Sigh part deux....get the feeling we're backsliding?

minsue

Gosling
Joined
Apr 27, 2002
Posts
22,062
The thread title will be my only editorial comment on the matter this time....

School Expels Girl for Having Gay Parents

Fri Sep 23, 7:05 AM ET

A 14-year-old student was expelled from a Christian school because her parents are lesbians, the school's superintendent said in a letter.

Shay Clark was expelled from Ontario Christian School on Thursday.

"Your family does not meet the policies of admission," Superintendent Leonard Stob wrote to Tina Clark, the girl's biological mother.

Stob wrote that school policy requires that at least one parent may not engage in practices "immoral or inconsistent with a positive Christian life style, such as cohabitating without marriage or in a homosexual relationship," The Los Angeles Times reported in Friday's edition.

Stob could not be reached for comment by the newspaper. Shay and her parents said they won't fight the ruling.

School administrators learned of the parents' relationship this week after Shay was reprimanded for talking to the crowd during a football game, Tina Clark said.

Clark and her partner have been together 22 years and have two other daughters, ages 9 and 19.
 
Last edited:
Fuck me running. I spelled the damn thread title wrong and you can't fix those. Grrrrrr....


ETA - Never mind. Apparently you can now! Pay no attention to the goose behind the curtain :rolleyes:
 
I can't blame Shay and her parents for not fighting.

Who's want to go to a school run by a bunch of jerks like that?
 
hell, down here I'd be surprised if they didn't call an assembly and denounce the poor kid in front of the whole school.
 
Jesus says your parents are shit. Jesus says unwed mothers must die. Jesus says it's okay to beat up queers.

Where do they get this shit?
 
vamplawyer said:
My daughter's best friend has Mommy X and Mommy Y... biologically both are her parents

I'm missing something here. How can you have 2 biological mothers? One the egg donor and the other the womb?
 
dr_mabeuse said:
I'm missing something here. How can you have 2 biological mothers? One the egg donor and the other the womb?


I have friends like this and they achieved shared biology by having a relative of one partner donate sperm to the other.

Jayne
 
jfinn said:
I have friends like this and they achieved shared biology by having a relative of one partner donate sperm to the other.

Jayne
Good to see you slumming around here again, however briefly. :rose:
 
Let's hope there is some other good school nearby for that kid.

Even if we were to accept a school that is against homosexuality, punishing the child for the "sinful" lifestyle of the parent is wrong however they twist and turn it. Jesus woulda kicked their ass for that, if not for being intolerant pricks in general.


jfinn said:
I have friends like this and they achieved shared biology by having a relative of one partner donate sperm to the other.

Jayne
Biologically, that would make one the mother (a pretty specific function) and one the---aunt or something. Not that it matters.
 
Liar said:
... punishing the child for the "sinful" lifestyle of the parent is wrong however they twist and turn it. Jesus woulda kicked their ass for that, if not for being intolerant pricks in general.

Um ... original sin?
 
I'm sorry to say that nothing like this surprises me anymore. Aggravates, infuriates, saddens... yes, but not surprise. I suppose that I'm becomming numb to the rampant hate and intolerance that dominates society. :(

Looking at it logically I know that it is probablly no worse than it was 50, 100 or even 300 years ago. 50 years ago it was the blacks who were told they were equal but all you had to do was walk into a store and see 'Black Restrooms' and 'White Restrooms' to know that was a crock. That still hasn't been set right completly even after 50 years.

Now it's the gays/lesbians turn to be told that this is the United States, Land of the Free... that is, free to be just like everyone else. If you're different, piss off.

I'm glad that at least Massachusetts upheld the right for Gay/Lesbian marrige recently. At least it gave equal rights, REAL equal rights a foot hold somewhere.
 
Last edited:
Wow, this pisses me off more than I can say. How sad.:(
 
I keep waiting to get kicked out of the Baptist University I attend for the same reasons. :rolleyes:

Although, I would absolutely be fighting to remain there and have policy altered.
 
