Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I agree with you, but she "demanded to escort her girlfriend and wear a tuxedo". This is a school and she was about bucking the system and rubbing everyone's nose in it, more than just wanting to go with her girlfriend.
The media used the term 'demanded' - mere rhetoric that frames the issue in such a way as to portray the girl in a negative light. The fact is that she shouldn't have had to 'demand' - she shouldn't have had to ask, it shouldn't have even been a question! This shouldn't be an issue.
And once again, I'll say it...you don't speak for EVERY parent in this country, and you DEFINITELY don't speak for me...quit trying to hide your juvenile hatred behind a bunch of knee-jerk whining, and realize you CAN'T and WON'T tell everyone else to hate someone or something because YOU get your undies in a bunch about it...
It's almost like being in a schoolyard sometimes...new kid comes to the school, you see something you don't like about that kid, so you start planting rumors and falsehoods to try and get everybody else to hate that kid...well, we're a little smarter than you give us credit for, and we can sniff out BS a mile away...try something else, because THAT dog don't hunt
Yours seems a very sheltered lifestyle and conveniently religious... I think Leviticus spoke harshly about eating pork as well as a host of other "sins"... I also wonder why Christians always go to the Jewish text to profess their beliefs?.... Nothing in the New Testament against all the .."sins"....
It is a good idea not to accept the rantings of a zealot as facts Some of the things you have repeated are jaw dropping ignorance personified, I can't believe anyone with exposure would actually accept some of the concepts repeated here...
Yours seems a very sheltered lifestyle and conveniently religious... I think Leviticus spoke harshly about eating pork as well as a host of other "sins"... I also wonder why Christians always go to the Jewish text to profess their beliefs?.... Nothing in the New Testament against all the .."sins"....
It is a good idea not to accept the rantings of a zealot as facts Some of the things you have repeated are jaw dropping ignorance personified, I can't believe anyone with exposure would actually accept some of the concepts repeated here...
Your comment about Leviticus is spot on; this speaks directly to the incredible hypocrisy and to the ignorant, bigoted roots of anti-gay sentiment among some fundamentalist Christians. Such fundamentalists aren't really basing their anti-gay feelings in scripture, rather their hate for gays seems to be a result of ignorance, hate and blind allegiance to those who preach such hate... and here is why:
The scriptural basis for being against gays is found in Leviticus; the oft-quoted passage says something to the effect of 'thou shalt not lay with a man as you lay with a woman, it is an abomination.' I'll admit, this is rather clear. However, the problem is what else Leviticus says. You can't cherry pick the passages you want to follow, you can't choose to place weight on one passage of Leviticus to discriminate against a group of people while ignoring other passages!!! So... what else does Leviticus refer to as sinful?
1. Leviticus says wearing clothes made of more than one type of fabric is a sin.
2. It says that eating shellfish is a sin.
3. It says laying in the same bed as a menstruating woman is a sin.
4. It says that slavery is fine!!!
5. It actually lays out rules for how one should purchase slaves, how one should sell slaves and who can be slaves!
So herein lies the problem; the book of the Old Testament used to justify anti-gay bigotry also says that these things are just as sinful as being gay. Yet, the fundamentalists protesting gays aren't protesting polyblend clothing! They probably like eating oysters and mussels! And I highly doubt they are engaged in the international slave trade!
You either take all the rules proscribed, or reject them all. Cherry picking is hypocrisy and is merely a means of disguising ignorant prejudice.
These girls had every right to attend prom as a couple without having to face ostracism. I, as a gay man, should have every right to go to dinner with another guy without being stared at. Those who disagree and do so for reasons of religion need to find some way of reconciling what I've written above with their approach to morality...
What does banning gay marriage have to do with allowing a same-sex couple to attend a prom? Nothing.
Your bigotry is showing again, dear.
The poster mentioned how backward Miss is, I just thought to remind her how many liberal states are also "backward" when given the chance.
Quote:
Originally Posted by eevee
there was no "demanding". she did the right thing and tried to ask permission first. and seriously, what's the big deal about a girl wearing a tux to the prom? what, will poor children's mind be warped beyond repair and the world come to an end? there's no nose rubbing involved, just two girls wanting to go to a prom and an intolerant school board/town/state keeping them from doing so
She obviously wanted to send a message.
Quote:
U.S. District Judge Glen Davidson noted that McMillen has been openly gay since she was in the eighth grade and that she intended to communicate a message by wearing a tuxedo and escorting another girl to the dance.
She was looking for her 15 minutes of fame, at the expense of her classmates. The one should not rule over the many.
She was looking for her 15 minutes of fame, at the expense of her classmates. The one should not rule over the many.
I continue to be amazed at how dismissive people are of this young lady, how completely oblivious people are to the injustice done to her. I'm curious, Sanrene, do you think that blacks who fought for integration, who drank from 'white' drinking fountains, etc. were just looking for their 15 minutes of fame? Were interracial couples that got married when such marriage was illegal simply seeking attention?
Saying that 'the one should not rule over the many' in reference to this specific situation is absurd. Our democracy was founded with the notion that tyranny of the majority should be avoided very much in mind. The few should not suffer as a result of petty whims of the majority. Saying that this young woman was 'ruling' over the many because she wanted to go to prom with her girlfriend is laughable. She was not 'putting the majority out' by her actions; it shouldn't have been an issue. Attending prom with her girlfriend would not have harmed any other students, it would not have ruined their good time, it would not have impinged upon their rights. This is not some bizarre zero-sum game in which she could only have a good time with her girlfriend by 'stealing' the enjoyment of prom from others. She could have been allowed to go and enjoy herself without ruining the enjoyment of others; it is the administration of the school that ruined the fun for all students by choosing to make this an issue instead of doing what was right and simply allowing her to attend with her girlfriend, no questions asked.
I the end she will not be Miss popularity is what she will learn later in life.Rebel without a cuase comes to mind.
Without a cause? Seems like she had a very good cause; she simply wanted to be treated the same as any straight person. Prom may seem petty, but it's representative of a wider, systemic problem. Gay people, gay couples... are treated as second-class citizens. Gay couples should enjoy the same social rights as straight couples; gay couples should be able to go to school dances, they should be able to enjoy a nice date at a restaurant, they should be able to hold hands in public just like straight couples. We're not asking for special treatment, we don't want to be able to do more than straight couples, we aren't seeking attention, we're simply seeking to be able to do the same thing as straight couples. No more, no less.
If straight couples can do X, Y and Z in public without it being viewed as a problem, without drawing attention the gay couples should be able to do X, Y and Z in public as well without it being viewed as a problem or drawing attention. It is not the gay couples who attempt to do what straight couples do that are causing problems, it is the straight individuals who choose to make it an issue.
This is probably a very good lesson for the young woman and her date -- get the hell out of Mississippi. It's a backward wasteland of a state. Anyone who stays there isn't settling for second best, they are settling for last out of 50. It's only slightly better than a 3rd world country.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
