RECENT  POSTS:  » 'No Law Against Woman Marrying Another Woman', says 103 years ago » What the hell is Brian Brown smoking?! » Their bullcaca will never ENDA » Here it is: 'The Manhattan Declaration' » For Gwen For Lateisha For Angie For Adolphus For Simmie For Ebony For Lawrence For Duanna For... » Far right to issue manifesto, drag Big Apple into rotten attacks » 'Daily' video: Wise beyond years vs. unwise inability to get beyond fears » Well since you did ask, Pete... » Poll: NJ will come down to those who can't/won't make up damn mind » Houston, chronically: City's 2nd anti-gay story in as many days  

« Go back a post || Return to G-A-Y homepage || Haul tail to next post »

11/27/2007

Grown adults go to court against most vulnerable kids

LegallyblechA "pro-family" group calling themselves the Advocates for Faith and Freedom has filed a lawsuit against the state of California over SB 777, the recently-passed law that protects gay students from discrimination:

Christian group sues over California student-discrimination law [AP via Mercury News]

And to understand just how little merit this legal group's case has, you don't have to do a ton of research. In fact, you can consider just these two lines from their complaint (pdf) to see the sort of mentality at play:

This provision is unconstitutionally vague because it places an educator in the impossible position of knowing whether an instruction or activity “promotes a discriminatory bias.” For example, any curriculum or instruction that pre-assumes the existence of a mother and father in a family relationship might be construed to promote a discriminatory bias against persons choosing alternative relationships.

For you see, they are working from the place that says mothers and fathers simply are existing, yet gay couples are "choosing alternative relationships." And this is the sort of mindset that underscores their entire complaint. They present homosexuality as a concept that exists outside of the realm of deserved equality and civility, instead using terms like "special treatment" to refer to those who have made this "choice." And they use the intellectually dishonest tactic of making it seem like they simply have no clue what does and does not constitute actual discrimination, as they attempt to muddy the waters between which side is throwing stones and which is getting hit.

But then again, the schoolyard bully never owned up to stealing our lunch money either.

Advocates for Faith and Freedom's lawsuit (pdf) [AFF]

gay-comment gay-G-A-Y-post gay-email gay-AddThis Feed Button gay-writer-jeremy-hooper


Your thoughts

Would that, by definition, make these people pro-discrimination?

Posted by: Brian | Nov 28, 2007 9:06:14 PM

Talk to us






*Why are my comments not appearing? See the G-A-Y Comments Policy


 
Related Posts with Thumbnails