Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Judge: Private School Not Covered By Calif. Gay Rights Law

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » GLBT Donate to DU
 
WillParkinson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-21-08 01:18 PM
Original message
Judge: Private School Not Covered By Calif. Gay Rights Law
(Riverside, California) A Riverside County Superior Court judge has dismissed a civil rights case brought by two teenage girls who were expelled from a private Lutheran high school because they were suspected of being lesbians.

More: http://www.365gay.com/Newscon08/01/012108cal.htm

(And now you can be removed from school if you are SUSPECTED of being gay. Wow. Nice religious values.)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
fasttense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-21-08 01:22 PM
Response to Original message
1. See, when you privatize a government function, the private firm doesn't have to
follow the law. Blackwater and the bushes have proved that laws don't matter.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
theredpen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-21-08 01:23 PM
Response to Original message
2. Dude, I know someone who was kicked out of Baylor for being suspected of being hetrosexual
He lent his car to his girlfriend, and on the evidence of his car being parked in front of her apartment overnight, they kicked him out for SUSPICION of premarital sex.

Religious zealots suck. I don't know why people put themselves through the misery of attending their schools. I'm sure there was a nice Episcopal or tolerant Catholic school those girls could have gone to (it was probably their parents' choice to send them to Bible Thumper High, though).
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Maat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-21-08 01:23 PM
Response to Original message
3. I was worried about this case ...
Edited on Mon Jan-21-08 01:27 PM by Maat
how disappointing!

The key is that, in a clash between 1st Amendment-related rights and anti-discrimination legislation, the Courts have always sided with the right of freedom of association (freedom to run the bigot's church as the bigot sees fit). The key, in my humble opinion, is that they were not accepting public funds. If they had been, it would have been an entirely different ballgame.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NMMNG Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-21-08 11:32 PM
Response to Original message
4. So long as they aren't receiving a penny of tax money,
I can deal with it. Otherwise that's BS. They can't claim "religious freedom" to skirt the laws then take tax dollars on the side.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Tue May 07th 2024, 02:41 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » GLBT Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC