Student expelled for being gay

Great, so call me a troll "for not responding to every part of your thread" and then ignore my entire thread in response? Isn't that a tad hypocritical?

I should have read more carefully, my goof.



That's a shame and their behavior was certainly not in line with their own christian ideals. My son is currently in line to become a youth pastor (he and I have very differing views on religion but fortunately we manage to argue respectfully heh) and one of his recent battles was when he and the head youth pastor stood against a large number of parents and refused to kick a girl out of the youth group because she is a lesbian. THAT's the way it's supposed to be. Religious institutions, whether we personally agree with their ideals or not should at least be expected to be consistent in those ideals.


(and sidenote, i've only taken two sips of my coffee this morning so far so forgive me if i'm only barely making sense.... off to finish the coffee)

By your logic: If I start a school, and accept Federal funds, it would okay to have a rule banning Jews and Arabs?


If my religious belief is "Jews and Arabs and blacks are all going to burn in hell", would this be okay to promote, too?


How the hell do you claim that, a school imposing its belief system on its students is somehow having another belief system "imposed" on it by requiring them to not discriminate when it accepts federal money?



/me smacks head against wall over and over

: stands back, watches and laughs. Thinks better of it and then offers a hammer to do more damage... oops, I'd prefer you not harm my hammer. Give it back please.

My decision to not engage you is based on your trollish posts in other threads as much as it is on your posturing and ignorance of my posts in this one.

Watch out... the sun's coming up. Be stoned with ye!

Jeez, who has time to even address reams and reams of illogic like this let alone post it?

You're a marvel.

Of projection, that is.

Thanks.

As for the other part of your post... Pot. Where's the fire? I wanna burn!

The problem is you can't. Once you insert governmental funds, you loose certain things. A governmentally-funded school can not, for example, descriminate against black people. Hell, even a privatly funded school would have a rough road to travel if it tried that.

Enforcing it's rules may not be descrimination - provided the rules are enforced evenly - but the rules themselves ARE discrimination.

Just to repeat something, because I'm sure your response to me will be something along the lines of "don't think about the federal money for a minute"...

You can't seperate the two. You're trying to defend a real situation as if it were a hypothetical situation that it isn't. There IS federal money involved, that DOES change things, and no, you can't pretend the money doesn't exist when considering it.

In this quote, you acknowledge that debating with you is like hitting one's head into a brick wall.


Which is a logical fallacy. You are avoiding my arguments and using good ole' red herring.
Other posts have nothing to do with this post.




I'll tell you this once, Picabo, in the hopes that you just don't get it:
What you are saying in this thread borders on open intolerance and hate-speech.

OK, so what rule was broken? That a student wrote about being gay? How is that breaking the lewd and indecent conduct provision of the policy? Anyway, lewd and indecent are in the eye of the beholder. Unless there is an objective standard, supported by law, conflicts will arise.

My issue is that a student was expelled from a school that receives public funds.

And Brown v. Board of Education hasn't stopped racial discrimination. Making this about a "legal" issue attempts to establish a fair standard by which these disputes can be adjudicated.

By expelling a gay student for speaking publicly about his being gay. My personal opinion is also backed up by evolving legal doctrines that seek to safeguard various minority groups from majority harms. I don't have any problem with the school having a platform against homosexuality. They err when they use that "religious opinion" to deny equal opportunity.

And vice versa. I believe each individual is free to believe and express whatever relgious thought or ideology they so choose. When they start to force that worldview upon others, that's where I have a problem.

The story mentions state funds, not federal. See, I can be VERY specific in what I consider.

As I said, I won't argue the legal-money issue. That's bound to change over time based on the history of it already having changed over time, IMO.

A private school can and should follow its religious precepts if it's a religous-based school. If you don't agree with that, then there's no further discussion possible.

If you disagree with the religious precepts, regardless of how repugnant to you they are, don't they have the right to promote those precepts? AFAIK, in America, they do. That and the fact that this is a private school makes it very simple for me to separate the discipline/enforcement issue from the funding issue that you say cannot be separated.

Which is the central, important issue. So, you're basically not arguing the issue.


Wrong, and wrong. This country was founded on a seperation of Church and State. That hasn't changed.


