Lesbian Prom part 2

[Cherokee_Mountaincat]

.Ellen, Web site give gay teen $30,000 in prom flap
Bros, talk show host Ellen DeGeneres sits down with Constance Fri Mar 19, 6:21 pm ET
LOS ANGELES (Reuters) – Talk show host Ellen DeGeneres and an inspirational Web site on Friday gave $30,000 toward the college education of a teenage lesbian whose high school prom was canceled when she asked to attend with a girl.

Constance McMillen, 18, of Itawamba County, Mississippi, appeared on "The Ellen DeGeneres Show" to talk about her experience and at the end of the segment DeGeneres, who is a lesbian, presented her with the check from the Web site, Tonic. (http://www.tonic.com)

McMillen's story made headlines earlier this month when the Itawamba County school board canceled the high school dance that for many students is a high point of their year.

Back in December, McMillen had asked school officials if she could attend with her girlfriend, and at first they said "no." Later, they changed their position and said the two could go, but not together, nor could they dance or hold hands.

"We could go, but not like as a date," McMillen told DeGeneres. "I was like, I'm not going to go to prom and pretend like I'm not gay, so there's no point in me going."

The prom remains canceled, and the American Civil Liberties Union has sued the school on McMillen's behalf.

McMillen told DeGeneres other kids from her school are angry and blame her for the canceled dance. DeGeneres countered that she thought the 18-year-old was "brave" for speaking out.

"It's always easy to be quiet, especially when you know somebody might tell you 'no' or it's going to cause a scene," said DeGeneres, who is also a judge on "American Idol."

Tonic describes itself on its Web site as being "dedicated to promoting the good that happens each day around the world."

(Editing by Jill Serjeant)


.

[Long Duck Dong]

marie was kind enuf to post this in the other thread..... but yeah again, its awesome to see......

speaking out is differcult and making waves is dangerous.... but its worked in constance favour.... I do hope for a positive outcome with the prom, that the students get their prom, and that is a result I am waiting for with interest....

I will be honest enuf to admit that I do not fully agree with what ellen did, tho I support the good will towards the student, as ellen is known for her warm heart and good will to others.... but I am not saying that ellen is wrong for her actions either....

I do wish constance and all the other students a good prom and a enjoyable night and the best of luck with her relationship with her partner, and I dare say that this is not the last we will hear of miss constance, I have a feeling in times to come, she would become a more vocal advocate of students rights..

[Realist]

That was excellent!

The girl is very brave and has a very sweet demeanor. I understand her surroundings very well and am so happy her father supports her; my family would have have totally rejected me, if they'd known I was bi.

I like Ellen more each time I see her and think she's really a good person!

[Donkey_burger]

Yay for Ellen, my favorite stand-up comedian!

DB :bipride:

[Billys_gurl]

Ellen should host a prom for all the GLBT couples in that school, because you know Constance and her girlfriend arent the only ones there.

[Long Duck Dong]

prom court case update (http://www.bostonherald.com/news/national/south/view/20100322judge_hears_lesbian_teens_suit_to_force_pr om/srvc=home&position=recent)

while this is not a official ruling on the prom issue..... it would appear that there is more to the case, then was first thought,... and it may not be all about constance and the issue of her date.....

I am watching this with great interest as I want to see the students have their prom, but its now possible the issue with the prom, was the students behievour

[MarieDelta]

I dunno, having read the article , I'm inclined to think most ,if not all, of this is fabricated.

They(the school admin) know they are in a tight spot, let's just make up some reasons to have done what we did.

Just my opinion, of course.

Then again , never have been very trusting of authority.

[TwylaTwobits]

Most public boards require notes to be taken during meetings. I'd be interested in seeing the minutes of the meetings about the prom and about Constance's request. I'm sure that they will be subpoenaed and we will all get to see what is and what is not fabrication and on who's part, Constance or the school board.

[Long Duck Dong]

I understand that too marie, I was curious about the changes in constances statements and the court papers.... but the lack of info coming from the school board was also a issue for me....

I will not question some aspects of the school boards rebuttals, as drugs and alcohol are becoming a wide spread issue in many schools and other areas... and yes, that can be a grave concern to teachers and parents alike

there is also the fact that the school board was interested is a low key, smoothly run prom, and there is evidence to support the fact that constance was intending to use the prom as a low level protest venue and that is supported by the students protests at school in favour of juin

what I am waiting to see, is the judges ruling on aspects of the case, as I want to see how they rule, under us law... and how the law is interpreted and applied by a judge, not posters in a forum, as the judge gets the final say

1 ) a prom is not a right, its a privilege, do the school have the right to state conditions of entrance and is the purchase of a ticket, a agreement to respect the rules of the entry, how ever wrong they may be.. and under that ruling, is the use of a prom as a low level protest, not in the interests of the prom and against the reason for the prom which is a dance for the students

2 ) was the school indeed discriminating against constance as a lesbian, or against constance and the gender of her partner, as that would be a gender issue, not sexuality... as a lesbian female can take a gay partner and both can go to the prom unhindered....

