School gets sued for sexual orientation discrimination

[DaN]

Some one please explain were the school went wrong.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

They have a duty of care

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Its for her own safty that the parents know if she's involved with someone and who.

[AThousandLies]

No, wait, I'm not going to completely sit on the fence here.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The school did not NEED to tell the parents that it was with another girl. That is the daughter's responsibility. They could've easily and should've not been too specific in that regard - and just said it was with another student. They should know that that's a sensitive subject, and if they actually were as responsible and caring for the student's welfare as they're meant to be, they would have realised that it was not necessary to include that detail.

[DaN]

What makes you think the parents dont have a right to know.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Her parents might not trust the other girl they have a right to know who there daughter is seein. Randomly leaving details out is NOT duty of care.

[AThousandLies]

What makes you think the parents dont have a right to know.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Her parents might not trust the other girl they have a right to know who there daughter is seein. Randomly leaving details out is NOT duty of care.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

So the parents need to know if they were tounging, if her hands were in her pants, or any other manner of details? There are so many other details that didn't need to be explained - yet they chose to mention that it was with another girl.

[____]

Just saying it was another student would've been enough.

 

 

 

But whatever, they have every right to disclose the exact details of what happened if they want to.

[Guest GhostRanger]

 

 

 

You'd inform students if someone was walking around with any other horrible disease.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Ladies and gentlemen: I give you ignorance.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

So ignore his ignorance and respond to the other intelligence rebuttles to YOUR ignorance.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Fine, I'll swallow my pride. Maybe I was wrong here. But I see no evidence indicating whether other people did or did not partake in expression of affection to the same extent that this girl and her girlfriend did. So until otherwise I'm going to sit on the fence for this one.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

You just proved my point yourself. There is no evidence that the school is singling this girl out - only that they told "sensitive matter" to her parents. Unless their is evidence of the school singling her out, we have to assume there isn't. We are guaranteed innocence until proven guilty, remember?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

No, wait, I'm not going to completely sit on the fence here.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The school did not NEED to tell the parents that it was with another girl. That is the daughter's responsibility. They could've easily and should've not been too specific in that regard - and just said it was with another student. They should know that that's a sensitive subject, and if they actually were as responsible and caring for the student's welfare as they're meant to be, they would have realised that it was not necessary to include that detail.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

See...when you keep talking you forget everything that was said before.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

This lawsuit has nothing to do with what the school needed to do and what the school did not need to do.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The point is the school has the RIGHT to do what they did, whether or not if you think it was necesarry - and therefore they did break a law. Since they did not break a law, the lawsuit has no grounds.

[AThousandLies]

 

 

 

 

You'd inform students if someone was walking around with any other horrible disease.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Ladies and gentlemen: I give you ignorance.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

So ignore his ignorance and respond to the other intelligence rebuttles to YOUR ignorance.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Fine, I'll swallow my pride. Maybe I was wrong here. But I see no evidence indicating whether other people did or did not partake in expression of affection to the same extent that this girl and her girlfriend did. So until otherwise I'm going to sit on the fence for this one.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

You just proved my point yourself. There is no evidence that the school is singling this girl out - only that they told "sensitive matter" to her parents. Unless their is evidence of the school singling her out, we have to assume there isn't. We are guaranteed innocence until proven guilty, remember?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

How can we assume one scenario and totally disregard the other when each have their validity?

[Guest GhostRanger]

How can we assume one scenario and totally disregard the other when each have their validity?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

But I see no evidence indicating whether other people did or did not partake in expression of affection to the same extent that this girl and her girlfriend did.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Innocent until proven guily, are we not? Anyway, unless I can be told otherwise (read below) that is beside the point in this case.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I'm having trouble finding in the lawsuit where it says the school was punishing only her and not straight couples. In fact, the girl is on record saying that this lawsuit is about the fact that they released the information to their parents - which is NOT against the law. Please address that point in your next response instead of avoiding it.

