the letter: "We believe our biblical role is to work in conjunction with the home to mold students to be Christlike." and this: "However, we believe that unless Sunnie as well as her family clearly understand that God has made her female and her dress and behavior need to follow suit with her God ordained identity..." (who are they to judge what identity God ordained her with? In my opinion, she IS living her God ordained identity.She is being Sunnie and dressing and acting in a manner that is comfortable to HER)... "For this reason, we ask you not to re-enroll Sunnie". They kicked her out. They wanted to dictate her style of dress and behavior at home too. At home she wears jeans, t-shirts and plays sports. At home, she is Sunnie. Yet they do not want her acting like any other child of society. They want her to stand out as different from other kids who do not go to their snotty school. Apparently the kids are expected to wear the uniform even at home. Talk about extreme. They control these kids even beyond the school property. How archaic can a school be to demand that kids not be allowed to be themselves even at home?

student handbook: http://tcs4u.org/timberlakeuserfiles/file/Parent%20Handbook%202014-2015.pdf

What should one expect from (in my opinion) an extremely conservative private school that doesn't "promote" Halloween and doesn't include "dancing" at school parties? I'm led to believe there is a lot more going on than we are being told. It's not unusual for someone with something to hide to start a recollection from the point forward where there is no self-incrimination. We get a letter acknowledging ongoing concerns.
Even a public school can (and does) send a student home for dress-code violations. This school expects 24/7/365 alignment with their mission. The school is uber-conservative. And, more importantly, OPTIONAL.

This letter does not address dress code violations within the school. As I pointed out, it seems to address home life and how the home life conflicts with the school's dress code and how a child should act given their gender. Judging the child when she is away from school. It's your right to support such archaic thinking that puts females in their place. Women fought for the rights we have to be individuals without restrictions. The school wants to move females back to archaic times. I too believe there is more going on, more that what the school is willing to admit to. They suddenly changed rules about the way a girl is perceived to act according to their mindset of what is God ordained, just this year. They are intolerant to tomboys. Their right. I hope this 15 minutes of fame the grandparents and Sunnie are getting, wakes up other parents to just what this school is doing to the students there.

Again, I'm not assuming anything. Interpretation is the key to the whole issue, and I'm not a mind reader as far as CTS, Sunnie, grandparents, or anyone else goes. This is also part of the handbook:
DISCIPLINE AND CONDUCT
24/7 It is our goal to help students endeavor to develop their whole person with an integrated Christian lifestyle. We ask and
expect that students honor Christ in all behavior and activities 24/7/365. The school generally follows its discipline procedures
contained herein. However, there are circumstances in which the school administration and/or board may determine, in their
sole discretion, that it is appropriate not to follow progressive discipline steps. In cases in which a student has engaged in flagrant, immoral, illicit, illegal, and/or other unacceptable behavior which reflects adversely on Timberlake Christian Schools, on campus or off campus, when school is in session or in recess, the school reserves the right to suspend or expel the student immediately. The administration may give parents the option to withdraw the student. In doing so, the discipline issue will not be discussed in the student’s records.

Sunnie was not expelled; let's keep that in focus. What the school saw as unacceptable IN THEIR OPINION is never made clear to me in their letter. The references to prior and ongoing concerns is unclear. I can't just listen to a one-sided crusade, and I'm not siding with anybody. My point is the school has its rules; were it a public school, the whole issue would be different. This school is an optional choice. Would I send MY kids or grandchildren there? No.

1. "flagrant, immoral, illicit, illegal, and/or other unacceptable behavior which reflects adversely on Timberlake Christian Schools"

This cult does not like girls who wear jeans, cut their hair short and play sports. That's extremely clear between the letter and the articles that take the grandparent's views and Sunnnie's views into account also. So, this infraction is one or all over the above. Pretty darn harsh when I see a lot of Christian females who wear jeans, cut their hair short and play sports. What a confusing dilemma for this 8 year old girl.

2. She was asked not to return. Let's keep that in focus and not mince words. It's clearly outlined what they found unacceptable to me and others. They do not like the way she dresses, and acts. To them, this is a gender identity issue. How you can miss that is questionable.

3. Rules are made to be broken. A rule that limits freedom of expression and self awareness to females in 2014 and especially one that extends beyond the boundaries of school should not exist. I hope the other parents wake up to this and stop abusing their kids by sending them to that outdated school that indoctrinates rather than educates and teaches kids to be intolerant of the school's idea of the different.

4. God bless Sunnie's grandparents for being more open minded and realizing the dangers of such an outdated indoctrination.

What we have here is a failure to communicate. I don't seem to be able to express myself clearly that the school gets to have its rules and Sunnie doesn't have to go there. Therein lies the freedom. If they don't like it, they have the freedom to LEAVE, just like akaQA, scouts, the gym, your house of worship, your job, your home, etc. etc. etc.
Bringing the issue to the public forum is an invasion of the child's privacy. The grandparents have brought a lot of unnecessary attention on Sunnie, in my opinion, using her as a pawn for some malevolent purpose. One doesn't drag a kid into the spotlight like this with benevolent intent.