3 ) is a school obligated to hold a prom every year, or is a school board free to hold one as they see fit....

[Donkey_burger]

I dunno, having read the article , I'm inclined to think most ,if not all, of this is fabricated.

They(the school admin) know they are in a tight spot, let's just make up some reasons to have done what we did.

Just my opinion, of course.

Then again , never have been very trusting of authority.

Yeah, that's my thought, being a high school dropout.

They probably made up all the stuff about drug use, etc. so they can save some face. There's issues with drugs or sex at all school events from the sixth or seventh grade on up. At the very least, there's going to be a student smoking tobacco, or jacking off somewhere on or near the premises.

DB :bipride:

[MarieDelta]

Here is an interesting interview of Constance by Dan Savage(http://slog.thestranger.com/slog/archives/2010/03/16/constance-mcmillen-is-back-in-fulton-mississippi-is-super-grateful-for-your-support-and-wants-you-to-be-nice)

[Donkey_burger]

Here is an interesting interview of Constance by Dan Savage(http://slog.thestranger.com/slog/archives/2010/03/16/constance-mcmillen-is-back-in-fulton-mississippi-is-super-grateful-for-your-support-and-wants-you-to-be-nice)

Constance seems like a very nice girl. This would make it more interesting if she is, indeed, not the only reason why prom got canceled like the school claims. I hope not. It would be horrible for lgbt rights.

DB :flag4:

[MarieDelta]

Like I said, my bias goes towards the little guy. I may be wrong, but its my opinion (having seen C. speak and watched her) that she is telling the truth.

Yes, it may be a low level civil disobedience action on her part. It still doesn't make it less true.

As far as prom being a disturbance, when wasn't the prom a disruption? I mean, really?


Like I said, its my opinion, I'm not willing to discuss it here.

[*jeannie*]

I dunno, having read the article , I'm inclined to think most ,if not all, of this is fabricated.

They(the school admin) know they are in a tight spot, let's just make up some reasons to have done what we did.

Just my opinion, of course.

Then again , never have been very trusting of authority.

i also believe the school is fabricating reasons to try to get out of a tight spot.

[*jeannie*]

what I am waiting to see, is the judges ruling on aspects of the case, as I want to see how they rule, under us law... and how the law is interpreted and applied by a judge, not posters in a forum, as the judge gets the final say

well, keep watching because the ruling of a federal judge on the issue of constance and her girlfriend attending the prom together will be in their favor.

as for the issue of the tuxedo, it could go either way.

[MarieDelta]

Well the Court has come back on C.'s request for injunction-

http://www.aclu.org/lgbt-rights/fulton-ms-prom-discrimination

http://www.aclu.org/lgbt-rights/court-rules-mississippi-school-violated-first-amendment-rights-lesbian-student

They found:


The record shows Constance has been openly gay since eighth grade and she intended to communicate a message by wearing a tuxedo apd to express her identity through attending prom with a same-sex date. The Court finds this exipression and communication of her viewpoint is the type of speech that falls squarely within th¢ purview of the First Amendment. The Court is also of the opinion that the motive behind the School Board's cancellation of the prom, or withdrawal of their sponsorship, was Constance's requests and the ACLU's demand letter sent on her behalf. For all of the foregoing reasons, the Court finds that Constance's First Amendment rights have been violated and therefore, she has established, by a preponderance of the evidence, a substantial likelihood of success on the merits with respect to her First Amendment claim.

------------

The Court has already found that Defendants' policies against same-sex dates and girls not wearing tuxedos, along with Defendants' ac~ion of cancelling the prom, or withdrawing their sponsorship of the prom, have infringed upon Constance's First Amendment rights and therefore, there is a substantial threat that irreparable harm. will occur. The Court finds that Constance has clearly met her burden of persuasion as to the second Canal Authority factor.

---------

As such, Constance has met her burden! of persuasion by showing by the preponderance of the evidence that the threat of injury she faces outweighs the threat of injury to Defendants.

---------------

However, the Court is of the opinion that its failure to grant an injunction in this instance does not disserve the public interest. Defendants testified that a parent sponsored prom which is open to all IAHS students has been planned and is scheduled for April 2, 2010. Though the details of the "private" prom are unknown to the Court, Defendants have made representations, upon which this Court relies, that all IAHS st4dents, including the Plaintiff, are welcome and encouraged to attend. The Court finds that reqJiring Defendants to step-back into a sponsorship role at this late date would only confuse and confound the community on the issue. Parents have taken the initiative to plan and pay for a "private" prom for the Juniors and Seniors of IAHS and to now require Defendants to host one as it had: originally planned would defeat the purpose and efforts of those individuals.





There is more , and you can read it if you like.

[allbimyself]

Great news!

By the way, a bit late, but BBC had a great article on the story

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/8580537.stm

As was stated in their article, many schools, including some in small communities in the so called bible belt have revised their policies and had proms that included same gender couples. I'm assuming that nothing too terrible occurred or we would have heard about it (and the school board in this case would certainly have brought those incidents to the court's attention), making the school board's arguments moot.

