Civil Rights Law Protects L.G.B.T. Workers, Supreme Court Rules

hedrick said:

as far as I can tell from what you've pointed to, she showed a photo of her with her wife. there's no sign that she did more than mention that she was her wife. I would expect that the recent Supreme Court decision would make that clearly legal. the standard for Title Vii is "but for.". that is, if the same thing would have been legal for a male, the school is in trouble. they will now have to accept it or make any pictures of or reference to a spouse a violation. some schools are sufficiently dedicated that I think they might do that. after all we had people advocating the abolition of marriage because gays could do it. I just hope no one outside Christianity blames this insanity on us.

Click to expand...

See quote in #78 please. It was more than just showing a picture.

98cwitr said:

it's more than that

Click to expand...

the article contradicts itself: on the one hand it says: "Mansfield teacher suspended for discussing her sexual orientation with students, officials say"

it then goes on to say:"MISD officials have refused to give a reason for the suspension"

See the photo of a Texas teacher and her wife she showed before being barred from the classroom

Click to expand...

yeah....what a horrible sick picture

the facts remain that she didn't discuss here sexual orientation with students. she showed a picture of herself and her fiancee in fish costumes. That picture was shown at a school wide event where all teachers were encouraged to bring in personal pictures to show students.[/quote][/QUOTE]

98cwitr said:

Propaganda as in normalization, promotion, and advocacy.

Click to expand...

Propaganda is information, especially of a biased or misleading nature (Like recruitment or making claims about "sexual confusion)

Example:



Muslim parents protest gay teacher who 'over-promotes LGBT values' | Metro News

Click to expand...

yep. propaganda

Quartermaine said:

the article contradicts itself: on the one hand it says: "Mansfield teacher suspended for discussing her sexual orientation with students, officials say"

it then goes on to say:"MISD officials have refused to give a reason for the suspension"

Click to expand...

No contradiction. The article makes the claim for suspension, the officials had not, at the time, released an official statement of why.

yeah....what a horrible sick picture

the facts remain that she didn't discuss here sexual orientation with students. she showed a picture of herself and her fiancee in fish costumes. That picture was shown at a school wide event where all teachers were encouraged to bring in personal pictures to show students.

Click to expand...

And said, at the least, "this is my future wife"...I would like to know what else she said.

98cwitr said:

Propaganda as in normalization, promotion, and advocacy.

Example:



Muslim parents protest gay teacher who 'over-promotes LGBT values' | Metro News

Children need to be in moral surroundings, taught moral values, and engaged without sexual confusion. If a student happens to be gay, then that student need not be discriminated against by the teacher or administration. After all, they're people too and deserving of fair and equal protections under the law. Yet, we see we're moving past "anti-discrimination" and into promotion very quickly.

Click to expand...

"Am I OK to be a boy?" What a teachable moment that is. 10 years old, a couple of years from menarche at most. It's time she started to find out about such things. It's mostly ignorance which causes sexual confusion.

98cwitr said:

No contradiction. The article makes the claim for suspension, the officials had not, at the time, released an official statement of why.

Click to expand...

contradiction in that the school district officials were saying the teacher was suspended for
suspended for discussing her sexual orientation but at the same time the school district officials "refused to give a reason for the suspension"

And said, at the least, "this is my future wife"...I would like to know what else she said.

Click to expand...

according to students and others there, that was it.

There's no indication that what she said is more than describing someone as her wife. I know enough people here that would consider it teaching inappropriate sexual content just to say "yes, women can marry other women" that I'm not convinced by statements about inappropriate sexual content, absent further specifics

98cwitr said:

Heterosexual teachers usually aren't bringing their sexuality into a classroom, or even their private lives for that matter.

And yet

Lesbian teacher suspended for telling students about her wife settles with school district

Do you think a teacher's sexuality is relevant in a classroom of children?

Click to expand...

There is nothing wrong with a teacher mentioning their partner or showing a photo of their partner at school. Nothing insidious or harmful about it.

Did the school have a rule against teachers ever mentioning their partners within school grounds?????

Would the school have been troubled had a female teacher mentioned their husband on school grounds?

Speedwell said:

Yes, you wouldn't want them to find out about LGBT lest they decided that's what they wanted to be when they grew up.

Click to expand...

I presume the goal is to make gay kids feel isolated and alone, to feel weird and not to fit in. Make them feel that their lifestyle is shunned and should be hidden from society. That's the way to go. Yay for the Christians and their Christian love.

98cwitr said:

We must raise them to know Him, love Him, and therefore adhere to God's Will and moral law/objectivity.

Click to expand...