[logic-is-overrated]

Is there a transcript of the conversation between the parents and school officials anywhere? How exactly did the information of the girls sexual orientation come across? Did they just call her parents into the office and say, "hey guess what you're daughters a homosexual"? Did the parents ask who she was engaging with? I mean if the only point you have left is that they didn't have to tell her, then i'd like to know how they did tell her.

[AThousandLies]

 

How can we assume one scenario and totally disregard the other when each have their validity?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

But I see no evidence indicating whether other people did or did not partake in expression of affection to the same extent that this girl and her girlfriend did.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Innocent until proven guily, are we not? Anyway, unless I can be told otherwise (read below) that is beside the point in this case.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I'm having trouble finding in the lawsuit where it says the school was punishing only her and not straight couples. In fact, the girl is on record saying that this lawsuit is about the fact that they released the information to their parents - which is NOT against the law. Please address that point in your next response instead of avoiding it.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Want me to address it? Okay, well, I haven't been presented with a law that states that schools have every right to deliver any and all information to the parents of the student. If there is a law stating that, than I'd say it's pretty stupid.

[Guest GhostRanger]

 

 

How can we assume one scenario and totally disregard the other when each have their validity?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

But I see no evidence indicating whether other people did or did not partake in expression of affection to the same extent that this girl and her girlfriend did.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Innocent until proven guily, are we not? Anyway, unless I can be told otherwise (read below) that is beside the point in this case.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I'm having trouble finding in the lawsuit where it says the school was punishing only her and not straight couples. In fact, the girl is on record saying that this lawsuit is about the fact that they released the information to their parents - which is NOT against the law. Please address that point in your next response instead of avoiding it.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Want me to address it? Okay, well, I haven't been presented with a law that states that schools have every right to deliver any and all information to the parents of the student. If there is a law stating that, than I'd say it's pretty stupid.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

1) When you are a minor your parents have every right to know whatever they want about you.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

2) When you are at school you submit to the school and THEIR right to inform your parents of everything that goes on at school. If you are displaying affection with your girlfriend or boyfriend on campus, the school has the right to tell your parents that.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

When you go to school, you are submittnig to the legal authority of the school. And as a minor, you are under the legal authority of your parents. Therefore: the school has broken no law. When no law is broken, no lawsuit has a base for the case.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Another point that I guess you haven't realized is freedom of expression. Anyone has the right to tell anyone what they want. If I saw someone showing affection to their girlfriend I could go to their parents and say "your daughter is homosexual." We have the right to do that. So even if you ignore the fact that the school has the right to tell the parents of everything that goes on (whether you think it needs to be done or not), you can't ignore the fact that the Bill of Rights protects everyone's right to free speech. Where are your complaints when magazines release private information about celebreties everyday? Of course you don't complain! Because if you do something in public, everyone who wants to has the right to tell people about.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Your only argument in defense is "well that's a stupid rule." :roll:

[AThousandLies]

 

 

 

How can we assume one scenario and totally disregard the other when each have their validity?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

But I see no evidence indicating whether other people did or did not partake in expression of affection to the same extent that this girl and her girlfriend did.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Innocent until proven guily, are we not? Anyway, unless I can be told otherwise (read below) that is beside the point in this case.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I'm having trouble finding in the lawsuit where it says the school was punishing only her and not straight couples. In fact, the girl is on record saying that this lawsuit is about the fact that they released the information to their parents - which is NOT against the law. Please address that point in your next response instead of avoiding it.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Want me to address it? Okay, well, I haven't been presented with a law that states that schools have every right to deliver any and all information to the parents of the student. If there is a law stating that, than I'd say it's pretty stupid.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Another point that I guess you haven't realized is freedom of expression. Anyone has the right to tell anyone what they want. If I saw someone showing affection to their girlfriend I could go to their parents and say "your daughter is homosexual." We have the right to do that. So even if you ignore the fact that the school has the right to tell the parents of everything that goes on (whether you think it needs to be done or not), you can't ignore the fact that the Bill of Rights protects everyone's right to free speech. Where are your complaints when magazines release private information about celebreties everyday? Of course you don't complain! Because if you do something in public, everyone who wants to has the right to tell people about.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

You really think freedom of expression is exercised? So I have the right to tell you that I'm going to kill your significant other, that anybody not white is the scum of the earth and that all women should serve men?