Also, if the parents are providing a prom in which Constance is invited and allowed to bring the date of her choice, it's obvious those parents do not have concerns about the behavior of those attending.

So, it would appear the school board's entire motive was "to prevent those poor kids from being exposed to the evils of homosexuality."

[FalconAngel]

I dunno, having read the article , I'm inclined to think most ,if not all, of this is fabricated.

They(the school admin) know they are in a tight spot, let's just make up some reasons to have done what we did.

Just my opinion, of course.

Then again , never have been very trusting of authority.

It makes sense that they came up with this latest story in order to do a little CYA.

Police find that all the time when they interrogate a prisoner that they know is guilty. The school board is no less human that a criminal, so they would do and say anything to protect themselves from a lawsuit as well as to keep their foney-baloney jobs.

They would also say anything to make them look good and MacMillen look bad, in light of a lawsuit that is highly likely to cost the school board a very large sum of money and the board members their jobs.

Lawyers for government entities are exceptional at suggesting things like that. Anything to avoid responsibility for those they represent.

[FalconAngel]

Most public boards require notes to be taken during meetings. I'd be interested in seeing the minutes of the meetings about the prom and about Constance's request. I'm sure that they will be subpoenaed and we will all get to see what is and what is not fabrication and on who's part, Constance or the school board.

Now THAT could be very enlightening. I am sure that it will be requested by the ACLU for the trial. It will come out during discovery.

How much does anyone want to bet that the minutes in question get "lost" (they will blame some unimportant clerk for losing them)?

[Long Duck Dong]

thank you marie for posting the ruling ......

a ruling on the grounds of first amendment rights.... tells me exactly what I wanted to know...... the right to make a stance at the prom was denied enuf said

as for the ruling on the reason for the cancelling of the prom, the court has found that the prom was cancelled as constance was told it would be, if there was other reasons, ( factual or infactual and we will never know )... they are secondary to the reason ruled on by the courts....

now as for the other students, there is no school prom... for anybody.... as ruled by the courts, but I take heart in the fact that other concerned people, have looked out for the other students and making sure that they get their prom....

as for constance, yes I feel for her... she made her case, the court ruled, but no school prom.... however, with the 30k and internship as a bright outlook for the future, I wish her luck

but as I have said many times, some fights are better not fought the way they are.... as we can win the battle, but lose the war....... and with the ruling on the prom.... that happened

[MarieDelta]

I think you misread...

They upheld her right to go to the prom with a same sex date, dressed in a tux. However they didn't see any reason to force the school to sponsor another prom if there was one she could attend.


Therefore there was no loss.

[MarieDelta]

Now THAT could be very enlightening. I am sure that it will be requested by the ACLU for the trial. It will come out during discovery.

How much does anyone want to bet that the minutes in question get "lost" (they will blame some unimportant clerk for losing them)?

Heh too late, if you look at the PDF it tells in there amidst the verbiage that they "never considered" letting C. and her date attend the prom.

That was part of the reason it was considered a first amendment right, the school board was against it.

[Long Duck Dong]

I think you misread...

They upheld her right to go to the prom with a same sex date, dressed in a tux. However they didn't see any reason to force the school to sponsor another prom if there was one she could attend.


Therefore there was no loss.

misread ??? win the right to go to the school prom, win the right to take a same sex partner, win the right to wear a tux.... and lose the fight to have the school prom.....

how can you go to a school prom on your terms if there is not one ???

I have not misread..... I just do not view a private prom to be a school prom, if the school is not running it but a private party

[MarieDelta]

A prom is a prom. As long as she can go, with her date, in a tux then its a prom, which is all she really wanted anyways.

so yeah...

[FalconAngel]

Heh too late, if you look at the PDF it tells in there amidst the verbiage that they "never considered" letting C. and her date attend the prom.

That was part of the reason it was considered a first amendment right, the school board was against it.

I saw that after I had gotten far enough to see your post with the links. I was working my way down the posts.

[FalconAngel]

misread ??? win the right to go to the school prom, win the right to take a same sex partner, win the right to wear a tux.... and lose the fight to have the school prom.....

how can you go to a school prom on your terms if there is not one ???

I have not misread..... I just do not view a private prom to be a school prom, if the school is not running it but a private party

You did misread it.

The school board was found to be wrong for canceling the prom. They could still be ordered to sponsor the private prom, which will allow her to show up just as she had originally planned for the "official" prom that the school board was supposed to hold.

But, in order to clarify your position, just what is a reasonable "sacrifice" to uphold civil rights for all?
Is a single prom enough?
Perhaps prison time, like Nelson Mandella had to endure?
How about people's lives, like we had to go through to get the rights that we Americans, as well as other free nations have had to endure?

While you appear to be concerned more about the school board holding the prom, rather than the fact that the school board now knows that they cannot do what they did ever again.

I think that losing a single prom is a rather small price to pay, by comparison.

Of course, it's better not to lose it, but if it can put a bunch of right wing GLBT haters in their place, then I say that it was worth it.

And beyond all of that, she is still going to get her prom, even if the school board doesn't sponsor it.

