School can expel lesbian students, court rules

[MCWAY]

why no mention of the "handbook" in the story.  That would seem to make it cut and dried and probably would never have even gone to court.  I suspect if there is a handbook it has nothing in it about being gay.

The school's statement of faith spells out, in no uncertain terms, that homosexuality is wrong. Why would the school's handbook be any different?

It appears you're trying to make grey areas where there are none.

from the story in the first post there seems to be some dispute over what the girls actually admitted.  The principal says one thing and the girls say another:

"According to the principal, who called each girl out of class separately, both admitted they had hugged and kissed each other and told other students they were lesbians. The girls said they admitted only that they loved each other as friends."


I guess things could be worse.  If they were in Iran they'd probably be whipped and then hung.  Luckily the religious nutjobs in this country can only expel you.

Yep! Nothing says "religious nutjob" like having the audacity to ask the students to ABIDE BY THE RULES of the school (which they and their parents agreed they would do) .

[Straw Man]

I'd be curious to see what other kids were expelled and for what reasons. 

These two girls were expelled because homosexuality is considered to be a sin.  Is that correct or am I missing something?

[muscleforlife]

Are you talking about the process or the ultimate decision? 

The Golden Rule doesn't require a Christian school to accept what they believe is immoral behavior.   

was it immoral behavior because of the girl on girl action or the being intimate on school grounds?

If the school gets no public funding, it sets it own rules and standards that the parents and students agree upon when enrolling.


There is always a tinge of hypocrisy, but on the surface follow the rules of the school.
Sandra

[Straw Man]

was it immoral behavior because of the girl on girl action or the being intimate on school grounds?

If the school gets no public funding, it sets it own rules and standards that the parents and students agree upon when enrolling.


There is always a tinge of hypocrisy, but on the surface follow the rules of the school.
Sandra

I don't think there was any charge of sex on school grounds, unless you're going to call hugging sex.   I'm sure other girls in that school hug all the time.  I'm pretty sure the interpretation and enforcement of sinful activity is pretty vague and arbitrary. 

[Straw Man]

sounds like one head of the school is a bit of a weirdo himself.  Can you imagine your child being interrogated about such intimate things without the consent or presence of a parent.   His final summation was that while their was no physical relationship there was a "bond of intimacy" that woudl send a message that the school condones such things. 

Again, if the Lutheran school is concerned about the implication of tacit approval for allowing the girls to remain in school then the same argument must exist for any school that participates in activities with this school.  The concept has to work both ways.

BTW - there doesn't appear to be any written rule that explicitly states this policy.  What it appears to be is one person deciding what activity is "unchristian" and that's about it.

A week after school started, on September 7, 2005,   started, the head of school, Rev.  Gregory Bork,

" individually and separately interrogated the (students) in a closed room, without the parents' knowledge or consent ... and asked (them) inappropriate and personal questions such as whether they loved one another and were lesbians," court documents state. "In such a manner, Bork coerced one of the (students) to admit that she 'loves' the other."

On September 15, 2005, Bork communicated with the girls' parents by letter, stating

that "while there is no open physical contact between the two girls, there is still a bond of intimacy ... characteristic of a lesbian  (relationship). ... Such a relationship is unchristian. To allow the girls to attend (Cal Lutheran) ... would send a message to students and parents that we either condone this situation and/or will not do anything about it. That message would not reflect our beliefs and principles."

Bork goes on to write that the school did not want to seem tolerant to the two alleged lesbian students, as it could lead others into a similar relationship and the school has a spiritual and moral obligation to keep its students from sin.

[tu_holmes]

what im saying is that there are public agencies that recieve funding from the government that "discriminate"...your telling me that groups like the NAACP, gay and lesibian groups dont recieve government funding or support?

Do they?

I think the NAACP is a private entity as well as most LoGos.

If they are not, I'd be interested in seeing that information.

[Dos Equis]

was it immoral behavior because of the girl on girl action or the being intimate on school grounds?

