Mississippi School does the right thing: Bans prom due to Lesbian couple attending.

[CurveLight]

Go ahead. Won't fly. You can not hold the school district responsible for discrimination if they did not actually discriminate against anyone. By canceling the Prom they solved ALL the legal problems.

They're fuxxing cowards.

They were smart enough to not fall into the trap.

Nobody said cowards are dumb. They're just American hating cowards.

 

[rightwinger]

Maybe if vast winger would stop using the strawman argument, it would not be continually pointed out

Maybe if it was a "Straw Man" argument, I would stop using it.

These two ladies are simply trying to go to their high school prom with their significant other, JUST LIKE EVERYONE ELSE.

They're not asking to be allowed to be legally married, they're only trying to have a normal fucking adolescence, and along come some self-righteous assholes who decide to discriminate against them by turning the entire student body of their school against them.

And then you turn around and say it's their fault.

Well, it's not "their fault", they are victims of discrimination, pure and simple. They are not asking for special rights, they are simply asking to be allowed to do what all their other classmates do.

When Rosa Parks sat in the front of the bus to stand against discrimination, people also said it was "her fault", and that she was "just being stubborn", or that she was "uppity".

People just like you.

Now, I'm not gay, but there's nothing wrong with two girls who are involved in a relationship wanting to attend their own prom without being publicly stoned for it.

Valid analogy and not a strawman since it relates to a blame the victim situation.

 

[Shogun]

You're talking about other people's views, perceived morals, not absolute morals. Those were black people doing things that were perceived as immoral by a certain group of people, not that they were inherently immoral because of their skin color. Are you saying that the white woman married to a black man wouldn't be perceived as immoral? Is she immoral simply because she is white then, or because she decided to do something considered unacceptable to society at that time?

You don't even realize how the bolded sentence sinks your entire position, do you? Perceived as immoral.. hmmm.. yup... SURE DOESN'T APPLY HERE.

I said their ACTIONS were perceived as immoral, not that they were thought immoral simply because of their skin color alone.

the action was a direct result of race. if it were a white kid whistling there would have been no issue.

check mate.

 

[Vast LWC]

Go ahead. Won't fly. You can not hold the school district responsible for discrimination if they did not actually discriminate against anyone. By canceling the Prom they solved ALL the legal problems.

Yeah, they solved all their legal problems alright.

And now they just have to be responsible for the possibility of a lynching of these poor girls by the rest of the student body due to the fact that they are now being denied a prom too.

I was in the military and so were you, we both know this tactic well, and this school board is a bunch of nasty fucks for using it.

And the OP is just as nasty for publicly approving of this decision.

 

[Samson]

Of course I read the OP. I see you didn't bother scrolling up. One handed typing feels so good, right buddy?

Then I can only surmise you read, but couldn't understand the OP.

The Thread has nothing to do with anyone being shot for whistling at white women.

I look forward to making 25,000+ posts pointing out the obvious to Shogun!!!

You are free to assume whatever you need to in order to miss the point I made about the same excuses made by the same people in the same area. Indeed, that seems easier on your cognitive abilities than admitting you have no rebuttal.

After all, it must take a real brainiac to find a correlation between the "immoral" act of a black kid chirping at a white woman and a few dykes trying to dyke it up at a prom given the behaviour of both being weighed against the cultural backdrop in which they happen.




a REAL rocket scientist!

I think you've almost grasped the topic of the thread.....but

keep trying.

 

[rightwinger]

Where in the constitution does it state that you can't descriminate due to sexual preference.

Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution

Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws

.

Both gay or straight can be prosecuted under sodomy laws... that is equal

Law's against necrophilia as a sexual preference or choice does not discriminate either

Borderline moot since most sodomy laws have been thrown out.

One reason is that they were unequally applied to gay sex

 

[Contumacious]

Constance McMillen

She is a pretty girl.

To each her own.

.

 

[DiamondDave]

Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution

Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws

.

Both gay or straight can be prosecuted under sodomy laws... that is equal

Law's against necrophilia as a sexual preference or choice does not discriminate either

Borderline moot since most sodomy laws have been thrown out.

One reason is that they were unequally applied to gay sex

Not all have though.. and none have been declared unconstitutional... same with other laws revolving around actions dealing with sexual choice

 

[Vast LWC]

Correct.