[darkeyes]

thank you marie for posting the ruling ......

a ruling on the grounds of first amendment rights.... tells me exactly what I wanted to know...... the right to make a stance at the prom was denied enuf said

as for the ruling on the reason for the cancelling of the prom, the court has found that the prom was cancelled as constance was told it would be, if there was other reasons, ( factual or infactual and we will never know )... they are secondary to the reason ruled on by the courts....

now as for the other students, there is no school prom... for anybody.... as ruled by the courts, but I take heart in the fact that other concerned people, have looked out for the other students and making sure that they get their prom....

as for constance, yes I feel for her... she made her case, the court ruled, but no school prom.... however, with the 30k and internship as a bright outlook for the future, I wish her luck

but as I have said many times, some fights are better not fought the way they are.... as we can win the battle, but lose the war....... and with the ruling on the prom.... that happened

Duckie darlin'.. wetha or not the prom is a school prom or not..an wetha or not it can b considered a victory or loss wile important they r hardly winnin or losin the war..they r but 1 small fite for basic human rights on behalf a LGBT peeps.. thats wer ur arguments mess up.. we will lose fites.. peeps will get hurt an sadly even worse.. we will make sacrifices.. but our main challnge isn a lil High School prom.. or the rite 2 marry.. or ne otha thing ya pluck outa the air.. it is nuthin less than equal rites for all human beins irrespective of who an wot they r.. this wos an is 1 teensy weensy battle..hugely important 2 those who r involved an in its own way 2 our cause.. but it is not the war..

..an as it happens me c's ur point in this.. whoeva is runnin the prom wile it is a prom..it is not the school prom.. jus who has won is debatable.. in the waya things it mite b that at worst we can claim an honorable draw for our side an the otha side can slink away, prob smirkin all ova ther faces.. but they hav no honour left..

[Long Duck Dong]

I can not help but notice the change of stance by people in a 180 degree turn.... and they are now saying what I have been saying, and telling me I am still wrong.....

the fight for civil rights has been won for all students now and in the future....that was the important part of the ruling.... I said in another thread that there should be equal rights for all.... now the people telling me I was wrong for saying that, are saying it and telling me I am wrong

now without using the term right wing glbt haters, if the prom the judge was refering to, is the one by the parents in that town.... I would not value constances chances of going and enjoying it... especially cos of the reason its having to be held now..... and that is based on the statement that constance made about not knowing about a private prom in her town and that she would not be invited anyway

so if people wanna call me wrong for what I say... do me a favour and do not say what I have been saying before, especially if you have been telling me I am wrong for saying it

[Long Duck Dong]

Duckie darlin'.. wetha or not the prom is a school prom or not..an wetha or not it can b considered a victory or loss wile important they r hardly winnin or losin the war..they r but 1 small fite for basic human rights on behalf a LGBT peeps.. thats wer ur arguments mess up.. we will lose fites.. peeps will get hurt an sadly even worse.. we will make sacrifices.. but our main challnge isn a lil High School prom.. or the rite 2 marry.. or ne otha thing ya pluck outa the air.. it is nuthin less than equal rites for all human beins irrespective of who an wot they r.. this wos an is 1 teensy weensy battle..hugely important 2 those who r involved an in its own way 2 our cause.. but it is not the war..

..an as it happens me c's ur point in this.. whoeva is runnin the prom wile it is a prom..it is not the school prom.. jus who has won is debatable.. in the waya things it mite b that at worst we can claim an honorable draw for our side an the otha side can slink away, prob smirkin all ova ther faces.. but they hav no honour left..

I am the sort of person that feels that human rights and equal rights should be fought for.... but not if it costs heavily or creates adversity for others....

while constance stood up for her rights, and she was right to do that.... and win against the school board, which was good and will cause change.....
the cost to a large number of people ( students and other lgbt people in that country and the funders of another prom ) is high......

I would have loved to have seen constance go to the school prom with her same sex partner and knowing that it was not possible, would have loved to have seen her find another way to go after the school board, without placing other lgbt at risk in that county and without fucking off so many people

there are other lgbt people in that town, and now they face a very hostile and anti lgbt town and county.....
thats not what I call a victory when we have placed them and others at risk

[Long Duck Dong]

A prom is a prom. As long as she can go, with her date, in a tux then its a prom, which is all she really wanted anyways.

so yeah...

marie.... to some people the school prom can be a once in a lifetime event.... to some of the people in that town, its something that they have lost.... and it can not be replaced..... you can give a substitute prom.... but thats like having the chance to have a 20 carat diamond and getting a cubic zirconia....

but cos its not our prom and we are not the students at that school, we do not appreciate what that school prom really means to them.... all we see is that constance got what she wanted..... and not that a lot of others can't have what they wanted....

I would never trample on your dreams to half achieve one of my own....