If the school gets no public funding, it sets it own rules and standards that the parents and students agree upon when enrolling.


There is always a tinge of hypocrisy, but on the surface follow the rules of the school.
Sandra

Based on the story, it was the fact they were lesbians, bisexuals, or whatever you want to call it. 

Where is the hypocrisy?  Unless the girls were mentally ill, they knew what the Bible says about homosexuality before they chose to attend a Christian school.  The school enforced its rules.   

[Straw Man]

Based on the story, it was the fact they were lesbians, bisexuals, or whatever you want to call it. 

Where is the hypocrisy?  Unless the girls were mentally ill, they knew what the Bible says about homosexuality before they chose to attend a Christian school.  The school enforced its rules.   

there is no "fact" that they were lesbians.  There is one mans judgement that these two kids had a bond of intimacy that he deemed characterstic of a lesbian relationship.   

It's pretty creepy that an adult man can interrogate two kids about sexual issues without either the consent or presence of their parents.   

Since it was this one mans judgement that this frienship was essentially sinful I'd like to know what other kids have been expelled for sins and exactly what sins merit expulsion.  Surely there must be others and this is not an isolated incident.  If it were that would just seem arbitrary and capricious

[Dos Equis]

It's a fact that one of the girls told the world she was "bisexual" and other said she was "not sure" about her sexual orientation.  It's a fact that the school determined, based on their investigation, that the girls admitted to being lesbians.  That's all that matters. 

This really is a dumb case.  Shouldn't be a national story. 

[MCWAY]

there is no "fact" that they were lesbians.  There is one mans judgement that these two kids had a bond of intimacy that he deemed characterstic of a lesbian relationship.   

It's pretty creepy that an adult man can interrogate two kids about sexual issues without either the consent or presence of their parents.   

Since it was this one mans judgement that this frienship was essentially sinful I'd like to know what other kids have been expelled for sins and exactly what sins merit expulsion.  Surely there must be others and this is not an isolated incident.  If it were that would just seem arbitrary and capricious

This judgment is based on their behavior, what he saw on their Myspace ads, and the minor fact that these girls NEVER DENIED that they were gay. (The principal claims that they admitted to hugging, kissing, and declaring themselves to be lesbians to their classmates).

A simple "No, we ain't gay!!!" ends this entire situation. But, they don't do that. Plus, look at the nature of this suit. It's about whether or not the school can expel students for engaging in homosexual behavior, NOT about whether these girls were falsely accused of being gay, before getting the boot.

[Straw Man]

This judgment is based on their behavior, what he saw on their Myspace ads, and the minor fact that these girls NEVER DENIED that they were gay. (The principal claims that they admitted to hugging, kissing, and declaring themselves to be lesbians to their classmates).

A simple "No, we ain't gay!!!" ends this entire situation. But, they don't do that. Plus, look at the nature of this suit. It's about whether or not the school can expel students for engaging in homosexual behavior, NOT about whether these girls were falsely accused of being gay, before getting the boot.

They never admitted they were gay even when the principal asked them very invasive and private questions.

They only said they loved each other as friends

Hard to imagine Jesus having a problem with love of any kind

[Straw Man]

It's a fact that one of the girls told the world she was "bisexual" and other said she was "not sure" about her sexual orientation.  It's a fact that the school determined, based on their investigation, that the girls admitted to being lesbians.  That's all that matters. 

This really is a dumb case.  Shouldn't be a national story. 

this sentence makes no sense: 

It's a fact that the school determined, based on their investigation, that the girls admitted to being lesbians.

really this whole thing is pretty sick.  You've got a principal asking taking each kid into a room individually and withotu parental consent or presence, allegedly "sitting very close to them" and asking them highly personal questions and invasive questions. 

The conlusion of this individual (from his own letter) was  that "while there is no open physical contact between the two girls, there is still a bond of intimacy ... characteristic of a lesbian (relationship).."

Again, I'd like to know what sins that kids have committed which resulted in expulsion.

Why doe the sin of a loving someone in any manner result in expulsion while other sins do not. 

