Skip to main content

Aren't you just sick as hell of hearing about things like this? I know I am.

http://www.lex18.com/...

A Lexington Catholic High School student claims she was barred from prom because she planned to bring a date of the same sex.

Hope Decker, 18, told LEX 18 administrators sat her down Friday and told her she could not attend with her girlfriend, Tiffany Wright, who is also a student at the school.

"What I experienced in the Dean's Office was blatant homophobia," said Hope Decker, a senior at the school. "We were told that this school has catholic principles and so they couldn't let it happen."

"At first I was really upset," said Tiffany Wright, Decker's date for the dance. "I mean, we both cried and then I was like, this is ridiculous. There's gotta be something we could do about this."....(more + video)

According to the piece the students had their own "prom" outside, and have started a petition with 107 supporting students signing it.

Change.org has a petition demanding apology from the school, if you feel the same, you can sign it here.

Picture of the outside pro-equality group made me smile a little though. More out there than I expected to be honest.

Originally posted to EastKYprogressive on Sun May 13, 2012 at 08:45 PM PDT.

Also republished by LGBT Kos Community, Milk Men And Women, and Angry Gays.

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Republished to all the usual places (7+ / 0-)

    I'm indeed sick to death of hearing these stories. But they have to be told. Otherwise those homophobic administrators are going to escape any notice and avoid any condemnation/consequences for their bigotry. We need to make life as uncomfortable as possible for these people.

    Homosexuality is found in over 450 species. Homophobia is found in only one. Which one seems unnatural now?

    by Chrislove on Sun May 13, 2012 at 08:56:57 PM PDT

  •  it ain't right but it ain't surprising (8+ / 0-)

    As a nation, the U.S. consumes the most hot dogs per capita. So you'd be wise to never underestimate our powers of denial.

    by jbou on Sun May 13, 2012 at 08:58:05 PM PDT

  •  this shit just pisses me off. -nt (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    ekyprogressive, bythesea, jayden, Matt Z
  •  Isn't it a private school? (0+ / 0-)

    Unfortunately if it is they get to do whatever they want. It's infuriating.

    While many minority groups are the target for discrimination, few face this hostility without the support and acceptance of their family as do many glbt youth.

    by azrefugee on Sun May 13, 2012 at 09:13:55 PM PDT

  •  No, I'm not surprised, mostly because this may (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    in the Trees, Catte Nappe, VClib

    well be a private, parochial Roman Catholic high school.  They get to make their own rules, whether we like it or not. If what I'm reading is correct, this is something of a non-issue; we are talking about freedom "of" as well as "from" religion here...

    ...apologies if I'm misreading the nature of the school...

    "In a nation ruled by swine, all pigs are upward mobile..." - Dr. Hunter S. Thompson

    by Jack K on Sun May 13, 2012 at 09:20:51 PM PDT

    •  Yes. (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Chrislove, FogCityJohn

      It is, I included a link to the school site so that would be more apparent. But as I said above, that doesn't mean we can't exercise our free speech to let them know that the population finds their discriminatory practices unacceptable, and maybe make them think twice about it in the future.

    •  Exactly. Sometimes people at this site forget (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Catte Nappe, VClib

      that the First Amendment also guarantees "freedom of" religion, in addition to "freedom from" religion.

      Going to a religious high school is a choice.  It seems to me that it's really not valid to choose to go to a Catholic high school and then complain that they enforce Catholic beliefs.   You sign on to those beliefs when you choose that school.  

      •  No one is saying they can't practice their faith.. (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        FogCityJohn, Tonedevil

        But that doesn't mean they shouldn't hear that we disapprove of their discriminatory practices. If we sit silent, what motivation is there for them to reconsider such stances?

        •  Yes, it does. (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          VClib

          The fundamental basis of the First Amendment is that a religious community has a right to their own religious beliefs within the confines of their religion.  The First Amendment was passed precisely so that a majority would not de-legitimize religious beliefs with which they disagreed.  

          Should the majority feel free to de-legitimize tenets of the Jewish religion with which it disagrees?

