Court: Christian school can expel lesbian students
RIVERSIDE, Calif. – A California appeals court has ruled that a Christian high school can expel students because of an alleged lesbian relationship.
The 4th District Court of Appeal in Riverside on Monday upheld California Lutheran High School's right as a private, religious organization to exclude students based on sexual orientation.
Two girls sued claiming they were discriminated against after they were expelled from the Wildomar school in 2005. A lower court said the school isn't bound by the same anti-discrimination laws as a business establishment.
John McKay, attorney for California Lutheran, says the school's goal is to educate based on Christian principles.
The attorney for the girls could not be immediately reached Tuesday.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090128/ap_on_re_us/students_exp...
-----------------------------------------
They may be broke but at least they got this one right (and don't take this as a attack on sexual orientation- its about property rights!).
I teach public school - homeschool - tutor - and private
Get Gov't out of Pub Ed and schools will need to compete to stay afloat.
There will be plenty of schools just begging for gays in a free-market.
Understand -- in a Free-Society the right to exclude is honored.
In a free-society Revenue Streams are thus: #1 Consumer-who-Purchase and #2 Consumers-who-Invest --- No Bailouts - No Advantages - No Tax Breaks - No Subsidization - No Fiat Credit
Personally I think boys and girls should be educated separately from K-12 -- they could have structured interaction in co-ed dance classes held offsite after school -- the kids would love it and the behavior would be great modeling.
*&^ Constitution --- Constitutional Rationality
this issue is retarded
Why the $hit do 2 lesbians want to go to......... aw forget it..
w/e
agreed
agreed
"People should not be afraid of their governments; governments should be afraid of their people." - V for Vendetta
agreed
agreed
"People should not be afraid of their governments; governments should be afraid of their people." - V for Vendetta
well
if you're an idiot enough to belong to a church that excludes you on the basis of sexuality, then i fully support their right to be idiotic.
Im kinda siding with the school on this one...
The public sector needs to be all inclusive- the private sector..no. If ya dont like the private club rules- dont play. Im waiting for a black person to sue the KKK for not allowing him to join.
thats a good one.
thats a good one.
a contract violation
Thats that.
They are free to be lesbo's Just not in that school.
Real simple
Watch freedomtofascism.com
Patriot News
http://redpillpost.com
*
Stand up For your Civil Rights
http://SueBadCops.com
'free to be lesbos' ? as i
'free to be lesbos' ? as i remember its punishable with jail time in some states. crime against nature.
"We must re-take the Republican Party"-Ron Paul. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NlqXq8YxQFQ
Big government
Just because it's a law doesn't mean it's right. That law would be big government in my book. I thought this was a freedom movement?
I'm more worried about the 'alleged' part...
A Catholic high school removing a student for 'un-Catholic' behavior is understandable... even expected.
The problem begins when they expel people for 'alleged' action.
I may not know the truth, but I know when I'm being lied to...
I may not know the truth, but I know when I'm being lied to...
well expulsion could be...
a contract violation, if the students' parents were not aware that a lesbian relationship was grounds for termination. In other words, the school might be obligated to continue educating the "lesbian" students until the end of the year where they would then be able to "fail to allow" the students to renew the contract.
All are the same,.,,,,
pedophiles, queers are all the same. Read Romans chapter 1.
Thanks Beavis
Which one are you?
Eh, doesn't matter, you're all the same, right?
"I don't endorse anything they say"
~Ron Paul On the 911 Truth movement.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hGyhlNY0y1k
Romans 2
Yep, now read Romans 2. You and I and everyone in this world are the same. You can't just pick and choose, you have to read all of it. Romans 3 will show you that we are all guilty.
They haven't repented.
We're all under the same condemnation unless forgiven.
Those that repent will obtain mercy from God but those that persist in their sin as sodomites do will not. God created man male and female with no inclination to homosexuality. To say otherwise is nonsense. Homosexuality is illogical and contrary to Nature.
To the adulteress in the gospel of John Jesus said, "go, and sin no more". By the "sin no more" he mean't don't commit adultery anymore as that was the issue at hand. As the bible condemns homosexuality (as it is sin) to continue on in that dillusional, aberrant behavior is sin. Thus, homosexuals (or whatever they label their perversion) should repent and sin no more.
Can you imagine what the military will be like now with queers are being let in there to openly "serve"? Geez, don't pick up the soap in the shower by the gay that dropped it.
Because if you are naked
Because if you are naked around someone of the gender you are attracted to you rape said person.
yeah...
...happens all the time at nude beaches
The Freedom Formula: Au + Ag + Cu + Pb
LXXI BC: Ego sum Spartacus // MDCCCLVII: I am Dred Scott // MCMVL: Ich bin Anne Frank // MMX: Je suis Assange // MMXI: Ik ben von NotHaus
Repent
So if you repent you no longer sin? All sin is equal in God's eyes, you can find that in James chapter 1 or 2.
If you repent and make Jesus
If you repent and make Jesus Christ LORD (put him first) and stop trusting your 'rightesness' to get you to heaven and rely on Christs righteousness to get you thier then you got it. Not Jesus +works or Jesus +church or spinning beads. Jesus alone. Like the song says 'nothin but the blood of Jesus'.
The wages of sin is death. you will pay for your sin or someone else will. the price has been paid. you need to accept it. Or pay it yourself .If you think your good (righteous ) enough. The Bible says our righteousness are as filthy rags". If you could have saved yourself God would not have sent his son to die for you.
