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

[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.

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...

I think the School District has hung themselves by hanging their argument on the dress code, not sexual orientation. A tux against the dress code? Really? I think a judge will be laughing at that one.

 

[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.

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...

If that's CL's point then it's a moot one.

How exactly are you going to sue someone for an illegal policy they abandoned when it came to their attention that it might be illegal? As long as they never enforced it, what can they be sued for exactly? And by whom?

 

[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.

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...

I think the School District has hung themselves by hanging their argument on the dress code, not sexual orientation. A tux against the dress code? Really? I think a judge will be laughing at that one.

Hogwash. It's never going to get to a judge.

There is no case.

 

[AllieBaba]

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...

I think the School District has hung themselves by hanging their argument on the dress code, not sexual orientation. A tux against the dress code? Really? I think a judge will be laughing at that one.

Dress codes usually address sex. Boys will wear such and such, and girls will wear such and such....

 

[CurveLight]

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.

Do you understand how legal cases work?

 

[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...

If that's CL's point then it's a moot one.

How exactly are you going to sue someone for an illegal policy they abandoned when it came to their attention that it might be illegal? As long as they never enforced it, what can they be sued for exactly? And by whom?

What makes you so sure they abandoned it? If they did, they'd probably be holding the prom. It should be easy enough to check their written school policy handbook.

 

[manifold]

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...

If that's CL's point then it's a moot one.

How exactly are you going to sue someone for an illegal policy they abandoned when it came to their attention that it might be illegal? As long as they never enforced it, what can they be sued for exactly? And by whom?

What makes you so sure they abandoned it? If they did, they'd probably be holding the prom. It should be easy enough to check their written school policy handbook.

Cancelling the prom renders any prom policies moot.

Again, who is going to sue them and for what exactly?

 

[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.

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...

That's why I've always said the discrimination is based on "sex." I've never said it was based on orientation.

 

[Samson]

If that's CL's point then it's a moot one.

How exactly are you going to sue someone for an illegal policy they abandoned when it came to their attention that it might be illegal? As long as they never enforced it, what can they be sued for exactly? And by whom?

What makes you so sure they abandoned it? If they did, they'd probably be holding the prom. It should be easy enough to check their written school policy handbook.

Cancelling the prom renders any prom policies moot.

Again, who is going to sue them and for what exactly?

ACLU will sue (to make headlines, if nothing else)

They will sue to change the policy of exclusion. Of course the board will change the policy before the court hears the case, but this is immaterial.

Hopefully, the Board will Ban Proms in the New Policy.

 

[Ravi]

If that's CL's point then it's a moot one.

How exactly are you going to sue someone for an illegal policy they abandoned when it came to their attention that it might be illegal? As long as they never enforced it, what can they be sued for exactly? And by whom?

What makes you so sure they abandoned it? If they did, they'd probably be holding the prom. It should be easy enough to check their written school policy handbook.

Cancelling the prom renders any prom policies moot.

Again, who is going to sue them and for what exactly?

Apparently the ACLU is going to sue them because the school has a rule, still in place, that says a prom date must be of the opposite sex.

 

[CurveLight]

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...

More semantic bullshit. Nobody is making anyone "embrace" gays, straights, bisexuals, or stoopid fuks like you when the Constitution gets affirmed. You know bigotry is unjustifiable so you try to set it up as if opponents are being forced when really it is the bigots saying

"In public you shall act heterosexual or you shall be excluded."

It bigots like you who are trying to force everyone else to conform to your self righteous and shallow holes of despair.

 

[manifold]

What makes you so sure they abandoned it? If they did, they'd probably be holding the prom. It should be easy enough to check their written school policy handbook.

Cancelling the prom renders any prom policies moot.

Again, who is going to sue them and for what exactly?

Apparently the ACLU is going to sue them because the school has a rule, still in place, that says a prom date must be of the opposite sex.

So the ACLU is going after precedent then?

It's pretty much a foregone conclusion that the school will throw out the rule before it gets that far. I mean, why do they need any prom rules if they don't have a prom.

I guess if their goal is to make sure every other school in the country has to allow queers to attend the prom or cancel the prom then they should keep up the great work!