          To me, criticizing a religion for enforcing their religious beliefs within the confines of their own religion and among people who voluntarily are part of that religion is -- and I don't often use this word -- "unAmerican," in the sense that it is contrary to the basic notion of religious freedom upon which this nation was founded.  

          The First Amendment means (1) the majority has no right to de-legitimize religious views with which it disagrees; and (2) one group's religious views are not to be imposed on others in the secular context.  I think it's hypocritical to support part 2 without supporting part 1.  Our country was founded on both principles. If you try to enforce part (2) without assuring religious people of their right to part (1), you will be adding to a backlash by religious people.  

          •  Logical disconnect (8+ / 0-)

            The fact that they have a right to practice their religion freely does not mean that others forego their own (separate) right to comment on such practice.

            I'm not sure where "de-legitimize" comes in, other than as a rhetorical tactic to equate discussion with repression.

            As long as I don't interfere with your church, I will maintain my right to comment on magic underwear, Thetans, transubstantiation, or any other thing that seems to me highly improbable.

            Other than just for the sake of good manners, I'm not required to abandon my own view of reality in deference to anyone's religious notions.

          •  You've made your views clear before. (7+ / 0-)

            You've previously defended both racism and homophobia, as long as those prejudices can be traced to some form of claimed religious belief.  

            Now you appear to be going one step further, saying that religious belief insulates people even from criticism for their actions.  Presumably that means you think it was improper for people to criticize the racially exclusionary policies of the LDS church back in the 1970s.  And it would also presumably mean no one could criticize those who used the Bible to justify segregation.  After all, those people were just following their religious beliefs, right?

            "Ça c'est une chanson que j'aurais vraiment aimé ne pas avoir écrite." -- Barbara

            by FogCityJohn on Mon May 14, 2012 at 08:59:06 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

  •  Surprised by the "well it's a private school" (6+ / 0-)

    arguments showing up here. Yes, it's a private school. Yes, technically, it has the ability to discriminate. But so what? We should be fighting it. The idea that we should just throw up our hands in resignation is absurd.

    Homosexuality is found in over 450 species. Homophobia is found in only one. Which one seems unnatural now?

    by Chrislove on Sun May 13, 2012 at 10:51:12 PM PDT

    •  You Have Quite The Fight Ahead Of You... (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      VClib

      with over a Billion Catholics in the world.  I doubt that any parochial school will bend to your criticism.  The parents that send their kids to parochial school understand the rules before they enroll.  Growing up, I never liked the uniforms they wore, plaid skirts, white blouses, and saddle shoes, but I don't think they would have listened to anyone and changed just cause I complained.

      But, peaceful protest is our right as citizens and we can exercise it even if we know it will be ineffective.

    •  1st Amendment isn't just a technicality (0+ / 0-)

      I'm not in favor of what this Catholic school is doing, but I am in favor of their right to do so.

      What makes me sad in all this is that most kids growing up in such environments don't have a choice of going to public school.  One of the kids involved here is under 18.  It's their parent's decision to send them to these schools.  Unfortunately, we have a lot of history of parents being able to do what they want to kids in the name of religion (e.g. "faith healing"), even when it's stupid and asinine.

      •  18 & 16 year olds go to proms all the time (3+ / 0-)

        So I don't see how the age is relevant. As they have their freedom of religion, we have our freedom of speech to make this as uncomfortable a situation as possible for them for their act of discrimination. Not until they see that we as a society won't tolerate such act will they cease to continue.

        •  ekyprogressive - people go to proms all the time (0+ / 0-)

          without dates. Why couldn't the two young women go to the prom without a "date" or were they trying to have the school accept them as a couple?

          "let's talk about that"

          by VClib on Mon May 14, 2012 at 09:16:28 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  I can't believe I'm reading this. (4+ / 0-)

            We gays and lesbians don't like to pretend we're "single" when we're not just to gain entrance to a social function. Would you like to go to the prom as "single" with your date and just hope the chaperones don't throw you out?

            Sometimes I forget I'm living in the year 2012. Jesus Christ. Even my old Diocesan school allowed gay and lesbian couples to go to dances.