[Guest GhostRanger]

You really think freedom of expression is exercised? So I have the right to tell you that I'm going to kill your significant other, that anybody not white is the scum of the earth and that all women should serve men?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

You have a bad habbit of flat out ignoring the points where you are wrong. Freedom of speech and expression is excersized actually, as long as you are not threatening anyone else's well being. This is clearly not a case where anyone's life was threatened. In fact, there are several groups that do say the latter of the two (non whites being the scum of the earth and that all women should serve men) - as long as they are not threatening anyone's life, they do have the right to say it. The KKK is still active in America and they have the right to be as long as they don't harm anyone.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

You still have yet to defend to me how this lawsuit has any based besides saying "the law is stupid." Frankly, no one cares if you think its stupid. The school has the right to do what it did - as clearly explained - so please tell us where teh BASE for this lawsuit is.

[AThousandLies]

 

You really think freedom of expression is exercised? So I have the right to tell you that I'm going to kill your significant other, that anybody not white is the scum of the earth and that all women should serve men?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

You have a bad habbit of flat out ignoring the points where you are wrong. Freedom of speech and expression is excersized actually, as long as you are not threatening anyone else's well being. This is clearly not a case where anyone's life was threatened. In fact, there are several groups that do say the latter of the two (non whites being the scum of the earth and that all women should serve men) - as long as they are not threatening anyone's life, they do have the right to say it. The KKK is still active in America and they have the right to be as long as they don't harm anyone.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

You still have yet to defend to me how this lawsuit has any based besides saying "the law is stupid." Frankly, no one cares if you think its stupid. The school has the right to do what it did - as clearly explained - so please tell us where teh BASE for this lawsuit is.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

One is allowed to express feelings/thoughts/opinions as long as they do not harm the welfare of others? Did the school not see that informing the parents of a sensitive issue such as this could've had severely damaging repurcussions?

[MyPurpleCrayon]

 

 

 

One is allowed to express feelings/thoughts/opinions as long as they do not harm the welfare of others? Did the school not see that informing the parents of a sensitive issue such as this could've had severely damaging repurcussions?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

This is a very pointless argument. ATL is never going to understand what Ghost is saying... It just keeps going in circles.

[Guest GhostRanger]

 

 

You really think freedom of expression is exercised? So I have the right to tell you that I'm going to kill your significant other, that anybody not white is the scum of the earth and that all women should serve men?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

You have a bad habbit of flat out ignoring the points where you are wrong. Freedom of speech and expression is excersized actually, as long as you are not threatening anyone else's well being. This is clearly not a case where anyone's life was threatened. In fact, there are several groups that do say the latter of the two (non whites being the scum of the earth and that all women should serve men) - as long as they are not threatening anyone's life, they do have the right to say it. The KKK is still active in America and they have the right to be as long as they don't harm anyone.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

You still have yet to defend to me how this lawsuit has any based besides saying "the law is stupid." Frankly, no one cares if you think its stupid. The school has the right to do what it did - as clearly explained - so please tell us where teh BASE for this lawsuit is.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

One is allowed to express feelings/thoughts/opinions as long as they do not harm the welfare of others? Did the school not see that informing the parents of a sensitive issue such as this could've had severely damaging repurcussions?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Jeez...CAN YOU NOT READ?! As a minor, the school has complete authority to tell the parents anything that happens while at school.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

It was obviously not THAT private or sensitive if the girl had no problem flaunting it in a public place such as school. She should know the consequences and should have acted accordingly.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Once again, you have avoided the fact that the school has acted in its authority and therefore no base for a lawsuit can exist.