[rissababynta]

At my school (and most from what I've heard) you weren't allowed to bring a date who was over the age of 21. My husband at the time was 23. I said "Aww crap that sucks" and made plans to go see a movie with him the night of my prom. I refused to go with anyone else and I refused to go without him and I was more than happy to do anything else as long as I was with him. To this day, I neither think about not going or regret it :)

Just my little prom experience I'm throwing out there

[darkeyes]

At my school (and most from what I've heard) you weren't allowed to bring a date who was over the age of 21. My husband at the time was 23. I said "Aww crap that sucks" and made plans to go see a movie with him the night of my prom. I refused to go with anyone else and I refused to go without him and I was more than happy to do anything else as long as I was with him. To this day, I neither think about not going or regret it :)

Just my little prom experience I'm throwing out there

The biggest fight I can remember at my High School about the Prom was the rule that girls could not wear strapless dresses. It happened 4 years before my Prom, but my sister and 18 or 20 other girls wore strapless dresses any way, arrived at the prom as a group with dates in tow and the school wisely decided to back down because of the strife it may cause. The row rumbled on for half a year but eventually parental prssure forced the school to back down.

There was also an argument about stockings which reared its head the year of my prom, as the rule was that tights must be worn and any girl found to be wearing stockings and suspenders would be sent home. It was a stupid rule for how could they police it? Girls had been wearing stockings for years beforehand and the issue had never been raised. A new chairman of the school board discussed it with the senior girls and after some stubborn but stupid resistance by the head, the rule was quietly dropped.

We didn't have an age limit Ris for dates, but it was never necessary for most kids wouldnt be seen dead taking someone much older than their age group. At my sister's prom for instance partners had to attend the school, so the age limit was a defacto 18. This rule was changed the following year. At my prom a lad did cause a stir when he arrived with a 27yo tall leggy brunette who was positively stunning. It turned out she was his cousin from down south somewhere. No naughty cousinly stuff involved... at least I hope not he was a right geek...:tong:

I know this isn't strictly on thread but they are illustrations of how rules and dress codes adapt in time to meet the needs of the kids. They always will...:)

[FalconAngel]

I can not help but notice the change of stance by people in a 180 degree turn.... and they are now saying what I have been saying, and telling me I am still wrong.....

the fight for civil rights has been won for all students now and in the future....that was the important part of the ruling.... I said in another thread that there should be equal rights for all.... now the people telling me I was wrong for saying that, are saying it and telling me I am wrong

now without using the term right wing glbt haters, if the prom the judge was refering to, is the one by the parents in that town.... I would not value constances chances of going and enjoying it... especially cos of the reason its having to be held now..... and that is based on the statement that constance made about not knowing about a private prom in her town and that she would not be invited anyway

so if people wanna call me wrong for what I say... do me a favour and do not say what I have been saying before, especially if you have been telling me I am wrong for saying it

Maybe you are just a piss poor communicator.

You have not been in agreement with us, based on what you have written, in the way that you have written it.

If we don't understand what you are saying, then you need to adapt your writing style accordingly, since we all understand each other perfectly well.
(Franspeak is a whole different issue, of course)

[FalconAngel]

I am the sort of person that feels that human rights and equal rights should be fought for.... but not if it costs heavily or creates adversity for others....

Here we go again.

In the other thread, you said, repeatedly, that Miss MacMillan should allow her right of equal treatment be abridged in favor of keeping the peace. Quite different from what you claim now.

Like I asked before what is a "reasonable cost" for equal rights, by your reckoning?

Any time that you stand up for equal rights, you either create adversity or have "heavy costs"; more often than not, you have both.

Looking at your philosophy in the cold, harsh light of the real world, you would rather have your rights trampled on than stand up and fight for them, neither for yourself nor future generations. You would foist off that responsibility to others, then slam them for doing what is necessary for the rights that you wouldn't fight for, since the effort would creates adversity.

If you are not willing to fight for something that directly affects you, then you do not deserve it. That is most true of civil rights and equality.

Remember the quote that I posted from Ben Franklin? There is far more truth in that, than in your recommended strategy.

In this country, during the late 50's and early 60's. People were, quite literally, being killed for standing up for equal rights for blacks. That is the price that often needs to be paid to insure that equality lasts beyond a single incident and into the far future for our descendants.
Is that too high a price to pay?
If it is, then you still have no clue about the actual value of equality.

People do not fight for equality JUST for themselves; they do it for all future generations.
You have failed, miserably, to learn anything from the history of the struggles for equal rights.

The only adversity for others, from this, was on those that either supported the school boards decision, or those that were bothered about the prom being canceled. The first group deserved it and the second group blew it out of proportion.

Adversity and annoyance are not the same as you are making out to be. In the words of the Great Bard, "Me thinks thou doest protest too much".



while constance stood up for her rights, and she was right to do that.... and win against the school board, which was good and will cause change.....

That is quite true. It will cause change that benefits everyone, not just the GLBT community.



the cost to a large number of people ( students and other lgbt people in that country and the funders of another prom ) is high......

How so? Miss MacMillan just won what is, outwardly, a minor civil rights issue.

But that one "small victory" will begin a larger change, the news of which will force other, like minded school boards, to toe the line of real equality and prevent this from becoming an issue again, anywhere else in the country.

That is the nature of this society.