            Faced with a clear case of discrimination, I can't believe so-called liberals and progressives are trying to blame the lesbian couple. "Why would you not go as singles?" "Why would you go to a Catholic school?" Here's a better question: Why does the school have to discriminate at its prom? And where in Catholic doctrine does it say lesbians can't attend a dance?

            Homosexuality is found in over 450 species. Homophobia is found in only one. Which one seems unnatural now?

            by Chrislove on Mon May 14, 2012 at 09:57:23 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

          •  The "stay in the closet" strategy. (4+ / 0-)

            One more time of having their relationship unacknowledged? Get them ready for when the state does it to them too...

            I would rather that cycle get broken.

      •  Nobody said they shouldn't have the "right" (3+ / 0-)

        That doesn't mean they should be able to discriminate  without being confronted. "Freedom" goes both ways. We have the freedom to expose and fight their bigotry.

        Homosexuality is found in over 450 species. Homophobia is found in only one. Which one seems unnatural now?

        by Chrislove on Mon May 14, 2012 at 06:49:48 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  It's your choice of words (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          in the Trees

          First off, I agree that there should be confrontation on this.  

          But, I opposed your characterization of their rights as "technically", as if the First Amendment were some sort of technicality.  I oppose your characterization of the First Amendment as a "right" in quotes, as if it's perhaps less of a right because it's in quotation marks.  The First Amendment is a real right, and it is a real pain the ass.  

          I'm not sold on the school being the best target to confront.

          Really, more than the school, I'd want the parents who send their kids to such schools to be confronted.  It's the parents that guide where their children go to school.  It's the parents who write the big checks.  If the parents stop paying for this kind of bullshit, if they vote with their feet and their wallets, the bullshit will stop.

          •  No, it's not my choice of words, (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            FogCityJohn

            I never said anything that would indicate that I thought the school didn't have a right, under existing law, to do what it did. Yes, the school technically has the freedom to do what it did. And we, under the same first amendment, have the right to speak out against that. The freedom of religion is not--NOT--the freedom to discriminate without facing any condemnation or consequence.

            I'm sorry you're not sold on the school that discriminated in the first place being the correct target. I don't have an attitude of "some people discriminate and there's nothing I can do about it." That's a pretty pathetic attitude for a so-called progressive imo

            Homosexuality is found in over 450 species. Homophobia is found in only one. Which one seems unnatural now?

            by Chrislove on Mon May 14, 2012 at 02:39:25 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

    •  How should "we" be fighting it? (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      VClib, in the Trees

      by insisting that a religion change its religious beliefs?  By insisting that a religion not exercise its religious beliefs?  

      Should "we" be insisting that all religions change beliefs "we" don't agree with?  

      The way people should be fighting religious beliefs with which they disagree is by not becoming a part of, or financially supporting, that religion.  Or by not letting the religious beliefs become part of the civil law.

      •  Well, honestly (5+ / 0-)
        by insisting that a religion change its religious beliefs?
        Yes. Churches change and evolve over time. I'm all for pushing a religion to change from the inside out.

        But in this case, the Church can remain anti-gay and still allow a lesbian couple to go to the prom. I went to a Diocesan university that eventually allowed a gay-straight alliance and implemented a gay "safe" network of allies. You think a Diocesan school can't change? I'm here to tell you it can.

        Homosexuality is found in over 450 species. Homophobia is found in only one. Which one seems unnatural now?

        by Chrislove on Mon May 14, 2012 at 06:52:24 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  That is completely contrary to the basic (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          VClib, in the Trees

          principles underlying the First Amendment.  

          Honestly, it is hypocritical for you to say, "you don't have any right to tell me that I should live according to YOUR religious beliefs, but I think it's my place to for me to tell you that you should adhere to MY religious (or non-religious) beliefs."  

          The whole point of the First Amendment is two-fold:  (1) the majority does not get to tell a religion that its religious views are illegitimate; and (2) in return, nobody can impose their religious views -- "legitimate" or not --  on anybody else.  

          It is hypocritical, and contrary to the basic principles on which this country was founded, to talk about part (2) as being so fundamental in areas like marriage and choice and then dismissing part (1) as not legitimate.  If you expect that the religious views of others should not be imposed on you, then you are being hypocritical to say that you should be telling them what their religious beliefs should or should not be.

