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

[CurveLight]

Right.

So they scrapped the illegal policy in favor of a legal one... no prom.

you lose

They did not scrap the policy you apple diddling cockroach. The policy is still in place.

You keep ignoring this simple question:

What law were you talking about when you said it wasn't cowardly to obey the law?

Go ahead and ignore it again you butt slime sucking weasel. I love it when bigots dodge because it reinforces how your position is based on shit.

did you major in stupid?

I tried but they said you were unavailable you fucking shitweed.

 

[manifold]

I never said they broke the law when they cancelled the prom you fuxxing idiot.

Fine. So when did they break the law and what law did they break?

Their Policy is illegal you dummass. I've only stated that about ten times and provided the 1st Amen. link as well.

Do you mean the policy they didn't enforce?


Massive FAIL!

 

[CurveLight]

Just as boys are not allowed to wear mini-skirts, etc.....

There are precedents for dress codes and those dress codes having standards for both boys and girls that are not exactly identical

Thank you for showing the only way you can defend bigotry is by pointing to.....bigotry. That is known as circular logic. Tuxedos are obviously appropriate for a prom yet you are trying to claim who can or cannot wear one based on.......sex. (now you just have to figure out how to slide in your "behavior" red herring.....)

Male speedos are appropriate for a swim meet too.. for males.... like i just said to bod, there are indeed differences between men and women...

Now.. would I personally be offended by some girl trying to wear a tux for a school picture for shock value?? No... but once you cross the line in allowing kids to dictate what is and is not acceptable in school, it can all go downhill very quickly

Thank you for pointing out another area that violates the First Amendment. Like I said, you can't justify discrimination by pointing to discrimination.

 

[CurveLight]

Fine. So when did they break the law and what law did they break?

Their Policy is illegal you dummass. I've only stated that about ten times and provided the 1st Amen. link as well.

Do you mean the policy they didn't enforce?


Massive FAIL!

Holy snotballs of pudding patties you are one seriously stoopid bitch. This has already been explained and you have ignored it.

 

[manifold]

For the intellectually challenged (and downright short-bus retarded):

If the school had the prom and didn't allow these girls to attend, it's realistic to assume they'd be doing so on shaky legal grounds. But they didn't.

Instead, they simply cancelled the prom for everyone and in doing so retained a firm legal footing.

It might have been a douche move, but of the two, it was the only one that is CLEARLY legal.

 

[manifold]

 

[mal]

For the intellectually challenged (and downright short-bus retarded):

If the school had the prom and didn't allow these girls to attend, it's realistic to assume they'd be doing so on shaky legal grounds. But they didn't.

Instead, they simply cancelled the prom for everyone and in doing so retained a firm legal footing.

It might have been a douche move, but of the two, it was the only one that is CLEARLY legal.

Children in Schools don't Enjoy the Same Rights in this Regard as Adults, but I Agree, the School was Covering it's Ass.



peace...

 

[DiamondDave]

Thank you for showing the only way you can defend bigotry is by pointing to.....bigotry. That is known as circular logic. Tuxedos are obviously appropriate for a prom yet you are trying to claim who can or cannot wear one based on.......sex. (now you just have to figure out how to slide in your "behavior" red herring.....)

Male speedos are appropriate for a swim meet too.. for males.... like i just said to bod, there are indeed differences between men and women...

Now.. would I personally be offended by some girl trying to wear a tux for a school picture for shock value?? No... but once you cross the line in allowing kids to dictate what is and is not acceptable in school, it can all go downhill very quickly

Thank you for pointing out another area that violates the First Amendment. Like I said, you can't justify discrimination by pointing to discrimination.

First amendment does not prevent dress code rules.. First Amendment does not go for rules about behavior...

While you may every right to wear a "Fuck 'Insert Teacher Name here'" shirt all up and down the sidewalk and show how you detest that teacher.. you have no first amendment right to wear that in school where there are indeed rules against it.... and those are not going to be struck down in the name of the first amendment

You may have the freedom to express yourself by waving your genitalia over a picture of someone you hate.. the first amendment does not give you the right to do that in a public place or in a private place with rules against decorum and dress and behavior..

Quit while you are behind

 

[mal]

Still Arguing about Forcing the Homosexual Agenda on Children in Schools?...



peace...

Still trying to sell your pathetic strawmen? When women fought for the right to vote were they forcing men to get pregnant? When there was a fight to let blacks vote were they forcing whites to go get a really deep suntan?