Since clearly cases like this are doing wonders to improve attitudes toward queers.

 

[Ravi]

Cancelling the prom renders any prom policies moot.

Again, who is going to sue them and for what exactly?

Apparently the ACLU is going to sue them because the school has a rule, still in place, that says a prom date must be of the opposite sex.

So the ACLU is going after precedent then?

It's pretty much a foregone conclusion that the school will throw out the rule before it gets that far. I mean, why do they need any prom rules if they don't have a prom.

I guess if their goal is to make sure every other school in the country has to allow queers to attend the prom or cancel the prom then they should keep up the great work!

Since clearly cases like this are doing wonders to improve attitudes toward queers.

Don't kid yourself. Proms are one of the schools ways of raising money.

 

[manifold]

Apparently the ACLU is going to sue them because the school has a rule, still in place, that says a prom date must be of the opposite sex.

So the ACLU is going after precedent then?

It's pretty much a foregone conclusion that the school will throw out the rule before it gets that far. I mean, why do they need any prom rules if they don't have a prom.

I guess if their goal is to make sure every other school in the country has to allow queers to attend the prom or cancel the prom then they should keep up the great work!

Since clearly cases like this are doing wonders to improve attitudes toward queers.

Don't kid yourself. Proms are one of the schools ways of raising money.

What am I kidding myself about?

 

[rdean]

In the south, they filled in public swimming pools with "dirt" to keep little colored children from swimming with the tidy whities.

They will lose their fingers before letting go all their hates and predjudice.

 

[PatekPhilippe]

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...

More semantic bullshit. Nobody is making anyone "embrace" gays, straights, bisexuals, or stoopid fuks like you when the Constitution gets affirmed. You know bigotry is unjustifiable so you try to set it up as if opponents are being forced when really it is the bigots saying

"In public you shall act heterosexual or you shall be excluded."

It bigots like you who are trying to force everyone else to conform to your self righteous and shallow holes of despair.

So how does the Constitution apply to this again?

 

[bodecea]

Cancelling the prom renders any prom policies moot.

Again, who is going to sue them and for what exactly?

Apparently the ACLU is going to sue them because the school has a rule, still in place, that says a prom date must be of the opposite sex.

So the ACLU is going after precedent then?

It's pretty much a foregone conclusion that the school will throw out the rule before it gets that far. I mean, why do they need any prom rules if they don't have a prom.

I guess if their goal is to make sure every other school in the country has to allow queers to attend the prom or cancel the prom then they should keep up the great work!

Since clearly cases like this are doing wonders to improve attitudes toward queers.

Isn't holding a prom every year precedent?

And, sorry if I don't really respect your opinion on this, but anyone who calls us derogatory names isn't worth respecting.

If she wanted to bring a black classmate, you'd be talking about *******, wouldn't you?

 

[bodecea]

In the south, they filled in public swimming pools with "dirt" to keep little colored children from swimming with the tidy whities.

They will lose their fingers before letting go all their hates and predjudice.

Yes, that's the same "cut off my nose to spite my face" attitude....seems rather cultural, doesn't it?

 

[manifold]

Apparently the ACLU is going to sue them because the school has a rule, still in place, that says a prom date must be of the opposite sex.

So the ACLU is going after precedent then?

It's pretty much a foregone conclusion that the school will throw out the rule before it gets that far. I mean, why do they need any prom rules if they don't have a prom.

I guess if their goal is to make sure every other school in the country has to allow queers to attend the prom or cancel the prom then they should keep up the great work!

Since clearly cases like this are doing wonders to improve attitudes toward queers.

Isn't holding a prom every year precedent?

And, sorry if I don't really respect your opinion on this, but anyone who calls us derogatory names isn't worth respecting.

If she wanted to bring a black classmate, you'd be talking about *******, wouldn't you?

I respect your decision to not respect my opinion.

But I'm not aware of any derogatory words that I might have used. Care to educate me?

 

[Rinata]

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."

The right thing??? Your right thing may not be my right thing. It's not something that you can proclaim, as you just did. It cannot be defined. You have no idea if cancelling the prom was the right thing to do. You just think it is. I think it isn't. See how it works???