          •  Um...you're quite mistaken (4+ / 0-)

            about my comment. I am not suggesting anybody pass any law to thwart Catholic doctrine. I am not suggesting we hold a referendum vote. At the same time, I'm all for pressuring churches to change and to evolve. If my friends and I hadn't done that, my old school would not have a safe place for LGBT students to this day. The First Amendment was created to protect the freedom of religion from the force of law, not from the activism of concerned citizens.

            Homosexuality is found in over 450 species. Homophobia is found in only one. Which one seems unnatural now?

            by Chrislove on Mon May 14, 2012 at 07:06:19 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  I understand that you have a Constitutional right (0+ / 0-)

              to say whatever you want.

              I think it's hypocritical.  If you want churches to respect your right to disagree with them (not impose religious views in the public arena) you have to respect THEIR right to disagree with you in the religious arena.  

              I also think that it's contrary to the principles on which the country is based.  

              Most importantly, I also think that this kind of thing gives fuel to the argument by Catholic and Evangelicals that those on the left do not respect religious freedom at all if those religious beliefs run counter to their own personal views.  

              I understand your right to say whatever you want.  However, if you expect others (Catholics, Evangelicals) to respect your right to disagree with them on issues like marriage and choice, and if you expect them to agree that the public arena should not reflect their religious views to the detriment of yours, you have to respect their right to disagree with you in the religious context.  

              Otherwise, you look hypocritical -- like you don't respect the First Amendment and religious freedom unless it works to your favor.  

              •  Then I'm a hypocrite, I guess (5+ / 0-)
                If you want churches to respect your right to disagree with them (not impose religious views in the public arena) you have to respect THEIR right to disagree with you in the religious arena.
                There you go again. I respect their RIGHTS. I do not respect their beliefs, which you seem to want me to do. Absolutely not. Their beliefs are abhorrent, and I will challenge those beliefs to the day I die.
                Most importantly, I also think that this kind of thing gives fuel to the argument by Catholic and Evangelicals that those on the left do not respect religious freedom at all if those religious beliefs run counter to their own personal views.
                Bullshit. First of all, they don't need any "fuel" for that argument. Secondly, nobody is advocating taking rights away. Disagreeing with a church policy and pressuring the church to change that policy within its institutional framework does not a war on religion make. They have every right and every ability to ignore activist demands.
                Otherwise, you look hypocritical -- like you don't respect the First Amendment and religious freedom unless it works to your favor.
                This is only the case if you don't understand what the First Amendment is and what it protects. That being said, I know you think I'm hypocritical, you've told me several times now. I don't particularly care if you think I'm a hypocrite.

                Homosexuality is found in over 450 species. Homophobia is found in only one. Which one seems unnatural now?

                by Chrislove on Mon May 14, 2012 at 07:27:00 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

  •  love this comment on the linked story (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    bronte17

    amidst the rah-rah support of the school for "standing up for morality"... there was this gem:

    If they would have worn a priest's cassock and taken a 6 year old boy, then I'm sure the church's hierarchy would have looked the other way.
    Damn... so much for the "morality" claims of the church, huh?

    "The death penalty is never about the criminal. They've already done their worst. The question is always "will we join them"?" - jlynne

    by Hopeful Skeptic on Sun May 13, 2012 at 11:08:08 PM PDT

  •  Generation Gap (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    ekyprogressive

    In a nutshell, the previous generation was raised on MTV and their idols a) Beavis, b) Butthead.

    This generation was raised on the Internet.

    Which generation you think is going to less likely to be fooled by the RW noise machine?

    Also, Lexington's a college town. It can't be that backwater.

    Thanks for this, T&R'd.

    •  Lexington KY, has an openly gay Mayor- (3+ / 0-)

      Just wanted to point that out.

      Intellect and romance triumph over brute force and cynicism

      by Hill Jill on Mon May 14, 2012 at 06:07:12 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Lexington is a college town encircled by (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      ekyprogressive, Vinnie Vegas

      irrational rednecks in their suburban sprawl.

      Many are pretend "farmers" on their 10-acre estates who get $100s of thousands of dollars in free welfare money from farm bills and tobacco settlements. Others are networked somehow with the military and the state apparatus.