I don't really get this. Why would anyone want to be part of a religion that rejects them anyhow?

I mean, if the Nazi's kicked me out for being a Jew, I wouldn't put up much of a stink.
 
It is my understanding that private and parochial academys and universities have wide disgression in there admision policies. Since they recieve no federal funds, they are not bound by federal guidelines in admitting minority applicants or applicants with sub-standard aceademic resumes or any of the other regulations that tried to impose a quota system on them.

I was not, however, of the opinion this wide disgressionary power allowed them to practice blatantly racist, sexist or discriminatory policy. If VMI & the Citidal have to accept qualified female applicants, if Mississippi University for women has to accept male applicants, it the baptist aceademy I attended was not allowed to demand students be baptist, nor the episcopalian school nor the catholic shool to make religion a requirements of admission, I am rather stumped that it is apparently legal for a school to decide orientation of the parents, not even the student, but of the parents is grounds to expell a student.

I may be missing something, but this seems patently illegal to me.
 
Colleen Thomas said:
It is my understanding that private and parochial academys and universities have wide disgression in there admision policies. Since they recieve no federal funds, they are not bound by federal guidelines in admitting minority applicants or applicants with sub-standard aceademic resumes or any of the other regulations that tried to impose a quota system on them.

I was not, however, of the opinion this wide disgressionary power allowed them to practice blatantly racist, sexist or discriminatory policy. If VMI & the Citidal have to accept qualified female applicants, if Mississippi University for women has to accept male applicants, it the baptist aceademy I attended was not allowed to demand students be baptist, nor the episcopalian school nor the catholic shool to make religion a requirements of admission, I am rather stumped that it is apparently legal for a school to decide orientation of the parents, not even the student, but of the parents is grounds to expell a student.

I may be missing something, but this seems patently illegal to me.

I couldn't agree more, but I don't know enough about USA eduation law to comment further.
 
Colleen Thomas said:
I may be missing something, but this seems patently illegal to me.

I'd be inclined to agree with you but untill someone decides to push the issue at the school thay will probablly continue to get away with it.

Perfaps now that their policy has been brought out into the open, so to speak, somebody will.
 
china-doll said:
I'd be inclined to agree with you but untill someone decides to push the issue at the school thay will probablly continue to get away with it.

Perfaps now that their policy has been brought out into the open, so to speak, somebody will.


Alittle investigation at findlaw.com leavesme feeling they are no acting illegally.

14th amendment protection providing equality under the law is specificially limited to making the states adhere to this policy. Private enterprises are not bound by the same laws. If it were a question of hiring, then an EEOC complaint coul dbe filed. Since the question is only of admission and the school is not the only school she could attend, it seems more likely now that they are within their rights to refuse admission for whatever reason thay choose to enumerate including no reason at all :(
 
Colleen Thomas said:
Alittle investigation at findlaw.com leavesme feeling they are no acting illegally.

14th amendment protection providing equality under the law is specificially limited to making the states adhere to this policy. Private enterprises are not bound by the same laws. If it were a question of hiring, then an EEOC complaint coul dbe filed. Since the question is only of admission and the school is not the only school she could attend, it seems more likely now that they are within their rights to refuse admission for whatever reason thay choose to enumerate including no reason at all :(

However, they are not descriminating against that girl for anything that she has done, race, orientation, beliefs etc. They are descriminating based on her PARENTS beliefs. Sins of the father, or in this case mother, being passed on to the daughter? I'm not sure how that factors into this. Maybe they can because she's a minor?

As I think about this it reminds me of the Boy Scout's battles to keep girls and gays out. THey won both of those battles too, probablly based on the the 14th as you showed above.
 
dr_mabeuse said:
I don't really get this. Why would anyone want to be part of a religion that rejects them anyhow?

