in which we discuss my school getting pwned on the front of the age.com

[pi]

ahh. did you ever have Ms Wilson before she left in 2008?

yes, i had her for eco in year 9

[ninwa]

I am sure Coblinator thinks his argument should apply to all privately-run institutions;

Even ones that receive government funding?

[Eriny]

since im a lesbian, i side with the girl automatically.
aha.

however, i dont think religious based schools should be allowed to discriminate based on religious values of others as well as sexuality.

but they have money and will buy their way out of it once again.

If you choose to go to a religious school, aren't you agreeing to abide by their religious code? I don't mean follow all the rules all the time, but at a school event, why should they not be allowed to impose their religion? It's the students' (or their parents, who are responsible for them) choice to go to the school, so they should follow the rules, whether they agree with them or not.

Given that most people going into school (whether its high school or primary school) don't know their sexuality for sure, I think that 'choice' in schools is a bit of an illusion here. It's not like a regular 12 year old can say 'well, I'm gay, so I'll go to a gay-friendly school', is it?

Additionally, why should they have to? Just because you're religious, doesn't make you necessarily homophobic. Likewise, there are homophobic people who aren't religious. People don't just subscribe to a set of predetermined beliefs, that's too simplistic. So, even if the child did know they were gay at age 12, doesn't mean that they would know how the school principal felt about gay people anyway. Moreover, there is no reason why a religious person necessarily ought to be homophobic.

And besides, discrimination is discrimination. Even if the girls knew at age 12 that they were lesbians, even if they knew that everyone at the school was homophobic, it's ridiculous that the school thinks it's okay to control students like this and deliberately exclude them from events. What I mean is, if a girl knows that she is a lesbian and that people aren't very accepting of that, does that mean that she needs to limit her own educational options? Does that mean she should never go to church, even if she believes in God and that she ought to go to church? Does it mean that she has to choose an employer on the basis that they aren't going to discriminate against her, rather than on the basis of her preferred industry or preferred starting salary? Is she meant to make concessions to homophobic people merely because they don't approve of her? Discrimination can influence peoples lives in so many ways, and while people may be entitled to their own private opinions, it doesn't mean it's okay to tell people that they can't be who they are in terms of something as basic and private as sexuality. I'm not sure you realise what heterosexual privilege really entails if you think that discrimination, by any institution, is ever okay and is something that a member of a minority group not only should realistically expect but should normatively expect.

This action also goes beyond their role as an institution designed to educate people, instead it closes off people from being themselves and showing students to accept others for who they are. People with closed minds are generally very poor learners and the school should be ashamed of this wasted educational opportunity.

[MuggedByReality]

I am sure Coblinator thinks his argument should apply to all privately-run institutions;

Even ones that receive government funding?

Oh, well, good point. No, I suppose not. Where's teh coblin grenade anyway?

[Yitzi_K]

@Yitzi, socially progressive religious schools do exist. I went to one.

Schools which are not prepared to compromise on their religious belief do exist. I went to one.

[ninwa]

What's your point? I was responding to this erroneous assumption that just because a school is religious, it's necessarily also completely backward:

If you choose to go to a religious school, aren't you agreeing to abide by their religious code? I don't mean follow all the rules all the time, but at a school event, why should they not be allowed to impose their religion? It's the students' (or their parents, who are responsible for them) choice to go to the school, so they should follow the rules, whether they agree with them or not.

[Yitzi_K]

What's your point? I was responding to this erroneous assumption that just because a school is religious, it's necessarily also completely backward:

If you choose to go to a religious school, aren't you agreeing to abide by their religious code? I don't mean follow all the rules all the time, but at a school event, why should they not be allowed to impose their religion? It's the students' (or their parents, who are responsible for them) choice to go to the school, so they should follow the rules, whether they agree with them or not.

My point is that your point has nothing to do with my point. The fact that there exists religious schools for whom the actual religion is changeable, does not alter the fact that there are schools for whom the content of their religion, and therefore the code that the school abides by, does not change. And therefore, when one goes to such a school, one is making the choice to follow that code, at least during school events.

[ninwa]

fixed it for ya

The fact that there exists religious schools for whom the actual religion is not changeable, does not alter the fact that there are schools for whom the content of their religion, and therefore the code that the school abides by, does not change. And therefore, such schools should make it clear that that is their policy, rather than hiding behind bullshit excuses like age.

edit: inb4 you start with the "stop imposing your views on everybody":

I agree a private school can be as backward as they want to be.