      You would not believe some of the homes in the suburbs of Lexington. Million $$ estate with waterfalls and Roman columns and statues everywhere inside the house... and the guy runs a rinky-dink little electronics shop. TV repair. Yeah.

      But, they keep Alice Forgy Kerr in office. And try to strip Kathy Stein away from the city core of Lexington.

      Anyway, it's a black & white world in Lexington with many dimensions of class snobbery permeating the landscape. And then you have the rational live-and-let-live folks who make the city a decent place to live.


      In my honor he pulled out old forgotten dignity and walked straight in a crooked world. ~~poetry of young Barack Obama

      by bronte17 on Mon May 14, 2012 at 06:29:09 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  I am not outraged (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    VClib

    because this is a private, Catholic high school.

    As I said above, people here forget that the First Amendment guarantees not only that others can't inflict their religious beliefs on you, but also that religious institutions get to be, well, religious institutions, enforcing their religion on those who choose to be a part of that religious institution.  That's as much a part of the Constitution as any other right we have.  

    No one is forced to go to a Catholic high school.  Anyone who goes to a Catholic high school knows, going in, that they will enforce what the administration of that school believes are the teachings of that Church.  That's what you sign up for when you choose to go there.  Frankly, I am not outraged when someone chooses to go to a religious institution, chooses to give their money to that religious institution, chooses to become part of that religious institution, and then complains that the institution is enforcing that religion.  It's like going to a Catholic school, and then complaining that they teach "pro-life" positions, or complaining that they teach that remarriage after divorce is wrong, or complaining that they don't serve meat on Fridays in Lent.  That's what you sign up for when you choose to go there.

    If this were a public school, where the government is involved, I would be saying something entirely different.  But I don't think it's legitimate to choose to go to a Catholic institution and then complain that they are acting like a Catholic institution.  Whether I like their beliefs or not, they have as much of a Constitutional right to behave like a Catholic institution as the public schools have a Constitutional obligation not to behave like a Catholic institution.  

    As long as they are not enforcing their religion on people who do not voluntarily choose to become part of their religion, I don't think I have any right to complain what they choose to do as part of their own religion.  I respect the Constitution's mandate that they have a right to live their religious beliefs according to their own religion.  

    If being part of a same sex couple at a school function was that important to this young woman -- and I'm not downplaying it, because I completely understand that being true to yourself is very important -- then she should not have been at a Catholic school, where it was obvious to anyone that they would not (if they knew about it) support same sex couples.  

    I know this is a minority view here.  And I'm not saying anything about how the GOVERNMENT should treat same-sex couples.  But, to me, this falls within the same realm as saying that, no matter how a state defines marriage, a religion is still allowed to define religious marriage in ways that comport with its own religion.   If I respect the Constitution, I have to respect the right of religions to hold positions I disagree with, and to act in accordance with their beliefs within the confines of their religion.  

    •  And I respect.. (4+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Chrislove, FogCityJohn, T100R, prfb

      The constitution's allowance of us to voice our collective displeasure with their discriminatory practices. Not until we do will they come out of the stone ages on this issue.

      •  Here's why that is counterproductive. (0+ / 0-)

        A big part of the opposition to same sex marriage in this country is based on religious beliefs.   The only way that this issue ever gets a majority support in this country is if it is made very very clear that religions are still allowed to hold their own religious beliefs on same-sex couples and marriage.  

        It has to be very very clear that, in a state that recognizes marriages of any two adults regardless of gender, a religious institution is free to refuse to conduct a marriage ceremony for two adults of the same sex if that is against their religion.  

        If you support the Constitution, you have to recognize that a religion has a right to discriminate against same sex couples for religious purposes.  

        If you start saying that a religion has no right to refuse to recognize the legitimacy of same sex couples, aren't you saying that you don't think a Catholic priest should refuse to marry a same-sex couple?  And if you start taking the position that religions have no right to religions beliefs that you believe are discriminatory, you will set back the cause you are supporting tremendously.  The only way that cause moves forward is for people to recognize the constitutional religious rights of others as long as their beliefs are confined to religious institutions.  

