"Christian" school expels gay student

Here is a synopsis. The story is a bit long.

This Christian school expelled a student after finding out he was gay. Mind you, he kept his homosexuality to himself, but some busy body teacher decided to ask this boy about his sexuality. The student answered honestly, and was then expelled. Some may say, "but, but it's a private school!! They can do anything they want!" Well, maybe not. Problem is, the school accepts taxpayer money from Florida's voucher system. Now the taxpayers of Florida have to fund this school's bigotry. I warned people this would happen if vouchers were allowed to stand.


http://palmbeachpost.printthis.clickability.com/pt/cpt?action=cpt&expire=&urlID=8051963&fb=Y&partnerID=491

It would be in California, which has anti-discrimination laws that are broader than the federal ones (which I never bother to plead because the Cal ones are so much better). Sexual orientation is protected and if they are taking state money they could lose it.

I think that if Florida is using a voucher system that this is an ideal case to demonstrate why public money shouldn't be used at places that foster hatred.

....but are we going to start questioning social service recepients as to their 'correct' views?

(this being relative to the administration in power?).

Let's be honest, we can't completely control were our taxpayer dollars end up.

We can try. It's called 'democracy'.

...but let's be frank.

Do you really have a say in prohibiting your money from being sent to defense contractors?(try selling that to the public!).

Maybe, decrease defense spending(but the money is still building bombs anyways).

As long as we allow the wealthy elites to remain in control, you're right, our money will go to them and we've little say over it. All we can do is try to pull their greedy hands off the levers of authority.

Every organization that gets Federal funds has to meet various criteria and not discriminate. If a school refused to admit Blacks or women, they'd lose funding. It's all in who complains.

Unfortunately, gay discrimination rules aren't as well developed as many others, so it could be a helluva fight. Probably lose in the courts, and have to take it to legislation.

Good luck, and prepare for the long haul. But, gay advocates have been doing that for how long now?

about emperors wearing no clothes?

I know that DU does not like bashing Dem candidates.

But you have to admit that this guy still has to prove himself.

Instant Dem?

Time will tell.

Never could get that grammar thing straight. Anyway, the question stands. If Joe claims to be a Democrat, what is the litmus test for "proving" he is one? When did something like that come into being, and who sets the rules?

Eisenhower comes out of the Army and DECIDES he is a Republican. No one questions his decision, even though Truman had offered to step aside if Ike wanted to run as a Democrat. Why, exactly, does anyone think they have the right to require anyone to "prove" their party affiliation EXCEPT for the voters?

If primary voters do not beleive Clark to be a Democrat, they won't vote for him. That's really the determining factor, isn't it? The choice of party affiliation is up to the individual involved, not some sort of self-appointed "credentials committee."

Anyway, in regard to the thread, using taxpayer's funds to support a school that discriminates against taxpayer's children on the basis of their sexual orientation seems pretty much an open and shut case. You have to wonder what Jesus would be saying to the folks who made that call.

off topic, but if you don't know whether to use who/whom, replace with they/them. So with your phrase "prove himself to they/them" you would say "prove himself to them", so you would also say "prove himself to whom". A more formal way to think of it is they and who are objects, them and whom are subjects, but I often just use the cheat above.

I'm nearly 50 and had never heard that. Thanks.

Jesus taught tolerance and love for all people. Heck, he hung out with tax collectors and ladies of dubious virtue! These so-called "Christians" ought to read their own Bible, especially the parts that Jesus said!

And, sorry, but the one line in Corinthians (written by Paul, who I don't think the right-wingers say is Christ, but you never know) which was sort of anti-gay is always taken out of context. The entire passage refers to ALL manner of sexuality, and the fact that if you're thinking about sex, it is well nigh impossible to also be thinking about spiritual things. And that's the whole point of the passage!

this is what voucher opponents have been saying all along. Private schools have the right to admit or not admit people as they see fit. But if they take the public dime they need to be forced to accept all students.