The history of expulsions would shed more light on this.  Surely other sinful activity must have resulted in previous expulsions.  If not then something ain't right.

[Dos Equis]

this sentence makes no sense: 

really this whole thing is pretty sick.  You've got a principal asking taking each kid into a room individually and withotu parental consent or presence, allegedly "sitting very close to them" and asking them highly personal questions and invasive questions. 

The conlusion of this individual (from his own letter) was  that "while there is no open physical contact between the two girls, there is still a bond of intimacy ... characteristic of a lesbian (relationship).."

Again, I'd like to know what sins that kids have committed which resulted in expulsion.

Why doe the sin of a loving someone in any manner result in expulsion while other sins do not. 

The history of expulsions would shed more light on this.  Surely other sinful activity must have resulted in previous expulsions.  If not then something ain't right.

From the story:  "According to the principal, who called each girl out of class separately, both admitted they had hugged and kissed each other and told other students they were lesbians." 

Pretty cut and dried.  The girls claimed they never said this.  This school disagrees (and the fact one of the girls told the world she was a bisexual support’s the school’s findings).  End of story.   

There is nothing sick about this.  It's crazy.  There are gray areas in the Bible.  Homosexuality is not one of them.  This is the school's business.  It’s about a private religious school enforcing its rules.   

What's really going on here is an attempt by the GLBT movement to demonize anyone who disagrees with their lifestyle, including those whose beliefs are Biblically based.  That's where our society is headed. 

[tu_holmes]

From the story:  "According to the principal, who called each girl out of class separately, both admitted they had hugged and kissed each other and told other students they were lesbians." 

Pretty cut and dried.  The girls claimed they never said this.  This school disagrees (and the fact one of the girls told the world she was a bisexual support’s the school’s findings).  End of story.   

There is nothing sick about this.  It's crazy.  There are gray areas in the Bible.  Homosexuality is not one of them.  This is the school's business.  It’s about a private religious school enforcing its rules.   

What's really going on here is an attempt by the GLBT movement to demonize anyone who disagrees with their lifestyle, including those whose beliefs are Biblically based.  That's where our society is headed. 

*Sigh*

I agree...  to an extent.

I do believe that the private entities who get NO outside financing from our Tax dollars can do whatever they want to.

They are not for profit and as such, have no such requirement to be fair... It's like someone telling you that you have to let gay people into your house.

It's your house and you don't have to do jack.

PERSONALLY, I think it's very sad that the school is doing this... So what if 2 girls are lesbians... big whoop.

Would the school also be upset at incest? Considering that Lot's 2 daughters banged him, I'm guessing that incest is A-OK.

[Dos Equis]

*Sigh*

I agree...  to an extent.

I do believe that the private entities who get NO outside financing from our Tax dollars can do whatever they want to.

They are not for profit and as such, have no such requirement to be fair... It's like someone telling you that you have to let gay people into your house.

It's your house and you don't have to do jack.

PERSONALLY, I think it's very sad that the school is doing this... So what if 2 girls are lesbians... big whoop.

Would the school also be upset at incest? Considering that Lot's 2 daughters banged him, I'm guessing that incest is A-OK.

 

[Straw Man]

Bum,

would you be OK with an adult male interrogating your teenaged daughter about her sexual activities without your consent or presence?

[Straw Man]

From the story:  "According to the principal, who called each girl out of class separately, both admitted they had hugged and kissed each other and told other students they were lesbians." 

Pretty cut and dried.  The girls claimed they never said this.  This school disagrees (and the fact one of the girls told the world she was a bisexual support’s the school’s findings).  End of story.   

There is nothing sick about this.  It's crazy.  There are gray areas in the Bible.  Homosexuality is not one of them.  This is the school's business.  It’s about a private religious school enforcing its rules.   

What's really going on here is an attempt by the GLBT movement to demonize anyone who disagrees with their lifestyle, including those whose beliefs are Biblically based.  That's where our society is headed. 

No need to demonize at all - just calling it like it is.

