Veil the Venus?
Again, I'm embarrassed to be a Nebraskan.
This is in reference to principal Kathy Latta feeling she has to veil a painting that she deems "immoral/inappropriate" for her students. I have to question her overzealous responsibility for judging -- culturally -- what is decent and what it is not. I'm sure these are the same children, who know how to use a cell phone, can use a computer, etc. know what is pornography and what is art.
Perhaps I can give Ms. Latta an example: pornography should not be read to students and a painting that has been reviewed by curator in a museum is not pornography. Would she have the ceiling of the Sistine Chapel veiled? What about Venus de Milo? Or, what about Michelangelo's statue of David? One has to wonder if Ms. Latta's value system isn't what should be covered.
Furthermore, if she is indeed an educator, she could have explained that some painters use the nude human form in paintings. this is neither good or bad, they are exercising their freedom to explain an idea, just as it is her freedom to have an opinion, but not to force it upon other people.
And finally, one has to wonder what kind of havoc would be wreaked upon the psyche of a kindergartner to third grader by a nude figure in the window of a painting?