I would have loved to have seen constance go to the school prom with her same sex partner and knowing that it was not possible, would have loved to have seen her find another way to go after the school board, without placing other lgbt at risk in that county and without fucking off so many people

That would be a horrible strategy and would most likel have had a much larger and more destructive and counterproductive outcome. She played by the rules, which she knew that the school board was breaking.
She did it out on a sense of knowing right from wrong and without trying to make waves. The school board told her in no uncertain terms, that her rights did not matter to them.

So she got the law to slap them down. She played by the rules and won. Using strategy as you have suggested really would have made her the "bad guy" in this situation.

I applaud her for choosing the high road strategy, even though the school board refused to do the same.


there are other lgbt people in that town, and now they face a very hostile and anti lgbt town and county.....

How do you know that? The school board has just been slapped down for violating the civil rights of one of their own people. There are more people out there that will accept that than will be hostile towards the GLBT community.

If you were right, then the private prom, where civil rights equality is being upheld, would not exist.



thats not what I call a victory when we have placed them and others at risk

And you still do not get it. No one is being placed at risk. Did you skip over the parts of the news reports that disagree with your points or are you being selectively ignorant?

Belief, in the absence of facts, is faith; Belief, in contradiction of facts, is foolishness.

Stop being foolish about this issue.

She won for everyone in her area. Not just the LGBT community, but for everyone.
She taught the school board that placing a single religion's standard on others is wrong.
She taught the school board that prejudice is wrong. A lesson that they should have already known.
And she taught this nation that one is never too young to stand up for one's rights.

Sounds like a win-win for everyone but the school board and it's supporters. Too bad for them.
They picked the wrong side of a fight, kind of like the Japanese in WWII. As a New Zealander, you should be very familiar with the lesson of that bit of history.

[MarieDelta]

In the early 1960s, Birmingham was one of the most racially divided cities in the United States, as black citizens faced legal and economic disparities as well as violent retribution when they attempted to bring attention to their problems. Protests in Birmingham began with a boycott to pressure business leaders to provide employment opportunities to people of all races, and end segregation in public facilities, restaurants, and stores. When business leaders resisted the boycott, SCLC organizer Wyatt Tee Walker and Birmingham native Fred Shuttlesworth began what they termed Project C, a series of sit-ins and marches intended to provoke mass arrests. After the campaign ran low on adult volunteers, high school, college, and elementary students were trained by SCLC coordinator James Bevel to participate, resulting in hundreds of arrests and an instant intensification of national media attention on the campaign. To dissuade demonstrators and control the protests the Birmingham Police Department, led by Eugene "Bull" Connor, used high-pressure water jets and police dogs on children and bystanders. Media coverage of these events brought intense scrutiny on racial segregation in the South.

There have always been costs associated with every choice.

If you choose to fight for (LGBT Civil) rights then someone must pay. This is the nature of things. There can be no gains without sacrifice.

In essence the same people are paying for the prom who would have paid for it originally, perhaps more directly.

It did put a big bright spotlight on this school and their practices. As well as the School admin, and School board in this county. Especially with regard to LGBT rights.

I don't think Constance would be shy about telling the world if the private prom was denied her and her date. Especially since the school board used that as their last line of defense and it is in the court records.

Just think this little school board is now known, not only in their state, but across the nation and the world for what they did.

[Long Duck Dong]

Maybe you are just a piss poor communicator.

You have not been in agreement with us, based on what you have written, in the way that you have written it.

If we don't understand what you are saying, then you need to adapt your writing style accordingly, since we all understand each other perfectly well.
(Franspeak is a whole different issue, of course)

try talking to me then instead of assuming, not reading properly ( you do jump posts as proven in this thread )... and actually listening to me and clarify what you do not understand......
I have done it with marie and she has been most helpful..... and please to do tell me that its not your responsibility to make sure you are correct in what you say, as even in this thread you have shown that you do not read things properly before replying
( I am refering to you posting about the school board losing records in the court case, after marie had posted the ruling, and thats not the first instance )

do not blame me for your inabilities.... I have no issues understanding what people say....and if I am unsure, I talk to them about it, so I can be sure.... as I have done a number of times with marie, and even tho marie and I disagree on things, she is always helpful with clarifying things.....


as for my stance on the court ruling, its simple and clear, I support it.... it was a shame that the school prom was lost to the students, but I am happy to see they still get a substitute prom.... and I am happy that the ruling applies to ALL students, not just the LGBT....

that ruling in support of all the students, is a true victory, as within it, is the lgbt, but on the same footing as everybody.... not a seperate group but part of the whole.....