And that's fine. In the same thought, the school should not accept public funds because they require the school to break its precept.


Tell that to the islamic extremists in GITMO. They have a firm believe that "destroying America" is "sanctified by Allah". Right.
(not to be seen as an endorsement of GITMO, which be all independent accounts is commiting torture, violating citizens' rights, and holding people prisoner for ambiguous reasons. But there are some bad people there that probably should be locked up.)


What makes a private school a private school? Funding. But you said you weren't going to discuss the funding? See, it's central to the debate. You're wrong. We're right. Go home. KTHXBYE.

There are plenty of Christian sects that do not agree with Cumberland's worldview. There is not universal agreement by religious scholars regarding homosexuality.

And, if by promotion you mean expelling students for expressing themselves, you bet they don't have that right. Most of the more conservative sects have totally abandoned the art of persuasion. They'd rather just ramrod a worldview down others' throats than do stuff like: Feed the hungry, clothe the poor and pray for their leaders.

http://www.religioustolerance.org/hom_bibi.htm

States tie funding to non-descrimination too.

I agree, a private school should follow its religious precepts. All they have to do to be able to make their own rules on this subject is to not take government money. Many schools do that.

If you break the law you get tried, sentenced, etc. based on what the law was at the time of the offense. Not what it was two weeks prior or five years later. Works the same for civil and criminal.

Just shows how little rights homosexuals have in America. Can you imagine what would happen if they did this to a black person...oh wait they did, 50 years ago!

I hope no pork is served in their canteen, black people are only there to do the serving and no women are allowed near anything during menstration.... I mean they gotta follow God's laws and not pick and choose what to follow from the Bible.

But if we all remember this thread unless we live in Kentucky, we probably shouldn't be commenting on this at all, right?

Seriously, government money is involved, discrimination is a big no-no when government money is involved. Discrimination is not a basic tenet of Christianity... but it seems that many so-called Christians have forgotten that. I was raised as a Christian. I certainly remember many things from church: tolerance of my fellow man... that sort of thing.

Hang on there bud. Are we speaking of all Christian schools or just this one? I thought we were speaking of a specific instance given the limited information in the news report.

As for my questions extending the religious precept basis for the school to the general question of doesn't such a school have a right to promote its religion... and your response... I think that you have an indefensible position when you say that a private school doesn't have the right to expel anyone. Being a private school pretty much gives them that right.

Tarring this school's actions and policies with a "dirty" brush of "conservative sect" label doesn't suggest any distance from this issue on your part. Generalizing about "conservative sects" is pretty brazen prejudice if you ask me. I guess that means you don't want to discuss this but would rather assail something you apparently don't understand from a perspective which is not yours - and thus can't agree with it under any circumstance. That's okay. I wasn't trying to convince you of the rightness of my position or the wrongness of yours.

In case it's slipped your mind or you didn't know, not all Baptists believe the same thing. I am pretty sure the news report said this was a Baptist school - tho' I could be wrong; it's just not worth rereading it to find out. Point is, lots of Baptists do and do not accept homosexuality and homosexuals.... it varies based on synod and individual church in my experience. So, your "feed.. clothe.. pray" reference is equally judgemental and that pretty much ends this as far as I am concerned.

Nah. Just you.

And this is the part of the thread where I point out how silly religions are to ban people who commit one "sin" and don't ban people who commit other "sins".

Sure.

Until they take government money to do so.

Then they have to play by government rules.

They can absolutely follow whatever discriminatory laws they want, so far as I'm concerned...

...when they give back the public money they got. Until then, no.

Speaking out against something over which people have no control is intolerance, plain and simple. Sexual orientation and race would be two examples of things which are not voluntary. Speaking out against things that are voluntary, like philosophies, religions, or political positions is a different story. If this person was being prevented from voicing dissenting opinions about any of those things I'd agree with you, but what she's fighting for is no different than claiming a "right" to be a racist.

And therein lies the great debate, Chip. Social conservatives don't think homosexuality is tied to genetic predisposition.

If you are describing me, then you are seriously mistaken. What I am defending is the school's right to enforce its own rules. I didn't defend their religious position.

If you want a discussion of a person's right to hold racist views, that might be an interesting discussion. But not in this thread.