Affirming equal rights as guaranteed by the Constitution isn't forcing anything on anyone. It's preventing discrimination. You homophobes are so fukkked up you actually cry persecution when you are prevented from sticking your over controlling hands in other peoples' pants.

A Black Comedian recently Summed it up for you People Attempting to Compare Chosen Sexual Deviancies to his Skin Color...

When he's Pulled over in his Car, he can't Jump back into the Closet....

He's Black, and that's that.

People Choosing to Defy their Natural Design is their Right, but Forcing Society on all Levels, including in Schools with Children, to Embrace that Choice, is NOT their Right.



peace...

 

[CurveLight]

For the intellectually challenged (and downright short-bus retarded):

If the school had the prom and didn't allow these girls to attend, it's realistic to assume they'd be doing so on shaky legal grounds. But they didn't.

Instead, they simply cancelled the prom for everyone and in doing so retained a firm legal footing.

It might have been a douche move, but of the two, it was the only one that is CLEARLY legal.

Children in Schools don't Enjoy the Same Rights in this Regard as Adults, but I Agree, the School was Covering it's Ass.



peace...

The student is an 18 year old adult and if you looked at the complaint filed you would see federal cases cited showing students have First Amendment protection in school and that mere whining does not justify censorship.

 

[CurveLight]

Still Arguing about Forcing the Homosexual Agenda on Children in Schools?...



peace...

Still trying to sell your pathetic strawmen? When women fought for the right to vote were they forcing men to get pregnant? When there was a fight to let blacks vote were they forcing whites to go get a really deep suntan?

Affirming equal rights as guaranteed by the Constitution isn't forcing anything on anyone. It's preventing discrimination. You homophobes are so fukkked up you actually cry persecution when you are prevented from sticking your over controlling hands in other peoples' pants.

A Black Comedian recently Summed it up for you People Attempting to Compare Chosen Sexual Deviancies to his Skin Color...

When he's Pulled over in his Car, he can't Jump back into the Closet....

He's Black, and that's that.

People Choosing to Defy their Natural Design is their Right, but Forcing Society on all Levels, including in Schools with Children, to Embrace that Choice, is NOT their Right.



peace...

Affirming equal rights for gays is not trying to make anyone else gay.

 

[manifold]

For the intellectually challenged (and downright short-bus retarded):

If the school had the prom and didn't allow these girls to attend, it's realistic to assume they'd be doing so on shaky legal grounds. But they didn't.

Instead, they simply cancelled the prom for everyone and in doing so retained a firm legal footing.

It might have been a douche move, but of the two, it was the only one that is CLEARLY legal.

Children in Schools don't Enjoy the Same Rights in this Regard as Adults, but I Agree, the School was Covering it's Ass.



peace...

The student is an 18 year old adult and if you looked at the complaint filed you would see federal cases cited showing students have First Amendment protection in school and that mere whining does not justify censorship.

Clearly you weren't paying attention to the bong hits for Jesus case.

 

[CurveLight]

Male speedos are appropriate for a swim meet too.. for males.... like i just said to bod, there are indeed differences between men and women...

Now.. would I personally be offended by some girl trying to wear a tux for a school picture for shock value?? No... but once you cross the line in allowing kids to dictate what is and is not acceptable in school, it can all go downhill very quickly

Thank you for pointing out another area that violates the First Amendment. Like I said, you can't justify discrimination by pointing to discrimination.

First amendment does not prevent dress code rules.. First Amendment does not go for rules about behavior...

While you may every right to wear a "Fuck 'Insert Teacher Name here'" shirt all up and down the sidewalk and show how you detest that teacher.. you have no first amendment right to wear that in school where there are indeed rules against it.... and those are not going to be struck down in the name of the first amendment

You may have the freedom to express yourself by waving your genitalia over a picture of someone you hate.. the first amendment does not give you the right to do that in a public place or in a private place with rules against decorum and dress and behavior..

Quit while you are behind

None of this idiotic bullshit addresses the fact the policy is illegal by discriminating based on sex.

 

[bodecea]

For the intellectually challenged (and downright short-bus retarded):

If the school had the prom and didn't allow these girls to attend, it's realistic to assume they'd be doing so on shaky legal grounds. But they didn't.

Instead, they simply cancelled the prom for everyone and in doing so retained a firm legal footing.

It might have been a douche move, but of the two, it was the only one that is CLEARLY legal.