[Long Duck Dong]

in nz, we were able to get the civil union law passed, without cost....
how we did it was a compromise, we can not claim marriage as its still a christian term, but we got the civil union on the equal standing for all nz'ers, hetero, lgbt etc......

thats one of a number of instances..... that were pro all and no cost.... and still no fallout....or back lash

ok back to the school prom, the money invested by the school in the prom is lost.... that is a cost to the school, the people that are now working to hold a new prom, have to provide for it, thats a added cost..... but as people say, thats fine, there is a cost incurred with the fight for civil rights...

so yeah, I support constance and the judges rulings, in respects to the fact that it benefits all students NOT just the lgbt..... which is in line with my repeated statements that if we want to be equal with the rest of the world, the least we can do, is act like it and not separate ourselves constantly

now people can argue all they want and tell me I am wrong.... but marie you have posted the proof many times, the deceased trans people, simply wanting to live... have lost their lives cos of a dislike of trans that can not be punished by law unless its a criminal act.... and until that criminal act happens, the haters are protected by the law....

it was the lgbts right to walk down the road being who they are, but its doing that same thing, that cost them so dearly..... thats the issue that people fail to understand when I talk about it.....
yes have your rights, yes be who you are, but yes acknowledge the risk and dangers involved in being who you are, do not deny the fact that nothing will stop the prejudice and hatred as unless its acted on, the haters are protected by the same laws that protect us..... and until they commit a criminal act, they have done nothing wrong.....

the same with the small town, constance may have won her battle, but she now faces the war... as peoples attitudes in that town will not just turn off, after the prom..... and in a number of places, what people will see is a lgbt person cost a small town their prom, and gained 30k and a internment for her actions...... thats gonna add fuel to their dislike of lgbt.....
but unless its acted on, the haters are protected by the same laws that protect us.....

I hope that we have no casualties

btw falcon, the use of the term, right wing lgbt haters.... makes you as judgemental as the right wing lgbt haters.....

[*jeannie*]

here he goes again.

*posts a sign in front of Long Duck Dong's cage that reads... "please do not feed the troll."*

[FalconAngel]

try talking to me then instead of assuming, not reading properly ( you do jump posts as proven in this thread )... and actually listening to me and clarify what you do not understand......
I have done it with marie and she has been most helpful..... and please to do tell me that its not your responsibility to make sure you are correct in what you say, as even in this thread you have shown that you do not read things properly before replying
( I am refering to you posting about the school board losing records in the court case, after marie had posted the ruling, and thats not the first instance )

do not blame me for your inabilities.... I have no issues understanding what people say....and if I am unsure, I talk to them about it, so I can be sure.... as I have done a number of times with marie, and even tho marie and I disagree on things, she is always helpful with clarifying things.....


as for my stance on the court ruling, its simple and clear, I support it.... it was a shame that the school prom was lost to the students, but I am happy to see they still get a substitute prom.... and I am happy that the ruling applies to ALL students, not just the LGBT....

that ruling in support of all the students, is a true victory, as within it, is the lgbt, but on the same footing as everybody.... not a seperate group but part of the whole.....

My reading and comprehension skills have already been demonstrated to be superior to yours.

But you come along and say one thing and tell us that you meant something other than what you said.

That is not us not understanding, it is you either lying about what you said or you being a piss poor communicator.

Your repeated attempts at trying to turn things around to blame us for your inability to communicate clearly, are quite transparent. You should stop trying to do that, since it has yet to work on us.

Doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results is the first sign of a low IQ.

[Long Duck Dong]

falcon

I am doing nothing to you, you are the one that chooses to take issue with my opinion, and post, implying that its my fault for things.... when in fact I am not responsible for you falcon, you wish to post, you wish to reply and you wish to try and be insulting.....

I am the same, I have the right to reply to threads and I choose to reply to threads, therefore it becomes my responsibility for my conduct not others

yes you are responsible for your inability to comprehend things, not me.... as you have the ability to ask and clarify things, and choose not to..... I choose to as others well know.....

and you are correct falcon, telling me I am wrong time and time again and expecting me to believe that when I have watched a number of people prove you wrong, is a sign of low intelligence....

have a nice night

[Donkey_burger]

here he goes again.

*posts a sign in front of Long Duck Dong's cage that reads... "please do not feed the troll."*

I agree 100%. Whether or not LDD intends too, he IS disrupting the community and therefore needs to be ignored.

DB :flag4:

[darkeyes]

I agree 100%. Whether or not LDD intends too, he IS disrupting the community and therefore needs to be ignored.

DB :flag4:You know, there are times I despair and really worry about this little site of ours, and on the wider scene. the entire LGBT community.. are we really so small, so uptight, and so intolerant and downright shitty that we are unable to have within our ranks an argumentative person who has ideas which may not meet with the approval of the majority, but at least are ideas which he holds dear to him? Because I do not believe we are any of those things as a community, and if I did I would bugger off into the sunset never to be seen or heard of again..

Disruptive? Hun, you have no idea what disruptive is if you are saying Duckie is disruptive.. most people here claim to be democrats and yet it seems by claiming a man is a Troll, or is disruptive we put that claim to the test..a severe test..

I think many people on this site often talk out their arse on many occasions.. people for whom I hold a great deal of esteem and affection.. we have argued and taken issue with each other for a number of years now.. but I would no more attack them and call them a Troll, or accuse them of being disuptive and/or writing to Drew complaining about them. I wouldnt even write complaining about a proper Troll far less people who have a longstanding record of saying things which get on my tidgies...