I'm not a Christian, so don't really know how the Christian god might think, but...

Wouldn't the Christian god want Christians to be loving and caring of others, to support others by being respectful rather than judging others and wanting them to ostracise others and make others lose their jobs because the Christian doesn't approve of their lifestyle?

In the Christian belief system, aren't everyone sinners?
Should you ostracise everyone, judge everyone, protect your kids from exposure to everyone?

98cwitr said:

We always addressed our female teachers as Ms. growing up, whether they were married or not.

Click to expand...

I didn't. Funny how "anecdotes aren't data" works.

I know you're an atheist, but have you read Romans 1?

Click to expand...

Yes. Relevance?

We'll see how this plays out in America. I'll just send my kids to private school.

Click to expand...

It'll probably play out like other outrage from ultra conservatives when minorities get equal rights. It'll just serve to marginalize the people worrying about it.

stevil said:

I presume the goal is to make gay kids feel isolated and alone, to feel weird and not to fit in. Make them feel that their lifestyle is shunned and should be hidden from society. That's the way to go. Yay for the Christians and their Christian love.

Click to expand...

Suppose you believed that same-gender sex would cause people to be tortured forever in the fires of hell. You might reasonably feel that any step that might lead to it being considered acceptable could cause immense amounts of additional suffering in eternity.

CF rules don't permit us to question the premise in this forum, but I think that's the premise that many of our participants are working from. There are enough differences in basic ideas about humanity, sin, and salvation, that it's difficult to have meaningful discussions involving topics like the current one.

How same-gender sex create this reaction when other things don't is complex, and I'm not the right one to defend it.

hedrick said:

Suppose you believed that same-gender sex would cause people to be tortured forever in the fires of hell. You might reasonably feel that any step that might lead to it being considered acceptable could cause immense amounts of additional suffering in eternity.

Click to expand...

I find the threat of hell and eternal torture ludicrous. It has no utility and logically makes absolutely no sense.
The idea that an all powerful god is so concerned about the private and consensual sexual activities of human adults and would resort to torturing those people forever is not only sadistic but it is entirely absurd. I cannot fatham the amount of focus some people put onto sex, or in particular "the sexual habbits of others"
But the most important thing here is that not everyone in society believes in this.
Why do some Christians want to enforce their religious beliefs onto others?
People can make their own choices. They are entitled to do so. People also need jobs. Why do some Christians want to force people (even non Christians) to live a Christian approved life otherwise be denied the ability to gain employment?

If Christians want to save the after lives of people. Save them from being tortured by their all loving god, then publish a book about it. Open your churches up to non Christians, let them come in if they feel worried and explain the "rules" to them.
You don't need to deny people jobs, you don't need to put laws in place to force people to be Christians. There are other ways to encourage people to freely choose to be Christian, if it is in someway enticing to them.

98cwitr said:

If a student happens to be gay, then that student need not be discriminated against by the teacher or administration. After all, they're people too and deserving of fair and equal protections under the law.

Click to expand...

you say this but your response to how this teacher was treated says the opposite.

stevil said:

But the most important thing here is that not everyone in society believes in this.
Why do some Christians want to enforce their religious beliefs onto others?
People can make their own choices. They are entitled to do so. People also need jobs. Why do some Christians want to force people (even non Christians) to live a Christian approved life otherwise be denied the ability to gain employment?

Click to expand...

I'm an odd one to make this argument, because I reject almost all elements of it. But I think it's important for you to understand the position. (And CF rules don't actually allow us to look at your arguments in detail anyway, except in a couple of forums where you can't post.)

People don't act in a vacuum. The culture around them affects what they do and how they react to their feelings. If you read postings on this topic, the problem is that homosexuality is being "normalized." That is, it's becoming accepted. Suppose it wasn't, as has been true for most of the history of our country. Even if you believe that there's a more or less unchangeable sexual orientation (and not all conservatives do), you don't have to act on it. You can be celibate, marry someone of the opposite gender even though you're not really attracted to them, or pray to God to change your orientation. (Plenty of people in CF report such changes happening.) The general acceptance of homosexuality surely causes people to engage in same-gender sex who otherwise might not have.

So the issue isn't so much individual behaviors. Those can be forgiven, and people have a right to damn themselves anyway. It's things that cause the culture to accept homosexuality. Think of it as a public health issue, a cultural change that results in people being damned who might otherwise be saved. Or at least engaging in behavior that God (supposedly) strongly disapproves of.

The fact is, homosexuality actually has been normalized in much of the country, in a relative short amount of time. Even many Christians think it's OK. If I thought it led to eternal punishment, this would really bother me.

hedrick said:

So the issue isn't so much individual behaviors. Those can be forgiven, and people have a right to damn themselves anyway.