But let's address the interesting point: "to stop the prom altogether in order to discriminate against two students is the worst kind of discrimination."

So, a "better" discrimination would have been to have the prom and simply asked gays to stay home? Or have a "seperate-but-equal" gay prom?

But this would contravene Federal Law.

It would, but it would also stop the rest of the student body and all of their friends and neighbors from resenting them for the rest of their lives.

What about simply ignoring the parents that oppose homosexual behaviour? How about allowing gays to piss off the majority, who would simply boycott the prom, and no doubt use this to justify their increased prejudice and perhaps a wider intolerance?

This would all be lawful, but it would hardly change the opinion of "the entire student populace against the couple just because they wanted to go to the Prom."

How about not discriminating against them in the first place and allowing them to go to their own PROM???

How about that?

 

[Barb]

And as well you should be concerned: That's my point

The same could be said for the Catrholic Church, or Itawamba County: The day they support Queers, is the day they "lose a large chunk of their membership."

Yeah...because there's no safer minority group to bash than gays....everyone hates the gays.

<<<<sigh>>>>

Everyone does not Hate gays, bo.

I don't hate gays, but I think a church, and a school district, has rights to exclude individuals whose behavior conflicts with their moral beliefs. I wouldn't know why these individuals would WANT to be included in organizations or events in which their behaviour is so clearly unacceptable.

Oh, HELL no.

That's kind of the same reasoning used to excuse redlining. Nope, it's exactly the same reasoning. Why would black people,or Hispanic people, or pick your despised group, WANT to live in a neighborhood where they'd feel unwelcome (insert sickly sweet innocent expression here)? They'd be MUCH more comfortable in the bricks, where most of "their people" already are, no matter the substandard housing, ecological degradation, and distance from decent jobs, and no matter they worked their asses off to afford better. Same with people, whose sexual preference, a protected right under federal law, are not the majority of the population they live within. Why don't they just MOVE to friendlier climes? Hell, after this the families of these kids may have to. But so what...what's the harm?

The harm is in these little bigoted enclaves becoming more powerful than the law they are supposed to operate under. It flies in the face of what America holds up as its standard when it pokes its nose in other parts of the world for reasons far removed from that standard: equal protection under the law.

 

[CurveLight]

Maybe if vast winger would stop using the strawman argument, it would not be continually pointed out

Maybe if it was a "Straw Man" argument, I would stop using it.

These two ladies are simply trying to go to their high school prom with their significant other, JUST LIKE EVERYONE ELSE.

They're not asking to be allowed to be legally married, they're only trying to have a normal fucking adolescence, and along come some self-righteous assholes who decide to discriminate against them by turning the entire student body of their school against them.

And then you turn around and say it's their fault.

Well, it's not "their fault", they are victims of discrimination, pure and simple. They are not asking for special rights, they are simply asking to be allowed to do what all their other classmates do.

When Rosa Parks sat in the front of the bus to stand against discrimination, people also said it was "her fault", and that she was "just being stubborn", or that she was "uppity".

People just like you.

Now, I'm not gay, but there's nothing wrong with two girls who are involved in a relationship wanting to attend their own prom without being publicly stoned for it.

I did not argue against a gay couple being allowed into the prom.. I did not argue for it either...

And if there is no prom there is no discrimination

But nice try

There will still be a prom. Either some parents will "rent" the school for a private "Spring Formal" or the local K of C will rent their hall to the parents. I wonder who will provide the Gay Detectors at the door? Is Haggert still looking for a job?

 

[Samson]

They're fuxxing cowards.

They were smart enough to not fall into the trap.

Nobody said cowards are dumb. They're just American hating cowards.

Yes, the People of Ibwataba Co should care more about the feelings of Queers in Seattle.

 

[DiamondDave]

Maybe if it was a "Straw Man" argument, I would stop using it.

These two ladies are simply trying to go to their high school prom with their significant other, JUST LIKE EVERYONE ELSE.

They're not asking to be allowed to be legally married, they're only trying to have a normal fucking adolescence, and along come some self-righteous assholes who decide to discriminate against them by turning the entire student body of their school against them.

And then you turn around and say it's their fault.