Actually, cancelling a prom that has a tradition and an unspoken expectation in order to avoid allowing a minority from attending may in itself be illegal. Notice I say "may".

 

[bodecea]

I find your altering of Curvelight's nic rather immature.

 

[manifold]

For the intellectually challenged (and downright short-bus retarded):

If the school had the prom and didn't allow these girls to attend, it's realistic to assume they'd be doing so on shaky legal grounds. But they didn't.

Instead, they simply cancelled the prom for everyone and in doing so retained a firm legal footing.

It might have been a douche move, but of the two, it was the only one that is CLEARLY legal.

Actually, cancelling a prom that has a tradition and an unspoken expectation in order to avoid allowing a minority from attending may in itself be illegal. Notice I say "may".

Good luck with that.

 

[bodecea]

Still trying to sell your pathetic strawmen? When women fought for the right to vote were they forcing men to get pregnant? When there was a fight to let blacks vote were they forcing whites to go get a really deep suntan?

Affirming equal rights as guaranteed by the Constitution isn't forcing anything on anyone. It's preventing discrimination. You homophobes are so fukkked up you actually cry persecution when you are prevented from sticking your over controlling hands in other peoples' pants.

A Black Comedian recently Summed it up for you People Attempting to Compare Chosen Sexual Deviancies to his Skin Color...

When he's Pulled over in his Car, he can't Jump back into the Closet....

He's Black, and that's that.

People Choosing to Defy their Natural Design is their Right, but Forcing Society on all Levels, including in Schools with Children, to Embrace that Choice, is NOT their Right.



peace...

Affirming equal rights for gays is not trying to make anyone else gay.

Unwarrented discrimination against a law-abiding, tax-paying minority is still discrimination regardless of the law-abiding, tax-paying minority. Women are not blacks, yet...for some strange reason...it is not ok to discriminate against them either. Handicapped people are not blacks, yet...for some strange reason...it is not ok to discriminate against them either. Jews are not blacks, yet...for some strange reason...it is not ok to discriminate against them either.

 

[mal]

Still trying to sell your pathetic strawmen? When women fought for the right to vote were they forcing men to get pregnant? When there was a fight to let blacks vote were they forcing whites to go get a really deep suntan?

Affirming equal rights as guaranteed by the Constitution isn't forcing anything on anyone. It's preventing discrimination. You homophobes are so fukkked up you actually cry persecution when you are prevented from sticking your over controlling hands in other peoples' pants.

A Black Comedian recently Summed it up for you People Attempting to Compare Chosen Sexual Deviancies to his Skin Color...

When he's Pulled over in his Car, he can't Jump back into the Closet....

He's Black, and that's that.

People Choosing to Defy their Natural Design is their Right, but Forcing Society on all Levels, including in Schools with Children, to Embrace that Choice, is NOT their Right.



peace...

Affirming equal rights for gays is not trying to make anyone else gay.

I made no such Assertion, you Dingleberry...

Expecting Society to Embrace the Choice is what I was Referring to...

And it's NOT Analagous to Skin Color, and it's Insulting to People of Color for Sexual Deviants to Continue Comparing their Choices to the Honest Civil Rights Struggle in this Country.



peace...

 

[Ravi]

For the intellectually challenged (and downright short-bus retarded):

If the school had the prom and didn't allow these girls to attend, it's realistic to assume they'd be doing so on shaky legal grounds. But they didn't.

Instead, they simply cancelled the prom for everyone and in doing so retained a firm legal footing.

It might have been a douche move, but of the two, it was the only one that is CLEARLY legal.

I think Curvy's point is that even if the rule isn't enforced, just having it on the books is discrimination and therefore illegal.

Though I can't remember if sexual orientation is a protected class...

 

[bodecea]

For the intellectually challenged (and downright short-bus retarded):

If the school had the prom and didn't allow these girls to attend, it's realistic to assume they'd be doing so on shaky legal grounds. But they didn't.

Instead, they simply cancelled the prom for everyone and in doing so retained a firm legal footing.

It might have been a douche move, but of the two, it was the only one that is CLEARLY legal.

Actually, cancelling a prom that has a tradition and an unspoken expectation in order to avoid allowing a minority from attending may in itself be illegal. Notice I say "may".

Good luck with that.

Thank you...the good wishes are appreciated...I think it has something to do with reasonable and long standing expectations turning into "de facto" rules.