        If you are asking Catholics, or Evangelicals, to accept and respect the fact that THEIR religious beliefs on same-sex couples and marriage are not the position of the government, you have to, in turn, accept and respect the fact that the government's position is not going to de-legitimize their religious beliefs on same-sex couples and marriage.  Unless you want to repeal the First Amendment.

        It seems to me that people who believe strongly in Constitutional rights of all should not be decrying a religion's enforcement of its religious beliefs within the confines of their religion as a bad thing.  That is exactly what a religion is supposed to do -- keep their teachings within the confines of their institution.    I will not criticize a religion for enforcing its religious beliefs among those who choose to become part of that religion.

        •  A little while back a local church decided.. (6+ / 0-)

          It wasn't going to allow inter-racial couples to attend. The public response to that was immediate and overwhelming, making them drop that whole thing. That was in the confines of it's own institution, do you feel the outcome there was 'bad' for that cause?

          If the school decided segregation was in their teachings, should we still say nothing? How far should we let them take it while we do nothing or say nothing?

          Religion is a private individual practice and not everyone who attends a Catholic high school A) is catholic or B) had a choice in the matter, as the parents may have decided where they went.

          •  Do you expect Catholics and Evangelicals (0+ / 0-)

            to respect the rights of others to have different religious beliefs in areas like marriage and choice?

            Do you expect Catholics and Evangelicals to say, "I believe a fetus is a baby, but I understand that I do not have a right to impose my beliefs on others who disagree?"  

            If you expect that, it is hypocritical to say that you have the right to criticize the fundamental religious views of others when they are keeping those religious views within the confines of their religion.

            You have a constitutional right to say whatever you want, but I think it is completely hypocritical, and contrary to the basic principles on which this country was founded, to expect others to respect your right to believe differently than they do in the area of religion, while at the same time thinking it's ok for you to criticize them for having a belief different from yours in the area of religion.  

            And the parents clearly, clearly had a choice here.  Until the child is 18 or emancipated, the parents get to make that choice for their child.  The parents chose to put their child in that school precisely BECAUSE Catholic beliefs would be taught and enforced.  I respect their right to do that.  It would be hypocritical of me to say that they can't bring their religion to a public school to impose on others while, at the same time, saying that they should not have a right to enforce their religion in their own schools.

            And it is counter productive.  You cannot have any legitimacy on the issue of marriage, or choice, if you don't respect the right of others to disagree with you in the confines of their religion.  If you do, then you respect only half of the principles underlying the First Amendment.  If you try to make religious views in the context of a religion not legitimate,  you will undermine the very principles that you want to advance in the public arena.  Others (Catholics and Evangelicals) will say -- and rightly so -- that you don't respect religious freedom at all, but you want to impose YOUR views on THEM.  The only way you can have legitimacy on those issues is to say, I recognize your right to your own religious views, but you cannot impose those on me in the public arena, and in return, I will not impose my views on you in the religious context.  

            •  This is about two kids attending a fucking prom (5+ / 0-)

              It is not about changing Catholic doctrine on marriage or abortion. It is completely possible for a Catholic school to reconcile allowing gay students to exist and have some dignity and still holding true to their Church doctrine. I know this quite well--as I said above, I come from a Diocesan school, and it acknowledged the existence of gay students and allowed them to freely congregate and, yes, even go to dances. I still remember my friend and his boyfriend being the life of the homecoming my senior year. Barring a lesbian couple from the prom is not a part of Catholic doctrine, and the practice can be shed without compromising Catholic principles.

              Homosexuality is found in over 450 species. Homophobia is found in only one. Which one seems unnatural now?

              by Chrislove on Mon May 14, 2012 at 07:20:30 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

            •  You got asked about segregation. (8+ / 0-)

              You wrote six paragraphs without ever responding to the diarist's question.  He asked you about whether we should say nothing to religions whose teachings claim to require racial segregation.  Please have the courage of your convictions and admit your support for religiously based racism.