[AThousandLies]

 

 

 

You really think freedom of expression is exercised? So I have the right to tell you that I'm going to kill your significant other, that anybody not white is the scum of the earth and that all women should serve men?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

You have a bad habbit of flat out ignoring the points where you are wrong. Freedom of speech and expression is excersized actually, as long as you are not threatening anyone else's well being. This is clearly not a case where anyone's life was threatened. In fact, there are several groups that do say the latter of the two (non whites being the scum of the earth and that all women should serve men) - as long as they are not threatening anyone's life, they do have the right to say it. The KKK is still active in America and they have the right to be as long as they don't harm anyone.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

You still have yet to defend to me how this lawsuit has any based besides saying "the law is stupid." Frankly, no one cares if you think its stupid. The school has the right to do what it did - as clearly explained - so please tell us where teh BASE for this lawsuit is.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

One is allowed to express feelings/thoughts/opinions as long as they do not harm the welfare of others? Did the school not see that informing the parents of a sensitive issue such as this could've had severely damaging repurcussions?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Jeez...CAN YOU NOT READ?! As a minor, the school has complete authority to tell the parents anything that happens while at school.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

It was obviously not THAT private or sensitive if the girl had no problem flaunting it in a public place such as school. She should know the consequences and should have acted accordingly.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Once again, you have avoided the fact that the school has acted in its authority and therefore no base for a lawsuit can exist.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Well then perhaps a change to the law is necessary? Considering the case succeeded, and there are plans for other legislations preventing any orientation-discrimination, I think it may be on the way.

[Lionheart_0]

 

It still does not excuse the princeiple from realesing private information of the girls sexual oriantation

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Wow this is pathetic... you really make me want to kill myself.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

"Your daughter was caught making out with her boyfriend today during school, this is why she is suspended"

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

"Your daughter was caught making out with her girlfriend today during school, this is why she is suspended"

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

omg DISCRIMINATIONSSSS ACLU PLZ SAVE US

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I really dont know what your getting at...

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

What im saying is the principles could of done this "Your doughter was making out with another student today, this si why she is suspended". Now, does this realese any private information, nor not tell the parents what was going on. no.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Perahsp its just my way of thinking, but i think privacy is a right, not privilige.

[stevester77]

 

 

 

 

One is allowed to express feelings/thoughts/opinions as long as they do not harm the welfare of others? Did the school not see that informing the parents of a sensitive issue such as this could've had severely damaging repurcussions?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

This is a very pointless argument. ATL is never going to understand what Ghost is saying... It just keeps going in circles.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I agree.. someone *coughATLcough* needs to swallow their pride and admit they were wrong... and actually stick with their conclusion this time :roll: .

[Astralinre]

 

 

It still does not excuse the princeiple from realesing private information of the girls sexual oriantation

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Wow this is pathetic... you really make me want to kill myself.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

"Your daughter was caught making out with her boyfriend today during school, this is why she is suspended"

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

"Your daughter was caught making out with her girlfriend today during school, this is why she is suspended"

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

omg DISCRIMINATIONSSSS ACLU PLZ SAVE US

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I really dont know what your getting at...

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

What im saying is the principles could of done this "Your doughter was making out with another student today, this si why she is suspended". Now, does this realese any private information, nor not tell the parents what was going on. no.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Perahsp its just my way of thinking, but i think privacy is a right, not privilige.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

They released the information to her parents! If she has no problem with publically displaying her affection with her girlfriend in front of everyone at school, then she has NO basis for keeping that information private from her parents, who have raised her, probally love her more than anyone else does, and have every right to know what she's doing. She lost her right to privacy the moment she did these things in public.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Sorry for the large font, but this is driving me crazy.

[Lionheart_0]

 

 

 

It still does not excuse the princeiple from realesing private information of the girls sexual oriantation

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Wow this is pathetic... you really make me want to kill myself.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

"Your daughter was caught making out with her boyfriend today during school, this is why she is suspended"

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

"Your daughter was caught making out with her girlfriend today during school, this is why she is suspended"

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

omg DISCRIMINATIONSSSS ACLU PLZ SAVE US

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I really dont know what your getting at...