I've wondered about this, too. And I wonder how people can support a religion that doesn't support them. What's the point? What kind of spiritual guidance can you possibly be getting that is meaningful?

When parents tell their children they are stupid, we call that abuse. When a religion tells people they are not good enough to belong to their church, doesn't that feel like abuse too? Why would anyone seek this out, insist on sticking around to be constantly abused with messages of condemnation?

I remember that United Church of Christ had that ad campaign last year that the networks deemed too controversial to air: Jesus didn't turn people away. Neither do we. When there are religions that accept who you are, why go somewhere where they're constantly telling you that there's something wrong with you?
 
china-doll said:
However, they are not descriminating against that girl for anything that she has done, race, orientation, beliefs etc. They are descriminating based on her PARENTS beliefs. Sins of the father, or in this case mother, being passed on to the daughter? I'm not sure how that factors into this. Maybe they can because she's a minor?

As I think about this it reminds me of the Boy Scout's battles to keep girls and gays out. THey won both of those battles too, probablly based on the the 14th as you showed above.


The boyscouts had a firmer leg to stand on. There is a scouting program for girls that follows the same fundamental tenets. So no one could claim that being turned down by the boy scouts robbed them of the opportunites presented. Then too, as a privately run and voluntary group, you don't have an inalienable right to be a boy scout, but you do have a right to an education.

With gay scoutmasters, their stance is less clear cut, but I do believe they were able to withstand challenges to that policy in no small part because they were not an extention of the state. While private schools are privately owned and funded, all schools have to be accredited by the state, which is how several of them, like VMI and the Citadel were forced to integrate IIRC.

Obviously if no one challenges the policy it gets a free base. I don't blame the parents for not challengeing it though. It's an expensive process and while comon sense says one thing, that isn't always the way the law sees it. I also applaud them for not making their child an unwilling lightening rod.
 
LadyJeanne said:
I've wondered about this, too. And I wonder how people can support a religion that doesn't support them. What's the point? What kind of spiritual guidance can you possibly be getting that is meaningful?

When parents tell their children they are stupid, we call that abuse. When a religion tells people they are not good enough to belong to their church, doesn't that feel like abuse too? Why would anyone seek this out, insist on sticking around to be constantly abused with messages of condemnation?

I remember that United Church of Christ had that ad campaign last year that the networks deemed too controversial to air: Jesus didn't turn people away. Neither do we. When there are religions that accept who you are, why go somewhere where they're constantly telling you that there's something wrong with you?


But people who are deeply indoctrinated into a particular religion believe that the fault lies within themselves - not the religion.

That's the catch.

A wonderful woman at my church has an only son in his 20's who is gay. She grieves for the grandchildren she'll never have and for the difficulties he has and will encounter, but absolutely loves him to pieces and considers "gay" to be a non-issue.

He lives out of state but he's brought his boyfriend to visit a few times and they've gone to church together (which is how I met them). Everyone is always warm and welcoming and accepting, but my friend has confessed to me that a few older members have asked her if it is hard to forgive her son for what he is doing. Isn't that amazing?

And they study the Bible, these people. When the pastor begins a line of verse, he'll wait half a heartbeat and the congregation will fill it. Amazing.

Even if you take the Bible literally (which I don't), even if you truly believe that homosexuality is a sin (which I also don't), didn't Jesus teach that you are supposed to love the sinner, but condemn the sin? Isn't that right?

No wonder organized religion is losing members daily.
 
china-doll said:
...As I think about this it reminds me of the Boy Scout's battles to keep girls and gays out. THey won both of those battles too, probably based on the the 14th as you showed above.

Not in the UK. The UK Boy Scout movement admits girls and doesn't ask about gays. The Guide movement doesn't admit boys - yet. There isn't a large demand from the boys.

The parallel and much smaller Baden-Powell Scout movement hasn't admitted girls. They had a now resolved problem with the sexual proclivities of a very few Scout leaders.

Og
 
Back
Top