              "Ça c'est une chanson que j'aurais vraiment aimé ne pas avoir écrite." -- Barbara

              by FogCityJohn on Mon May 14, 2012 at 09:07:18 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

  •  Hello? Catholic school. (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Catte Nappe, VClib

    That, in its essence, is fascism--ownership of government by an individual, by a group, or by any other controlling private power. -- Franklin D. Roosevelt --

    by enhydra lutris on Mon May 14, 2012 at 08:39:37 AM PDT

    •  Does not mean... (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Hopeful Skeptic, FogCityJohn

      We have to sit back quietly and let them discriminate. Public pressure, public voicing of displeasure with their discriminatory practices are more likely to change their positions than just ignoring it and letting them do as they please. They should get an ear-full over it, As their faith is their first amendment right, so is our voices of discontent.

      •  Not going in the first place would also change (0+ / 0-)

        them. If you join a motorcycle gang, don't bitch about wearing their colors.

        That, in its essence, is fascism--ownership of government by an individual, by a group, or by any other controlling private power. -- Franklin D. Roosevelt --

        by enhydra lutris on Mon May 14, 2012 at 10:05:11 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Yep, blame the victims of the discrimination (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Hopeful Skeptic, T100R, FogCityJohn

          How very progressive of you.

          Homosexuality is found in over 450 species. Homophobia is found in only one. Which one seems unnatural now?

          by Chrislove on Mon May 14, 2012 at 10:45:39 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Supporting and funding bigots and haters (0+ / 0-)

            doesn't make one a victim of that bigotry and hate, Catholic schools are neither free nor mandatory and their agenda is known. Don't throw mud at those who are aware of those simple facts, it is unseemly. You aren't a vgictim when you volunteer.

            That, in its essence, is fascism--ownership of government by an individual, by a group, or by any other controlling private power. -- Franklin D. Roosevelt --

            by enhydra lutris on Mon May 14, 2012 at 11:47:28 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  You don't have any fucking clue why these girls (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              FogCityJohn

              went to this school. You want to talk about unseemly? To even rear your head in this diary and make victim-blaming comments like this is well beyond unseemly. Jesus fucking Christ, I forget what website I'm on sometimes.

              Homosexuality is found in over 450 species. Homophobia is found in only one. Which one seems unnatural now?

              by Chrislove on Mon May 14, 2012 at 02:41:16 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  asdf (0+ / 0-)

                It isn't about blaming anybody, especially the victims. It is about reality. You should check it out.

                If one attends a Catholic School, one doesn't expect to be permitted to take a same sex date to the prom. People don't take black dates to Aryan Nations meetings. These outfits have known rules.

                Stating known facts is simply that, it isn't blaming anybody, but it also isn't pretending that it is a big secret and surprise that Catholic schools don't approve of homosexual couples. If you join the Klan or New Black Panthers, certain behavior is not permitted. Also if you attemd Liberty U or Catholic schools.

                That, in its essence, is fascism--ownership of government by an individual, by a group, or by any other controlling private power. -- Franklin D. Roosevelt --

                by enhydra lutris on Mon May 14, 2012 at 05:18:05 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  MY Diocesan school (3+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  ekyprogressive, T100R, FogCityJohn

                  allowed gay and lesbian couples at dances, as well as a gay-straight alliance. No, not being able to go to the prom as a lesbian couple is not necessarily to be expected. Also, these girls were minors when they entered school. They did not "volunteer" for anything.

                  Homosexuality is found in over 450 species. Homophobia is found in only one. Which one seems unnatural now?

                  by Chrislove on Mon May 14, 2012 at 05:26:59 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  Your school was, as near as I can tell, abnormal. (0+ / 0-)

                    Somebody enrolled them in that school. It could have been the parents' sole decision, but it could have been the kids' choice too. In any event, the school's policies were discernible, and probably known.

                    If you have any solution, please post it, but saying "oh, gee, yet another Catholic school has uniforms or prohibits same-sex prom dates, isn't that horrible simply doesn't cut it." It will change when people abandon that church and stop sending their kids to those schools, and it is to be expected to be routing until such time as that happens.

                    That, in its essence, is fascism--ownership of government by an individual, by a group, or by any other controlling private power. -- Franklin D. Roosevelt --

                    by enhydra lutris on Mon May 14, 2012 at 07:17:00 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site