Their actions are discriminatory but not illegal (at least not so far)

Note - the principals reasoning in his letter includedthe statement that if they let the girls continue to attend it would imply they condoned their behaviour (which again - by the principals own statement was not physical but only a bond of intimacy)

This leads back the point I made earlier.  If the principal was concerned that allowing them to attend would suggest approval by the school then other schools have that same reasoning to shun this school because interaction could suggest that they condone this school discriminatory though legal action.

[Dos Equis]

Bum,

would you be OK with an adult male interrogating your teenaged daughter about her sexual activities without your consent or presence?

That would depend on what my daughter was doing.  My kids aren't dumb enough to tell the world they're engaged in activity that their church and school believe is immoral.  

But this isn't about me or my kids.  The issue is whether the school has the right to enforce its rules.  It does.  The court got it right.    

[MCWAY]

From the story:  "According to the principal, who called each girl out of class separately, both admitted they had hugged and kissed each other and told other students they were lesbians." 

Pretty cut and dried.  The girls claimed they never said this.  This school disagrees (and the fact one of the girls told the world she was a bisexual support’s the school’s findings).  End of story.   

There is nothing sick about this.  It's crazy.  There are gray areas in the Bible.  Homosexuality is not one of them.  This is the school's business.  It’s about a private religious school enforcing its rules.   

What's really going on here is an attempt by the GLBT movement to demonize anyone who disagrees with their lifestyle, including those whose beliefs are Biblically based.  That's where our society is headed. 

There you have it!!! Ironically enough, the GLBT folks in California, that have been howling about Prop. 8 passing, partially due to issues regarding schools being forced to condoning the homosexual lifestyle. They claim that the Prop. 8 supported lied about this issue to help its passage. Suffice it to say, this suit is proof that the concerns that Prop. 8 supporters had were valid.

Again, if these girls sued for being expelled under FALSE pretenses, that would be one thing. But, the simple fact is that they did not. They were asked about whether they were gay, after the principal saw the website. The principal claimed that they both admitted, independently of each other, to hugging and kissing each other and telling other students that they were lesbians.At no time did they DENY being gay.

*Sigh*

I agree...  to an extent.

I do believe that the private entities who get NO outside financing from our Tax dollars can do whatever they want to.

They are not for profit and as such, have no such requirement to be fair... It's like someone telling you that you have to let gay people into your house.

It's your house and you don't have to do jack.

PERSONALLY, I think it's very sad that the school is doing this... So what if 2 girls are lesbians... big whoop.

It is a "big whoop", because it's a Christian school and, as Beach Bum said (and as stated in the school's "Statement of Faith"), homosexuality is wrong.

These girls (and their parents) agreed that they would abide by the rules; it's not as if they didn't know that homosexuality is wrong (or at least, their tenets of the faith deem it as such).

Would the school also be upset at incest? Considering that Lot's 2 daughters banged him, I'm guessing that incest is A-OK.

You guess wrong!! One, the book of Leviticus covers incest as being a no-no. Two, the Bible's reporting a transgression does not mean that such is kosher (you will recall that Lot's daughters got their father DRUNK, prior to doing the deed).

this sentence makes no sense: 

really this whole thing is pretty sick.  You've got a principal asking taking each kid into a room individually and withotu parental consent or presence, allegedly "sitting very close to them" and asking them highly personal questions and invasive questions. 

The conlusion of this individual (from his own letter) was  that "while there is no open physical contact between the two girls, there is still a bond of intimacy ... characteristic of a lesbian (relationship).."

Again, I'd like to know what sins that kids have committed which resulted in expulsion.

Why doe the sin of a loving someone in any manner result in expulsion while other sins do not. 

The history of expulsions would shed more light on this.  Surely other sinful activity must have resulted in previous expulsions.  If not then something ain't right.

Of course, it has. This is getting so much press, simply because it involves two gay girls, and as Bum also mentioned, California GLBT is hell-bent on demonizing anyone who doesn't cower to their homosexual agenda.