Of course we will have great rows, and massive differences of opinion on this site.. and that is as it should be.. we are all individuals with our own opinions and beliefs.. in a free society we are meant to be allowed to express those opinions and beliefs without fear or favour.. we don't have the right to try and shut people up for saying what they believe and expressing their values and opinions.. to even think of attempting to do so is an arrogance and a selfish abuse of the privilege of the right to free expression.. Fascists, Nazi's and Stalinists do that sort of thing...and many other authoritarian ideologies.. they truly know how to disrupt when they don't like what people are saying.. believe me.. several times in my life I haved been on the rough end of proper disruption by such people.. physically.... these people you ignore at your peril... Duckie is an argumentative old bugger, but he is a dear, and is not one of those odious kinds of person.. he is one of us... believe me you don't even know you've been born!

[darkeyes]

Wotta bunch a big babbas sum peeps r... am wastin me bloody breath... withhunts r very unedifyin things.. b proud me lufflies... jus wotch the worm don turn... :rolleyes:

[allbimyself]

OMG! You people really need to get a clue. Whining about LDD because "the community" doesn't agree with him and seeking to get him banned? Sounds a lot like what the school board did... there were only trying to protect their community from a "bad influence" (even if that's not what they publicly said, it IS what they thought).

[csrakate]

OMG! You people really need to get a clue. Whining about LDD because "the community" doesn't agree with him and seeking to get him banned? Sounds a lot like what the school board did... there were only trying to protect their community from a "bad influence" (even if that's not what they publicly said, it IS what they thought).

Well stated, Allbi! I have kept quiet during this pissing match but it has finally evolved into lunacy. So the man doesn't agree with your opinions...big deal! Harsh words may have been spoken...but they were spoken on both sides. Don't turn this into a witch hunt. I think that suggesting that others contact Drew about him is just going too far.

[FalconAngel]

falcon

I am doing nothing to you, you are the one that chooses to take issue with my opinion, and post, implying that its my fault for things.... when in fact I am not responsible for you falcon, you wish to post, you wish to reply and you wish to try and be insulting.....

No, you are not doing anything to me, but when you say something that is clearly either uninformed or just plain stupid, then you should be man enough to argue your point intelligently instead of denial of what you said.



I am the same, I have the right to reply to threads and I choose to reply to threads, therefore it becomes my responsibility for my conduct not others

So then you finally agree that I have an equal right to challenge your unsubstantiated and indefensible arguments.



yes you are responsible for your inability to comprehend things, not me.... as you have the ability to ask and clarify things, and choose not to..... I choose to as others well know.....

Now, you see; this is the problem.

You have made the arrogant presumption that you are smarter and better educated than all who disagree with you. I, on the other hand, have already demonstrated that not only is my comprehension far superior to yours, but so is my ability to communicate my point, intelligently, to everyone but you.

Your problem is that you presume that education is equal to intelligence. It is not. Unlike you, I have both education AND intelligence.

Not that I am more intelligent than everyone here, but I am certainly smarter than you; and have shown it.

So enough already, before you get slapped down again.



and you are correct falcon, telling me I am wrong time and time again and expecting me to believe that when I have watched a number of people prove you wrong, is a sign of low intelligence....

have a nice night

You are not capable of letting anything but your ego run an argument.
You have made these issues a pissing contest over your ego's rule over your head. Instead you argue like a creationist, rather than someone with intelligence.

If you want to bark like a pit bull, you had better be a pit bull.

When you say something that many, if not all, of the people here know to be wrong or just plain ignorant, you should be able to back up your statements with facts.

Instead, you chose to compare the situation here with your appeasement policies in NZ.

Here's a shocker for you........The US does not live under NZ laws. Americans do not subvert what they believe and know to be right for the sake of peace. We stand up and fight; hard, for what is right. We do not take a compromise of human rights for the sake of a moment's peace.

Injustice anywhere is injustice everywhere -- Dr. Martin Luther King.

You have repeatedly offered appeasement, which is just lesser injustice.

A lesser injustice is still injustice. Based on what you have said, to date, you prefer injustice to equality.

So who has proved me wrong? You? No, you haven't. Come up with some proof, say like the unedited posts that dispute what I have said. from sources other that your uninformed opinions.

Put up or shut up.

[FalconAngel]

OMG! You people really need to get a clue. Whining about LDD because "the community" doesn't agree with him and seeking to get him banned? Sounds a lot like what the school board did... there were only trying to protect their community from a "bad influence" (even if that's not what they publicly said, it IS what they thought).

You know? you have a point.
After my last post, I read the posts after the one I responded to and read what you wrote.

I know that he has irritated me beyond reason and my fighting instinct has let me go on, back and forth with the big bone head. I am sure others sensed that as well.

At least I am man enough to admit that I have stuck in this fight far longer than I have needed to and far longer than he deserved responses for.

I don't see a need to necessarily ban him, but I wish that we could do a little sanctioning against him beyond just putting him on iggy. But, on iggy he must go. At least until he learns his lesson.
Because, from time to time, he does have a rare moment where he will say something that actually makes sense.