Christians Sue for Right NOT to Tolerate Policies (1 Viewer)

[vergiss]

From: http://washingtontimes.com/upi/20060410-120217-7787r.htm - see also http://ktla.trb.com/news/la-na-christians10apr10,0,1526774.story?coll=ktla-news-1

A lawsuit by a Georgia Institute of Technology student in Atlanta is the latest in an effort by religious groups to legally fight policies protecting gays. The campaign seeks to force public schools, state colleges and private workplaces to eliminate such policies, reports The Los Angeles Times.

In the Georgia Tech case, the senior claimed her Christian faith compels her to speak out against homosexuality. She sees the school's ban on any speech putting down others because of their sexual orientation as an infringement on her right to religious expression, says the report.

Argh! :doh Every day, people get that little bit more stupid.

 

[Trajan Octavian Titus]

From: http://www.latimes.com/news/printedition/la-na-christians10apr10,0,6596503.story?coll=la-home-headlines



Argh! :doh Every day, people get that little bit more stupid.

Does that school recieve federal funds? Is it a private school or a public school? If it's the latter then they're in violation of the first amendment's free speech rights INMO. To whit: The first amendment isn't there to protect the free speech we agree with it's there to protect the free speech that we don't agree with.

 

[vergiss]

Does that school recieve federal funds? Is it a private school or a public school? If it's the latter then they're in violation of the first amendment's free speech rights INMO.

What, because it's banned insults? :neutral:

The point here is not that she's challenging it as a violation of free speech, but as a violation of her religious expression.

 

[NME]

while i agree that her argument may seem petty in comparasson, i can also see a point in her argument. there are many PC things imposed by private (and many public) institutions aimed at detering one from practicing freedom of speech. theses guidelines are set in place to protect the feelings of those who might fall into whichever catagory is being spoken about.

she does have the right to speak openly and to ridicule homosexuality as a whole...just not where she wants to. the school is given the right deny her the ability to do so on their premises.

i agree with both sides. the school has to protect what is in the best interest of all people, regardless of their orientation.

she wants to speak about HER views regarding homosexuality. she wants to be able to do so freely. i see nothing wrong with that. we live in such a PC society, that most people are afraid to speak against anything for fear of scrutany, or fear of offending someone else, good for her.

i highly doubt she will be allowed to do so based on the laws in place, but who knows

 

[Deegan]

I suspect that the ACLU will be all over this, if people can scream baby killers to soldiers, then I guess religious nuts can scream their same rhetoric to homo's.

 

[Thorgasm]

I didn't know she couldn't express her views on a college campus. Private workplaces have the right to keep her from doing anything that might hurt the company. Is there really a story here?

 

[Deegan]

I didn't know she couldn't express her views on a college campus. Private workplaces have the right to keep her from doing anything that might hurt the company. Is there really a story here?

I certainly don't agree with private workplaces, or even private schools, but in public, go for it, all the other nuts are doing it.:roll:

 

[vergiss]

Deegan, I'm no more sypmathetic towards the anti-recruitment protesters than you are, but you're comparing apples and organges here. We're talking about political opinion (no matter how distasteful it may be, be it coming from the mouths of rabid hippies or Anne Coulter) versus insults and harassment based on sexuality, religion, gender etc - which the college has specifically banned.

 

[Deegan]

Deegan, I'm no more sypmathetic towards the anti-recruitment protesters than you are, but you're comparing apples and organges here. We're talking about political opinion (no matter how distasteful it may be, be it coming from the mouths of rabid hippies or Anne Coulter) versus insults and harassment based on sexuality, religion, gender etc - which the college has specifically banned.

And I don't agree with it, but we should never fear free speech, especially at our colleges. If they want to spew their hate, I'm sure the college could put them right next to the Jew hating Muslims, and we can all laugh and point.

 

[Enola/Alone]

She shouldn't be able to insult someone on the basis of their sexuality ANYWHERE. I hope this suit gets laughed out of court.

 

[Deegan]

lol, funny story, my cousin's a Navy ROTC at Virginia Tech, and one day he was doing his excercizes with his group, and apparently a whole bunch of kids were calling them baby killers. When he told me that I almost had a stroke from the sheer stupidity of it.

Anyway, the lady should be able to state her opinion definately. I got to call a kid at my school a fat liberal ******, I don't see why she shouldn't be allowed to express her opinion.

As long as it doesn't cross the line into harassment, cause I can imagine being gay in Georgia isn't all that much fun as is.

Atcually, being gay in Atlanta, is widely accepted, they have more gays there, then in SanFran. This should be heard, let's not fear it, let's embrace their right to make asses of themselves, I think it's helpful, we all get to see how ridiculous it is.

 

[vergiss]

And I don't agree with it, but we should never fear free speech, especially at our colleges. If they want to spew their hate, I'm sure the college could put them right next to the Jew hating Muslims, and we can all laugh and point.

The rules merely forbid low-blow harassment and insults, though. Public elementary and high schools forbid harassment and insults on the basis of sexuality etc. Why shouldn't colleges?

Again, people are missing the point - the woman is arguing that it violates her right to religious expression. More on that, less on the same First Amendment stuff we debate all the time.

 

[Deegan]

The rules merely forbid low-blow harassment and insults, though. Public elementary and high schools forbid harassment and insults on the basis of sexuality etc. Why shouldn't colleges?