[stonecold]

fixed it for ya

The fact that there exists religious schools for whom the actual religion is not changeable, does not alter the fact that there are schools for whom the content of their religion, and therefore the code that the school abides by, does not change. And therefore, such schools should make it clear that that is their policy, rather than hiding behind bullshit excuses like age.

I agree.  What annoyed me the most was not the fact that they don't endorse same sex couples, but the way they tried to lie about it and use age as a cover instead.

The principal came across as a but of a simpleton in the TV interview, especially if she expects people to believe the age thing.

[Cthulhu]

I think it is outrageous this school is doing this to this poor girl but at least the school didn't react like this:

"OMFG YOU HAVE A GIRLFRIEND? BUT YOU'RE A GIRL! AND YOU WANT TO BRING HER TO PROM? FINE. [size=15]PROM CANCELLED[/size]"
Cue rest of school hating on this poor girl
http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2010-03-10-noprom_N.htm

[Glockmeister]

I am sure Coblinator thinks his argument should apply to all privately-run institutions;

Even ones that receive government funding?

Oh, well, good point. No, I suppose not. Where's teh coblin grenade anyway?

I wouldn't mind hearing his opinion actually.

[Eriny]

What's your point? I was responding to this erroneous assumption that just because a school is religious, it's necessarily also completely backward:

If you choose to go to a religious school, aren't you agreeing to abide by their religious code? I don't mean follow all the rules all the time, but at a school event, why should they not be allowed to impose their religion? It's the students' (or their parents, who are responsible for them) choice to go to the school, so they should follow the rules, whether they agree with them or not.

My point is that your point has nothing to do with my point. The fact that there exists religious schools for whom the actual religion is changeable, does not alter the fact that there are schools for whom the content of their religion, and therefore the code that the school abides by, does not change. And therefore, when one goes to such a school, one is making the choice to follow that code, at least during school events.

I don't think that's true at all. People do obviously change the content of their beliefs over time, which is why people wear polyester and jewellery (those things are banned in the bible). Things change. And there's no way you can tell that someone is a homophobic on the basis that they're religious.

fixed it for ya

The fact that there exists religious schools for whom the actual religion is not changeable, does not alter the fact that there are schools for whom the content of their religion, and therefore the code that the school abides by, does not change. And therefore, such schools should make it clear that that is their policy, rather than hiding behind bullshit excuses like age.

I agree.  What annoyed me the most was not the fact that they don't endorse same sex couples, but the way they tried to lie about it and use age as a cover instead.

The principal came across as a but of a simpleton in the TV interview, especially if she expects people to believe the age thing.

While I agree that lying about the reasoning behind the ban is awful, I think the ban itself is much worse. Just because these girls are lesbians, they should not be unallowed to do the things straight people do. I'm frankly concerned that this debate isn't getting to the crux of this issue, which is that the school is infringing on the rights of their students.

Given that the school has the most amount of power in this relationship, yes, I am much more concerned about the girls' freedom to be lesbians than the school's freedom to not like it very much, particularly since the girls aren't actually hurting anyone!

[Yitzi_K]

edit: inb4 you start with the "stop imposing your views on everybody"

What's your point? I was responding to this erroneous assumption that just because a school is religious, it's necessarily also completely backward:

If you choose to go to a religious school, aren't you agreeing to abide by their religious code? I don't mean follow all the rules all the time, but at a school event, why should they not be allowed to impose their religion? It's the students' (or their parents, who are responsible for them) choice to go to the school, so they should follow the rules, whether they agree with them or not.

My point is that your point has nothing to do with my point. The fact that there exists religious schools for whom the actual religion is changeable, does not alter the fact that there are schools for whom the content of their religion, and therefore the code that the school abides by, does not change. And therefore, when one goes to such a school, one is making the choice to follow that code, at least during school events.

I don't think that's true at all. People do obviously change the content of their beliefs over time, which is why people wear polyester and jewellery (those things are banned in the bible). Things change. And there's no way you can tell that someone is a homophobic on the basis that they're religious.

Source? Neither jewellery or polyester are banned by the bible.

[Russ]

Lev 19:19 and I think the jewellery one comes from the general guidance not to be obsessed with physical things

[Cianyx]

And there's the shellfish one