Navy Pride
DP Veteran
- Joined
- Jul 11, 2005
- Messages
- 39,883
- Reaction score
- 3,070
- Location
- Pacific NW
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Very Conservative
Originally Posted by roguenuke
So, in your opinion, women should just go back to wearing skirts and dresses all the time, huh?
She's not trying to promote the gay agenda. Most likely she was just trying to save a little money, that the school was trying to unfairly charge her in the first place. Why should she have to pay more to bring her female date to prom than a male student does to bring his female date to prom? That's not right.
Also, why should it be okay for the school board to feel that if another student is uncomfortable with the lesbian couple being at the prom that they should have leave, but if it were any heterosexual couple that another student was uncomfortable with (just because of the couple type, not the actions of the couple), the same rule wouldn't, and most likely couldn't, apply?
You are clueless about how a lot of people feel about the gay lifestyle especially in the South where there are a lot more people of religeous faith and they take their religion seriously.......
I am not even saying its right....I lived in the south and I am telling you that is the way it is.....
If you believe what these two kids was doing was not political then you live in fantasy land......
Wouldn't that be great if women looked like women instead of a men.......I can remember when girls were required to wear skirts and dresses to school and it was a pretty good time in this country........
So people should just go along with what conservative southerners think, huh?
Did you say that during the Civil Rights movement?
Doesn't matter.
It's like you're a ranting old man on a front porch somewhere.
come around and see this old man sometime and I will show you how it feels to have a a size 14 boot up your ass sonny.........
Boots in asses? Is that a gay thing?
I don't know what they do....your the authority on that.......come find out.......:rofl
If it were up to me I'd thread-ban the lot of you.
I don't think that's true. The school says it's had the no same-sex date policy in place for over twenty years.Let's be clear, though, that this is not the school's doing. The school has for years welcomed same-sex couples.
No, not boots.Boots in asses? Is that a gay thing?
I agree............
I don't think that's true. The school says it's had the no same-sex date policy in place for over twenty years.
Early in this thread I researched the school and found a couple blogs where parents claimed that same-sex students were not an issue when they attended, and not before the current Admin took office.
I'm to lazy to go back and look all that up, though, but I'm sure I linked to it.
Oh I didn't know there were other proms set up. I left this thread for a while.
Let's be clear, though, that this is not the school's doing. The school has for years welcomed same-sex couples.
This is the doing of a single person, the Administrator, who singlehandedly denied the girl permission. It was not a board, there is no anti-gay wording in the dress-code or similar. This is one person's bigotry, not an entire school's.
I just know what's in Memorandum of Authorities that was submitted to the court, which says the rule has been in effect for 20+ years.Early in this thread I researched the school and found a couple blogs where parents claimed that same-sex students were not an issue when they attended, and not before the current Admin took office.
I'm to lazy to go back and look all that up, though, but I'm sure I linked to it.
It had to be more than just one person. The trial that was already held pretty much determined that. The principal was the original person that she said told her she couldn't bring a same-sex date to the prom. And she said that she asked him, specifically because the rule had been there in the past. So obviously, it wasn't a just this year thing. Also, in one of the articles I saw, but can't seem to find again, the judge made note specifically on the fact that some school officials testified that they canceled it due to the disruption caused by to the learning environment, yet the principal himself testified contrary to this, saying that the learning environment wasn't disrupted.
Lesbian gets day in court over nixed prom - USATODAY.com
McMillen vs. Itawamba County School
Note, it was the county's school Superintendent Teresa McNeece that was actually said to have canceled the prom. And the School Board Chairman Eddie Hood certainly testified for the school, because he is the one who said that there was another prom sponsored by the parents. Also, there was rules put out for prom that included that couples could only be opposite sex couples and that girls had to wear dresses and boys had to wear tuxes.
You're wrong. It was the school district officials, multiple, not just one administrator, that were guilty of discrimination and canceled the prom. Also, the mayor of the town defended the actions of the school board, saying that he supported the decision. This isn't just one person.
I will admit that I was wrong about the ticket price issue. From the link that I gave that has the actual court documents, Exhibit A (p. 10/20), says that a guest is someone outside of the Junior or Senior class of that school. This means that most likely it is because her gf is a sophomore that she had to buy her a guest ticket. But that does specify that guests had to be opposite sex. And this memo was written by Mrs. Sandy Prestige and Mrs. Sandra Sabino.
So another official canceled the prom not because a gay couple would be attending, but because this was drummed up into so much drama that it was disrupting the school.
That's not discrimination. Telling the gay couple they can't attend is discrimination, but canceling the prom due to disruption is not.
"We were being hounded every day. Our students were being hounded," McNeece said. "We were having a tough time of any bell-to-bell instruction."
On cross-examination, school officials did not give specific examples of classroom disruptions.
So another official canceled the prom not because a gay couple would be attending, but because this was drummed up into so much drama that it was disrupting the school.
That's not discrimination. Telling the gay couple they can't attend is discrimination, but canceling the prom due to disruption is not.
But there were no disruptions to class until after the prom was canceled, if at all.
Judge hears lesbian teen's suit to force prom | National news | Chron.com - Houston Chronicle
The bottom line is this:
The school has the right to discriminate since there is no gay rights law in that state.
The kids have the right to protest against this discrimination.
There is no right to a prom, so the school can cancel it for whatever reason they want.
None of this makes the school morally right, just legally right. Just like the schools that prohibited blacks and whites from going to the prom together in the early 60s were legally right but not morally right.
And the way to change the law is to do exactly what these kids are doing -- bring attention to the injustice.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?