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

What im saying is the principles could of done this "Your doughter was making out with another student today, this si why she is suspended". Now, does this realese any private information, nor not tell the parents what was going on. no.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Perahsp its just my way of thinking, but i think privacy is a right, not privilige.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

They released the information to her parents! If she has no problem with publically displaying her affection with her girlfriend in front of everyone at school, then she has NO basis for keeping that information private from her parents, who have raised her, probally love her more than anyone else does, and have every right to know what she's doing. She lost her right to privacy the moment she did these things in public.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Sorry for the large font, but this is driving me crazy.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

And where is it written that she lost these rights?

[Astralinre]

 

 

 

 

It still does not excuse the princeiple from realesing private information of the girls sexual oriantation

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Wow this is pathetic... you really make me want to kill myself.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

"Your daughter was caught making out with her boyfriend today during school, this is why she is suspended"

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

"Your daughter was caught making out with her girlfriend today during school, this is why she is suspended"

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

omg DISCRIMINATIONSSSS ACLU PLZ SAVE US

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I really dont know what your getting at...

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

What im saying is the principles could of done this "Your doughter was making out with another student today, this si why she is suspended". Now, does this realese any private information, nor not tell the parents what was going on. no.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Perahsp its just my way of thinking, but i think privacy is a right, not privilige.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

They released the information to her parents! If she has no problem with publically displaying her affection with her girlfriend in front of everyone at school, then she has NO basis for keeping that information private from her parents, who have raised her, probally love her more than anyone else does, and have every right to know what she's doing. She lost her right to privacy the moment she did these things in public.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Sorry for the large font, but this is driving me crazy.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

And where is it written that she lost these rights?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

If you do something in PUBLIC, it's no longer PRIVATE. See?

[Lionheart_0]

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

If you do something in PUBLIC, it's no longer PRIVATE. See?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

No i dont see. She chose to display her affection on school property, which is not public. Dont know about you, bu tall schools (even highschools) have a policy that if your going in and your not 1. a student 2. a staff memeber, you must cheak in with the office to make sure you have special access, and to clear you. thie means it was public in the school grounds, but not in the general public.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Non the less, where is it written that her information can be given everywhere?

[Astralinre]

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

If you do something in PUBLIC, it's no longer PRIVATE. See?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

No i dont see. She chose to display her affection on school property, which is not public. Dont know about you, bu tall schools (even highschools) have a policy that if your going in and your not 1. a student 2. a staff memeber, you must cheak in with the office to make sure you have special access, and to clear you. thie means it was public in the school grounds, but not in the general public.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Non the less, where is it written that her information can be given everywhere?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I hate to resort to this, but

 

 

 

Public: Open to the knowledge or judgment of all: a public scandal.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

in public: In such a way as to be visible to the scrutiny of the people

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Main Entry: pubÃÆââ¬Å¡Ãâ÷lic

 

 

 

Function: adjective

 

 

 

1 a : exposed to general view

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

A school may private property, but what goes on is still in public, that is, in front of people. An action is no longer private when it is done in front of people.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

And it doesn't matter if "it is written" that her information can be given or not, she chose to make it public, therefore it is no longer private information. If I post my credit card number in the hallway at school, do I have the right to complain if people use it?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Anyway, this debate is going in circles, I'm tired, and I have exams this week. I'm going to bed.

[AThousandLies]

 

 

 

 

 

One is allowed to express feelings/thoughts/opinions as long as they do not harm the welfare of others? Did the school not see that informing the parents of a sensitive issue such as this could've had severely damaging repurcussions?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

This is a very pointless argument. ATL is never going to understand what Ghost is saying... It just keeps going in circles.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I agree.. someone *coughATLcough* needs to swallow their pride and admit they were wrong... and actually stick with their conclusion this time :roll: .

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Hey, I haven't seen any laws the detail that the school is allowed to disclose any and all information to parents. If that's the case, than the law suit didn't have much ground - but I also think that the school shouldn't have the right to tell parents whatever they want.