Posted on 03/12/2010 5:05:12 AM PST by NYer
FANTASTIC POINT!!!
For example: The ACLU, which by the way was founded by communists, ...
Sounds like proms are going the way of the Triceratops.
That would be interesting. Have the prom, but have no one work on it. I mean, could the ACLU then demand involuntary servitude, and impress into service students to work on the decorating committee? Open the school, but provide no more than basic services (someone to open the doors and keep watch for trouble). No music, no decorations, no lighting, no refreshments, nothing. Just the girls dancing alone in the dark (maybe that’s what they want anyway). I wonder if the press would cover the “event”? If they did, I can guess what the spin would be (mean-spirited conservatives make girls dance in the dark).
I disagree that the school should have held the dance and allowed the girl to attend in a tuxedo. A school has the right to set a dress code for its students. It also has the right to set standards of conduct for students, to include not dancing with members of the same sex if it so chooses. Homosexuality is not a protected class under the US Constitution. I don’t know about the constitution of the state in question, but it probably doesn’t include “sexual orientation” as a protected class either.
Homosexuals can take their agenda and shove it. They have no right to force the rest of society to bend to their will. I could just as easily claim a right to polygamy, necrophilia or bestiality. Should the school bend if I want to bring a harem, animal or corpse as my date?
Fact: the vast majority of people are NOT homosexual.
Fact: homosexuality is dysfunctional by nature.
Again, there’s no reason why the rest of society should bend to accept homosexuality as normal. It is homosexuals who should bend to accept the dominant culture. As they say, what they do in privacy is their own business. So keep it PRIVATE, and we’ll all get along just fine.
The strong family unit is the fabric that's held this country together for generations. If the communist can break down the family unit, government can take the place of the spouse. We already see this happening all around us.
Bad company corrupts good character. If the ACLU can influence the other students with their "homosexuals are just like you" propaganda, the strength of the family concept is weakened. Perversion and chaos will follow, opening the door for a political "savior" - who will have no choice but to get involved "to help fix" what was deliberately destroyed.
Maybe private functions, residential communities are our future...courtesy of the media and Demonrat party.
“The ACLU should be abolished.”
Defund/dismantle/disconnect collectives. (we could start with the A’s, ACLU, ACORN, etc; etc;
Who funds the ACLU...
http://morningcoffee.wordpress.com/2006/10/06/who-funds-the-aclu/
Amen.
Building the case for private schooling and homeschooling. Thanks for posting.
>>>Homosexuals can take their agenda and shove it.
It’s not an issue of homosexuality. It’s an issue of a local schoolboard composed of apparently not very bright people who are panicking and shooting themselves in the foot. And in the process punishing the entire portion of the student body who wanted a prom.
“A school has the right to set a dress code for its students. It also has the right to set standards of conduct for students, to include not dancing with members of the same sex if it so chooses.”
Which it obviously had not done. Otherwise they wouldn’t have had to resort to canceling the entire prom. Punishing EVERYBODY just to keep two girls from dancing is absurd overkill.
As I said, handled as poorly as it possibly could have, short of deploying teargas and tasers anyway.
Political correctness was designed to silence anyone from speaking out against the left wing agenda. Political correctness, if you notice, protects ONLY those who are members of a left wing special interest group.
You nailed it. Schools can set reasonable dress codes inside the classroom and in school sponsored activities.
The prom should have been allowed as scheduled.
It was the right thing to do. Should all the students be forced to witness this abomination simply because two demand it? Should a small handfull of sexually dysfunctional people be allowed to change an entire culture in order to serve their own demented fetish?
tlb: “Which it obviously had not done.”
You really should read the article more closely before responding, because it clearly states the school had a strict dress code.
They had to cancel the prom because one person was pushing her agenda on all the other students. Perhaps you should blame the person who actually caused the disruption rather than the school board?
Again, schools have the right to set standards. Students must comply. No one’s constitutional rights were violated here.
>>> Should all the students be forced to witness this abomination simply because two demand it?
Girls dancing together is an abomination ? Just a tip, avoid Rockefeller Center. There are some girls there called Rockettes, and they dance together 50 at a time. Saints preserve us.
BTW, tlb, I might have handled it differently had I been in charge. Even if I agree with you that the board made a bigger deal out of it than necessary, it’s still for them to decide, not you or I. In other words, they have the right to run their school as they see fit, and if that includes not catering to lesbians, so be it.
I have no problem with two girls dancing. Kids do that all the time. The Message here is "Look at us. We're queer, and you're going to look at us and accept our behavior whether you like it or not. We're deciding for you. "
Big difference. Those two girls could have worn a dress like every one else and saved the school from the controversy. Insteasd, controversy was their goal in the first place.
(They can carpet much after the prom where no one would be forced to see it.)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.