Click to expand...

Absolutely. And we should always remember that society is made up of many people of various beliefs or non belief. Some people might think that people are damned and others might not think that those people are damned at all.

hedrick said:

It's things that cause the culture to accept homosexuality.

Click to expand...

This bit I think is a bit wrong.

Maybe I could be considered as socially liberal???
I consider that society is made up of many different people from different backgrounds, different cultures, with different beliefs. I think this is a great thing about society. Diversity is good. Rather than being shocked at the differences of our neighbors perhaps we ought to be respectful, tolerant and non judgemental? This is not to say that we ought to agree with what people are doing, or promote what people are doing. But instead, take a stance that if it doesn't hurt us and doesn't damage society, then we should just mind our own business.

I don't see it as an "accept homosexuality" thing.
I think we should accept our neighbors no matter what lifestyle they have. We are accepting of people rather than of practices. We accept our neighbors, show them respect, be kind, and not judge.

Treat people as people, as if "all lives matter". People have the right to a means of income. Homosexuals need to buy a house, need to buy food, buy clothes just like non homosexuals. We just shouldn't label people as homosexuals or hetrosexuals, instead, label them as "people". Be respectful, kind and considerate of people.
I hope I'm making my point clear here.

Employing a homosexual, isn't an endorsement of homosexuality. It is merely recognition that a person is needed to do a job and a qualified person is being hired to do the job.
If a person has an internal aversion or distaste of homosexuals, then this is their own personal challenge to overcome. To see those people as people rather than as "homosexuals", to treat them as equals, to give them charity, to give them kindness and not to judge. Wouldn't that be in accordance to Christianities values?

hedrick said:

Think of it as a public health issue,

Click to expand...

Could "atheism" then also be considered a public health issue? or what about all those other religions that aren't the same as the prime minister or the president's? are they all to be considered public health issues that must be solved in the national interest?

hedrick said:

a cultural change that results in people being damned who might otherwise be saved. Or at least engaging in behavior that God (supposedly) strongly disapproves of.

Click to expand...

But remember that society is made up of all sorts of people. Not everyone believes in god, or your particular god.
How do we go about living our lives in a diverse society? How do we play nicely (and respectingly) together?

hedrick said:

The fact is, homosexuality actually has been normalized in much of the country, in a relative short amount of time. Even many Christians think it's OK. If I thought it led to eternal punishment, this would really bother me.

Click to expand...

Sure but, there are other ways rather than to ostricise, shun and shame others.

You can teach your values to your children.
You can try and convince people to become Christians, once they do that they will start to adhere to the Christian rules.
But, please remember that society is made up of people that don't believe what you do.

Anyway, my message above isn't a personal message to you. It is directed at anyone who reads it.
You seem like a reasonable person.

Personally, of course, I'm fine with gays. Our denomination is willing to ordain gays, and our congregation does its best to support any gays that we know about (including particularly our youth). However I think the key Scriptural passage (Rom 1) is actually a conventional Jewish view that Paul is quoting in order to refute it. And I also think that while Paul had genuine experiences with Christ, his writings also reflect his background, and thus aren't always to be equated with Jesus' views. These views are heretical to most CF posters (though from time to time I get the impression that more readers are sympathetic than you might think).

hedrick said:

Personally, of course, I'm fine with gays. Our denomination is willing to ordain gays, and our congregation does its best to support any gays that we know about (including particularly our youth). However I think the key Scriptural passage (Rom 1) is actually a conventional Jewish view that Paul is quoting in order to refute it. And I also think that while Paul had genuine experiences with Christ, his writings also reflect his background, and thus aren't always to be equated with Jesus' views. These views are heretical to most CF posters (though from time to time I get the impression that more readers are sympathetic than you might think).

Click to expand...

Have we, instead of as Lot, choosing to live in Sodom and then flee from it, instead have invited Sodom and Gomorrah to worship with us? Should we then expect God's wrath upon His own House? God will certainly prune His own Vine. Where has the notion of repentance gone?

Ezekiel 16:49

“‘Now this was the sin of your sister Sodom: She and her daughters were arrogant, overfed and unconcerned; they did not help the poor and needy."

Click to expand...

I'll believe Evangelicals want to flee Sodom when they support policies that help the poor.

Tinker Grey said:

Ezekiel 16:49
I'll believe Evangelicals want to flee Sodom when they support policies that help the poor.

Click to expand...

They do, they just do it without government. There's no need for a middle man when you can help the poor directly and in secret.