"Bringing the issue to the public forum is an invasion of the child's privacy."

Uh, no it isn't. It's all over the news media and the internet which is public domain.

The grandparents set off a warning to other parents who might not know how cult-like this school is. Good on them.

Sunnie will remember for the rest of her life, those horrid people deemed her unworthy of their school. She will feel that stigma even if it were never publicized. As an 8 year old, I know I would have felt crushed. How dare they be so cruel in their judgement of her.

How her grandparents could display her like that is also disgusting. I've got to wonder how many people would be willing to spotlight their own children in a scenario like this. Counting yourself, there are 8 of us responding to this question.
I wouldn't expose my children or their children to this kind of publicity.

Happens all the time. See the conversation under Clu's answer. Search children expelled from school for saying gun, bang, holding their fingers like a gun. It' a way of getting people to understand what is happening in our schools, all schools and how unfair the rules are to kids who should just be allowed to be kids.

I wouldn't expose MY kids or grandchildren to that kind of publicity. That is my opinion and my choice. The handbook is clear, even the new stuff in bold print. The misdirected conservative nature of the school is obvious to me. We like Halloween, for one thing.
Please keep us informed how this all plays out, Colleen.

You say I'm invading Sunnie's privacy by posting her story on this public forum then say you wouldn't do that to you kids or grand kids yet you consistently open questions that discuss in detail the lives of your sons, their kids and their wives and girlfriends right here on this public forum. I believe you've even posted pictures (I could be wrong). Do you think that by not giving their last names, this somehow protects their privacy?

It's already played out. Sunnie is now in a public school missing her friends and living with the knowledge that the administrators of the misguided school do not like her, the way she dresses or acts and has forbidden her from re-enrolling unless she loses her identity. She will live with the knowledge that they have judged her as unworthy of their school or God's ordinance and that she is not Christlike, so is shunned. Now it's up to the other free thinkers to decide if they want their kids indoctrinated into the ways of this cult-like school. I'm sure it will be in the news if enlightened parents pull their kids out of that school.

I did not say YOU were invading Sunnie's privacy by posting on THIS forum. I said the grandparents didn't need to make a public spectacle of their granddaughter.
I certainly did post a photo of one of my sons with his newborn child and do seek opinion about situations. Do I call the newspapers and television stations?
There was absolutely no reason for Sunnie to know why she was switching schools; an 8 year old doesn't need to have that dumped on her and I don't care what anyone says to the contrary. She is EIGHT. There are rules all over the place. If one doesn't adhere to rules, they lose their freedom and/or are fined monetarily. Some lose their property; some lose their lives. In an OPTIONAL situation, you have two choices: play by the rules or find another game.
Sometimes it's appropriate and worthwhile to make an issue, but at the expense of a child's psyche, I really don't agree. My issue is with the grandparents more than the school. Yours is with the school and personal freedom. We get to say what we want, WITHIN THE CONFINES OF THE RULES.

I misunderstood. Public forum to me means,a web forum like this one. Main stream media is what I call the other. An 8 year old does not need to be judged by a school and put into counseling because she's a tomboy. She is EIGHT. There is nothing set in stone that she will remain a tomboy as she grows but this school saw fit to worry about the direction she was taking in like (at eight flipping years old). The school attacked her psyche and created a rule for it. Look at the timing of the newly installed rule into the handbook. You would rather her grandparent's lie to her and not tell her that some stupid rule about not being able to dress in jeans and t-shirts at home is what got the do not re-enroll letter sent to her home. I do not agree with lying, not even to a child. What other reason could the grandparents give? It's not like they are moving. The school is to blame. They set this in motion by creating a new rule just because bigoted adults were uncomfortable with a child who expresses herself as a tomboy. Those adults need to grow up and enter the year 2014. At 8 years old she does not need it dumped on her that there is something wrong with her because she is a tomboy. We also get to change the rules when enough common sense people stand up to bigoted behavior.

It is a private school. No one is forced to attend. There is discrimination everywhere on this earth. One needn't LIE, but there is a tactful way to address the situation. I also think saying "Kicked Out" is antagonistic to the situation. The grandparents were asked not to re-enroll their ward for the next term.
One REALLY important thing Sunnie (and everybody else) needs to remember: THIS SCHOOL IS NOT REPRESENTATIVE OF EVERY CHRISTIAN ORGANIZATION OR PERSON. I'll refer you right back to the handbook regarding Halloween and dancing.
By the way, following one's faith, whatever it is, is a daily endeavor.

I'm sure the teachers or administrators had already addressed their issues with Sunnie before the ultimatum came. She had to be told why she was in counseling with gender identity confusion being the topic (as outlined in the letter). Anything other than the truth would have confused her. Just because there is discrimination every where does not mean we have to accept it, not even from a private school. Kicked out is what the media used. I just used their wording but with an ultimatum like the one they gave, kicked out is not too far off track. If the grandparents had chosen to continue letting her be Sunnie at home, the school would have kicked her out.