Again, people are missing the point - the woman is arguing that it violates her right to religious expression. More on that, less on the same First Amendment stuff we debate all the time.

It's free speech period. These people stand on the street corner all the time, holding up their signs, "God hates fags" etc. If it's a state school, they should allow it, not on religious freedoms, but on free speech grounds. Harassment has never stopped anyone else before, why should it stop us now? As I said, I think it's healthy to allow these people to make asses of themselves, it teaches a fine lesson, don't be like those people!

 

[Enola/Alone]

The rules merely forbid low-blow harassment and insults, though. Public elementary and high schools forbid harassment and insults on the basis of sexuality etc. Why shouldn't colleges?

Again, people are missing the point - the woman is arguing that it violates her right to religious expression. More on that, less on the same First Amendment stuff we debate all the time.

So what would actually count as harrassment then, and what would count as free speech? Where is the line drawn?

 

[Thorgasm]

Atcually, being gay in Atlanta, is widely accepted, they have more gays there, then in SanFran.

Do you have a source for this? I thought San Fran was the mecca for homosexuals. I even thought that Orlando (Disney) had more than Atlanta. I am not debating your fact. I just find it surprising.

 

[Deegan]

As far as I know, homosexuals do not have their sexuality tattooed on their foreheads, I don't know how the can be "harassed" necessarily. If you're proud, walk tall past these idiots, and know you are right. If you question your own choice, don't blame these people, do some soul searching yourself.

 

[Enola/Alone]

we have laws about harassment

I realise taht, I'm just a bit confused as to how it's decided what is objectionable but legal free speech and what is harrassment.

 

[Deegan]

Do you have a source for this? I thought San Fran was the mecca for homosexuals. I even thought that Orlando (Disney) had more than Atlanta. I am not debating your fact. I just find it surprising.

It's what I heard when I lived there, I could be wrong, but with the high costs of living in San Fran, I wouldn't doubt it. There are many opportunities for gays there, I believe it to be a fact, but will we ever know? It certainly was prevalent there, and my customers were largely gay there, but I really don't have any proof, I could be wrong, I should have stated that.:3oops:

 

[Thorgasm]

If you question your own choice, don't blame these people, do some soul searching yourself.

That is where the issue is. It is not a choice. That is why people have these policies in place. It is no different than race. The religious see it as a choice even though they don't have one shred of evidence that would support that.

 

[Enola/Alone]

As far as I know, homosexuals do not have their sexuality tattooed on their foreheads, I don't know how the can be "harassed" necessarily. If you're proud, walk tall past these idiots, and know you are right. If you question your own choice, don't blame these people, do some soul searching yourself.

Homosexuality isn't really a choice... I think it's as little different in a school situation: teens can be cruel to anyone who's the slightest bit different, and unless their school/teachers are obviously against anti-gay bullying, the lives of gay students can end up hellish. I know thsi woman isn't asking for the right to do physical violence to any students, I'm just worried she might incite it, if that makes any sense.

 

[Deegan]

That is where the issue is. It is not a choice. That is why people have these policies in place. It is no different than race. The religious see it as a choice even though they don't have one shred of evidence that would support that.

Well, that's one aspect I will never agree with, that people don't have a choice, or are born only to be with one sex. I believe you can be born with more female, or male genes, such as the struggle some men and women endure with their gender, but not born to only to a specific sexuality. Everyone has a choice, and I don't believe in furthering that lie, but that's just my opinion.

 

[Enola/Alone]

That is where the issue is. It is not a choice. That is why people have these policies in place. It is no different than race. The religious see it as a choice even though they don't have one shred of evidence that would support that.

I agree. Marginalised groups deserve state protection.

 

[Deegan]

Homosexuality isn't really a choice... I think it's as little different in a school situation: teens can be cruel to anyone who's the slightest bit different, and unless their school/teachers are obviously against anti-gay bullying, the lives of gay students can end up hellish. I know thsi woman isn't asking for the right to do physical violence to any students, I'm just worried she might incite it, if that makes any sense.

I agree, it's not a good place for such debate, not in middle, or high school, but college, that's a whole different ballgame, and has been for sometime now. But I still feel it's better to allow it, let's all know who the assholes are, then we can say, look, there goes the asshole.

 

[vergiss]

Well the right to religious expression is part of the first ammendment, the whole "Congress shall make no act establishing a state religion or preventing the free excercize thereof" part

I'm Australian, I didn't know that. :2razz:

I realise taht, I'm just a bit confused as to how it's decided what is objectionable but legal free speech and what is harrassment.

In my eyes, it's when a person or a group of people maliciously mocks, insults or otherwise verbally intimidates a specific person (or persons), in this case based soley on sexual orientation. Whether or not homosexuality is a choice shouldn't come into it - religion or the lack thereof is a choice.

Deegan - surely you don't think children at state schools should have to suffer teasing from their peers, because forbidding it would violate "free speech"? :neutral: If you don't, then why should anyone else?

 

[Thorgasm]

Well, that's one aspect I will never agree with, that people don't have a choice, or are born only to be with one sex. I believe you can be born with more female, or male genes, such as the struggle some men and women endure with their gender, but not born to only to a specific sexuality. Everyone has a choice, and I don't believe in furthering that lie, but that's just my opinion.

What is your favorite food? When did you choose to make that your favorite food? What is your favorite sexual position? When did you choose to make that your favorite? These questions are rhetorical of course. They illustrate my point though.