Well, it's not "their fault", they are victims of discrimination, pure and simple. They are not asking for special rights, they are simply asking to be allowed to do what all their other classmates do.

When Rosa Parks sat in the front of the bus to stand against discrimination, people also said it was "her fault", and that she was "just being stubborn", or that she was "uppity".

People just like you.

Now, I'm not gay, but there's nothing wrong with two girls who are involved in a relationship wanting to attend their own prom without being publicly stoned for it.

I did not argue against a gay couple being allowed into the prom.. I did not argue for it either...

And if there is no prom there is no discrimination

But nice try

There will still be a prom. Either some parents will "rent" the school for a private "Spring Formal" or the local K of C will rent their hall to the parents. I wonder who will provide the Gay Detectors at the door? Is Haggert still looking for a job?

That's neither here nor there.... you can invite whomever you want or not invite whomever you want to your own private function

There is no prom being held by the school... hence the school is not discriminating

 

[actsnoblemartin]

im confused, a prom is to take your date to a social event.

Other then some people not liking, or feeling a bit uncomfortable. why cant a girltake a girl to a prom?

This was a smart move by the Mississippi School District in banning the High School Prom due to a immoral lesbian couple wanting to attend that would taint the event. Here in the south we want southern family MORAL traditions maintained that will carry on in this christian faith based family conservative values region. It is best to mainstain the status quo of boy girl dates. Louisiana did this last year at a prom and banned the same sex couple by sticking to their moral convictions in doing the right thing. This same sex behavior should recieve zero tolerance at all school events.

Living | Miss. school prom off after lesbian's date request | Seattle Times Newspaper

JACKSON, Miss. —
A northern Mississippi school district decided Wednesday not to host a high school prom after a lesbian student demanded she be able to attend with her girlfriend and wear a tuxedo.

The Itawamba County school district's policy requires that senior prom dates be of the opposite sex. The American Civil Liberties Union of Mississippi had given the district until Wednesday to change that policy and allow 18-year-old Constance McMillen to escort her girlfriend, who is also a student, to the dance on April 2.

Instead, the school board met and issued a statement announcing it wouldn't host the event at Itawamba County Agricultural High School in Fulton, "due to the distractions to the educational process caused by recent events."

The statement didn't mention McMillen or the ACLU. When asked by The Associated Press if McMillen's demand led to the cancellation, school board attorney Michele Floyd said she could only reference the statement.

"It is our hope that private citizens will organize an event for the juniors and seniors," district officials said in the statement. "However, at this time, we feel that it is in the best interest of the Itawamba County School District, after taking into consideration the education, safety and well being of our students."

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Maybe if it was a "Straw Man" argument, I would stop using it.

These two ladies are simply trying to go to their high school prom with their significant other, JUST LIKE EVERYONE ELSE.

They're not asking to be allowed to be legally married, they're only trying to have a normal fucking adolescence, and along come some self-righteous assholes who decide to discriminate against them by turning the entire student body of their school against them.

And then you turn around and say it's their fault.

Well, it's not "their fault", they are victims of discrimination, pure and simple. They are not asking for special rights, they are simply asking to be allowed to do what all their other classmates do.

When Rosa Parks sat in the front of the bus to stand against discrimination, people also said it was "her fault", and that she was "just being stubborn", or that she was "uppity".

People just like you.

Now, I'm not gay, but there's nothing wrong with two girls who are involved in a relationship wanting to attend their own prom without being publicly stoned for it.

I did not argue against a gay couple being allowed into the prom.. I did not argue for it either...

And if there is no prom there is no discrimination

But nice try

There will still be a prom. Either some parents will "rent" the school for a private "Spring Formal" or the local K of C will rent their hall to the parents. I wonder who will provide the Gay Detectors at the door? Is Haggert still looking for a job?

You are Terminally stupid. So long as the School does not host or run it, they are not discriminating against anyone.

 

[Vast LWC]

And besides, at the risk of sounding like a complete pig...

Two teenage girls, together, after the prom??? Sounds pretty hot to me. LOL.

Why is anyone arguing against this?

 

[CurveLight]

I did not argue against a gay couple being allowed into the prom.. I did not argue for it either...