"We must re-take the Republican Party"-Ron Paul. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NlqXq8YxQFQ
Ruckamite
You can't make Jesus, Lord. He was made Lord by God, not by man. I do agree that I have no righteousness. Jesus plus nothing means exactly nothing. It sounds like you are contradicting yourself by saying Jesus plus repenting. Remember, God made Jesus Lord, not you or me.
Well...
I'm glad I don't recognize your little magic book as the basis for law. The last thing I want is people who have sex with their own children, cut fetuses out of the bodies of women to kill separately, kill children because they make fun of a bald man, and think eating shellfish is a sin, giving me moral or ethical advice.
www.libertyrestorationproject.org
"We are the inheritors of the American Enlightenment, which tells us that Individual Liberty always trumps collectivism in all forms."
As a night club manager...
... I have the right to refuse service to anyone for any reason. I would never be so foolish as to offer a reason, however. That opens others doors of liabialty, slander and discrimination for example. I prefer to just say, "Time to call it a night." Regardless of what the law says about decrimination based on color, creed, religion or sexual orientation, my right to property trumps all these distractions put forth by the State. This is the heart of Dr. Pauls' stand against the 1965 Civil Rights act. So the school by the right of property can refuse service too anyone for any reason, PERIOD! There may be a matter of a tuition refund to discuss, but other than that, I see no debate.
Local perspective
The school in question is about seven blocks from my home. That's pretty local.
The girls were expelled over an alleged lesbian relationship, but at the time it was not only unproven, but it was pure speculation and based only on rumors from students. IOW, the school relied on innuendo, which is why they got sued.
Only later did one of the girls come out as a lesbian. That didn't help their case any.
The ruling was correct in that as a private organization, they can do what they did, even as it was poorly done. But OTOH, the upcoming appeal to the California Supreme Court will focus on the girls being discriminated against because of their sexual orientation. What Yahoo isn't reporting is that the school had a history of inconsistency in terms of discipline regarding PDAs--some would get busted, and others would not--and that would create an environment of permissibility. I'm not saying that's a correct view or not, just that it's one focus they'll be taking.
If anything it becomes an interesting case because of the conflict between the rights of the girls and the rights of the church. Because I reject the concept of all artificial organizations having rights at all (they only have delegated and consented powers), I would side with the girls, UNLESS there was a code of conduct they signed and assented to on the front end that prohibited that behavior, in which case they are in breach of contract and should lose.
I believe in rights
I believe that the school has the right to determine the rules and regulations which are to followed in their school.
And I believe that the girls have the right to transfer to another school, whose rules and regulations that they feel they can abide by !
That
...is what Tannim just said.
www.libertyrestorationproject.org
"We are the inheritors of the American Enlightenment, which tells us that Individual Liberty always trumps collectivism in all forms."
Mohusk,
My comment did not include anything about discrimination,
inconsistency, IOWs, OTOHs, PDAs, ( I'm not into that acronym game du jour - I prefer to say things in a way that everyone can understand what I am saying ), or numerous other points articulated by Tannim ...
so ... NO ...
my comment was NOT what Tannim just said !
My comment was straightforward ... either EVERYONE has rights,
or NO-ONE has rights !
Oh Vlbc...
I never said you comment included any of those things. You are accusing me falsely. And I don't get the acronyms either, no clue.
Second, before the meat of the matter, you said, "either EVERYONE has rights, or NO-ONE has rights !". That is a fallacy of false choices. It is very true throughout our history that some people had rights while others don't. And, still to this day when looking at Prop 8 issues. Obviously, two homosexuals that wish to enter into a marriage contract together like a heterosexual couple cannot.
Now, for the post: You said:
"I believe that the school has the right to determine the rules and regulations which are to followed in their school."
Tannim said: "I would side with the girls, UNLESS there was a code of conduct they signed and assented to on the front end that prohibited that behavior, in which case they are in breach of contract and should lose."
---So, Tannim is saying the school has the right to determine rules and regulations (sound familiar? I thought so)---
Thennn..you said:
"And I believe that the girls have the right to transfer to another school, whose rules and regulations that they feel they can abide by"
Tannim said: " {re: code of conduct} in which case they are in breach of contract and should lose."
also: "ruling was correct in that as a private organization, they can do what they did
---So, by losing the case, the girls would have to leave and transfer to another school. So therefore, ta-da, you both said the same thing, albeit with a different approach.
So, YES your comment contained the same sentiments and ideas.
www.libertyrestorationproject.org
"We are the inheritors of the American Enlightenment, which tells us that Individual Liberty always trumps collectivism in all forms."
Mohusk,
I will try to put this very simply.
If I don't want anyone spitting on the floor in my house, and someone comes into my house and spits on the floor ... I do not require a signed contract to inform them that their behavior is unacceptable ...
and throw them the hell out the door, onto the street !
Their supposed rights do not supersede my rights in MY house !
Uh....
What the hell are you talking about??
I would never argue against that. All I did was point out that you said the exact same thing as Tannim, but were pretending to be in opposition.
Also, just to be clear, your absolute property rights in your house are not congruous to the situation. The families in question, as paying members of a private group, do have rights as established by the group since they are members. The school, unless having an established, single-person law giver, would have certain rules codified by a board of directors or a foundation. And, contract disputes are reviewable by courts - it's in the Constitution. It is possible that the charter used to get tax-exempt status in the state gave the administrator of the school dictatorial power, or some other structure. But, we cannot know that without more details.
www.libertyrestorationproject.org
"We are the inheritors of the American Enlightenment, which tells us that Individual Liberty always trumps collectivism in all forms."