Furthermore, "Loving someone" doesn't excuse sinful behavior. David loved Bathsheba; but that didn't excuse or cover for his adultery.

Quit trying to shift the blame to the school and the principal. These girls violated rules that they agreed to follow. An investigation was done. The girls were found to be at fault and got expelled accordingly. What's really sad is that, instead of either admitting that they were gay or denying such (if they weren't), they tried to paint the principal as a pervert, in a feeble attempt to save their behinds.

[Straw Man]

you keep forgetting the principal wrote a letter saying their was no interaction and the girls only admitted loving each other as friends.    This is what the principal said.

BTW - I have no problem if the school can do this but it still discrimination and there is no reason to not condemn it just becaused it's been deemed legal.

The principal sounds like a weird dude.  He should have at least had the common sense to have another adult in the room with him and should have also consulted the parents first.

[mightymouse72]

There you have it!!! Ironically enough, the GLBT folks in California, that have been howling about Prop. 8 passing, partially due to issues regarding schools being forced to condoning the homosexual lifestyle. They claim that the Prop. 8 supported lied about this issue to help its passage. Suffice it to say, this suit is proof that the concerns that Prop. 8 supporters had were valid.

Again, if these girls sued for being expelled under FALSE pretenses, that would be one thing. But, the simple fact is that they did not. They were asked about whether they were gay, after the principal saw the website. The principal claimed that they both admitted, independently of each other, to hugging and kissing each other and telling other students that they were lesbians.At no time did they DENY being gay.


It is a "big whoop", because it's a Christian school and, as Beach Bum said (and as stated in the school's "Statement of Faith"), homosexuality is wrong.

These girls (and their parents) agreed that they would abide by the rules; it's not as if they didn't know that homosexuality is wrong (or at least, their tenets of the faith deem it as such).

You guess wrong!! One, the book of Leviticus covers incest as being a no-no. Two, the Bible's reporting a transgression does not mean that such is kosher (you will recall that Lot's daughters got their father DRUNK, prior to doing the deed).

Of course, it has. This is getting so much press, simply because it involves two gay girls, and as Bum also mentioned, California GLBT is hell-bent on demonizing anyone who doesn't cower to their homosexual agenda.

Furthermore, "Loving someone" doesn't excuse sinful behavior. David loved Bathsheba; but that didn't excuse or cover for his adultery.

Quit trying to shift the blame to the school and the principal. These girls violated rules that they agreed to follow. An investigation was done. The girls were found to be at fault and got expelled accordingly. What's really sad is that, instead of either admitting that they were gay or denying such (if they weren't), they tried to paint the principal as a pervert, in a feeble attempt to save their behinds.

Well said. 

MCWAY speaks the truth.

[MCWAY]

you keep forgetting the principal wrote a letter saying their was no interaction and the girls only admitted loving each other as friends.    This is what the principal said.

He also said that the girls admitted to other students that they were lesbians. Combined that with the MySpace pages, in which one says she's bisexual and the other says she's "not sure" (along with their not denying that they were gay). And, you have more than enough substance to take disciplinary action.

BTW - I have no problem if the school can do this but it still discrimination and there is no reason to not condemn it just becaused it's been deemed legal.

The principal sounds like a weird dude.  He should have at least had the common sense to have another adult in the room with him and should have also consulted the parents first.

It's not just a legality issue. These girls knew what the standards of the school were and agreed to abide by them. They didn't, pure and simple. And, they were expelled as a result.

The principal doesn't sound weird to me. He simply getting to the bottom of an investigation. Again, the girls tried to make him sound like a pervert, to save themselves, when they were the ones at fault. It certainly wouldn't be the first time that students in trouble try to shift the emphasis onto someone else to avoid getting in trouble. Were these girls totally incapable of simply saying, "We ain't gay; we're just friends, buddies, pals, BFFs!!!!"?

[Straw Man]

He also said that the girls admitted to other students that they were lesbians. Combined that with the MySpace pages, in which one says she's bisexual and the other says she's "not sure" (along with their not denying that they were gay). And, you have more than enough substance to take disciplinary action.