And if there is no prom there is no discrimination

But nice try

There will still be a prom. Either some parents will "rent" the school for a private "Spring Formal" or the local K of C will rent their hall to the parents. I wonder who will provide the Gay Detectors at the door? Is Haggert still looking for a job?

That's neither here nor there.... you can invite whomever you want or not invite whomever you want to your own private function

There is no prom being held by the school... hence the school is not discriminating

You're missing the point you dumb fuxxing bitch.

 

[Samson]

Yeah...because there's no safer minority group to bash than gays....everyone hates the gays.

<<<<sigh>>>>

Everyone does not Hate gays, bo.

I don't hate gays, but I think a church, and a school district, has rights to exclude individuals whose behavior conflicts with their moral beliefs. I wouldn't know why these individuals would WANT to be included in organizations or events in which their behaviour is so clearly unacceptable.

Oh, HELL no.

That's kind of the same reasoning used to excuse redlining. Nope, it's exactly the same reasoning. Why would black people,or Hispanic people, or pick your despised group, WANT to live in a neighborhood where they'd feel unwelcome (insert sickly sweet innocent expression here)? They'd be MUCH more comfortable in the bricks, where most of "their people" already are, no matter the substandard housing, ecological degradation, and distance from decent jobs, and no matter they worked their asses off to afford better. Same with people, whose sexual preference, a protected right under federal law, are not the majority of the population they live within. Why don't they just MOVE to friendlier climes? Hell, after this the families of these kids may have to. But so what...what's the harm?

The harm is in these little bigoted enclaves becoming more powerful than the law they are supposed to operate under. It flies in the face of what America holds up as its standard when it pokes its nose in other parts of the world for reasons far removed from that standard: equal protection under the law.

My question really was less rhetorically based than you assume: I really cannot imagine why Queers whould really care about being accepted in Ibawata Co, MS.

You've proven my worst fear: That some centralized authority will claim to know more about "what America holds up as its standard" than "these little bigoted enclaves."

Happily, in the USA, local people still have the right to determine how they will live. I applaud the Ibawata Co board for illustrating this fact.

 

[actsnoblemartin]

im not a lawyer, but discriminating against people based on race, religion, or even sexual orientation

doesnt seem that um ethical to me

There will still be a prom. Either some parents will "rent" the school for a private "Spring Formal" or the local K of C will rent their hall to the parents. I wonder who will provide the Gay Detectors at the door? Is Haggert still looking for a job?

That's neither here nor there.... you can invite whomever you want or not invite whomever you want to your own private function

There is no prom being held by the school... hence the school is not discriminating

You're missing the point you dumb fuxxing bitch.

 

[actsnoblemartin]

imagine, if everyone thought you were an abolmination, going to hell, should die or aids, or were not acceptible simply for who you are/what you cannot change

<<<<sigh>>>>

Everyone does not Hate gays, bo.

I don't hate gays, but I think a church, and a school district, has rights to exclude individuals whose behavior conflicts with their moral beliefs. I wouldn't know why these individuals would WANT to be included in organizations or events in which their behaviour is so clearly unacceptable.

Oh, HELL no.

That's kind of the same reasoning used to excuse redlining. Nope, it's exactly the same reasoning. Why would black people,or Hispanic people, or pick your despised group, WANT to live in a neighborhood where they'd feel unwelcome (insert sickly sweet innocent expression here)? They'd be MUCH more comfortable in the bricks, where most of "their people" already are, no matter the substandard housing, ecological degradation, and distance from decent jobs, and no matter they worked their asses off to afford better. Same with people, whose sexual preference, a protected right under federal law, are not the majority of the population they live within. Why don't they just MOVE to friendlier climes? Hell, after this the families of these kids may have to. But so what...what's the harm?

The harm is in these little bigoted enclaves becoming more powerful than the law they are supposed to operate under. It flies in the face of what America holds up as its standard when it pokes its nose in other parts of the world for reasons far removed from that standard: equal protection under the law.

My question really was less rhetorically based than you assume: I really cannot imagine why Queers whould really care about being accepted in Ibawata Co, MS.

You've proven my worst fear: That some centralized authority will claim to know more about "what America holds up as its standard" than "these little bigoted enclaves."

Happily, in the USA, local people still have the right to determine how they will live. I applaud the Ibawata Co board for illustrating this fact.