It's not just a legality issue. These girls knew what the standards of the school were and agreed to abide by them. They didn't, pure and simple. And, they were expelled as a result.

The principal doesn't sound weird to me. He simply getting to the bottom of an investigation. Again, the girls tried to make him sound like a pervert, to save themselves, when they were the ones at fault. It certainly wouldn't be the first time that students in trouble try to shift the emphasis onto someone else to avoid getting in trouble. Were these girls totally incapable of simply saying, "We ain't gay; we're just friends, buddies, pals, BFFs!!!!"?

I'd be more inclined to believe the idea that the girls knew they were breaking the rules if there was actually a written rule to that effect or at least a precedent for being expelled under for suspicion of "gayness".   

Anyway - all in all it's probably a great lesson for these kids to learn at a young age instead of wasting their time and money belonging to such an institution.  Also a great lesson for any other gay kids in that school to be ashamed and stay in the closet.

[MCWAY]

I'd be more inclined to believe the idea that the girls knew they were breaking the rules if there was actually a written rule to that effect or at least a precedent for being expelled under for suspicion of "gayness".   

Anyway - all in all it's probably a great lesson for these kids to learn at a young age instead of wasting their time and money belonging to such an institution.  Also a great lesson for any other gay kids in that school to be ashamed and stay in the closet.

Ummmm……the “written rule” is part of the school’s Statement of Faith. And, even though I haven’t seen it online, it’s likely also part of the school handbook. Again, as a former student of a Christian high school, I can tell you first-hand that they have such items, that spell out the rules (ESPECIALLY, when it comes to sexual conduct), in no uncertain terms.

They weren't expelled for mere suspicion, Straw Man. What part of that don't you get? They have ADMITTED to being lesbians: They told their classmates and (perhaps) the principal and they put it on their respective MySpace pages, seen by their teacher and at least one other student.

Plus, when asked outright, they never denied it their lesbanism and, instead, tried to accuse the principal of getting fresh with them.

Besides all of that, do you REALLY think that these girls had no clue that their church and school believe homosexuality to be wrong? If that were the case, then they would have either admitted it or denied it. Their silence speaks louder than anything. There was too much evidence for them to try and lie their way out of it; but a blatant admission would have assured their expulsion. So, they gambled that by keeping quiet and claiming the principal was a pervert, they would escape the consequences. They lost that bet.

Plus, as mentioned earlier, the fact that they filed an anti-discrimination suit, NOT A WRONGFUL EXPULSION suit, also proves that the principal was right from the start.

[Dos Equis]

Ummmm……the “written rule” is part of the school’s Statement of Faith. And, even though I haven’t seen it online, it’s likely also part of the school handbook. Again, as a former student of a Christian high school, I can tell you first-hand that they have such items, that spell out the rules (ESPECIALLY, when it comes to sexual conduct), in no uncertain terms.

They weren't expelled for mere suspicion, Straw Man. What part of that don't you get? They have ADMITTED to being lesbians: They told their classmates and (perhaps) the principal and they put it on their respective MySpace pages, seen by their teacher and at least one other student.

Plus, when asked outright, they never denied it their lesbanism and, instead, tried to accuse the principal of getting fresh with them.

Besides all of that, do you REALLY think that these girls had no clue that their church and school believe homosexuality to be wrong? If that were the case, then they would have either admitted it or denied it. Their silence speaks louder than anything. There was too much evidence for them to try and lie their way out of it; but a blatant admission would have assured their expulsion. So, they gambled that by keeping quiet and claiming the principal was a pervert, they would escape the consequences. They lost that bet.

Plus, as mentioned earlier, the fact that they filed an anti-discrimination suit, NOT A WRONGFUL EXPULSION suit, also proves that the principal was right from the start.

Right.  Good points, especially about the basis of their claim.   

Another way to look at this is if the girls would claimed to be lesbians when they applied for admission, the school would denied their applications.