Mississippi School District Cancels Prom Amid Lesbian Date Controversy

reply to post by JohnnyCanuck


Now don't misinterpret this, I haven't argued the lesbian angle with you yet. I have only tackled the angle of the hormonal teenage girl taking on the Mississippi state supreme court. We can tackle the lesbian part if ya'd like though.

Originally posted by JohnnyCanuck

...are living lives of desperation as a result of hate-filled invective such as yours.

Hold on. The reason people like Constance are living lives of desperation is because they are trying to change everyone ELSE's view instead of accepting that some people just don't accept their perverted lifestyle.

Perhaps people like Constance ought to move to areas where there are more people like her and more accepting of that lifestyle. Their lives would be a lot easier to live and less dramatic.

Yes, it's a segregated, non-idealistic society that's sad in many ways, but it's also more in reality with human nature than expecting everyone to suddenly become all-tolerant and all-accepting.

This story proves that while courts may rule that someone like Constance had her rights violated, they cannot force society to become accepting of a gay lifestyle - at least until they start mind-controlling people. People resistant to it will find ways to resist. And I applaud them for that, whole-heartedly!!!!

[edit on 7-4-2010 by sos37]

Originally posted by sos37instead of accepting that some people just don't accept their perverted lifestyle.

Ironic, I consider your lifestyle perverted by religion and/or bigotry. I am not going to attempt to change that, but nor would I bar you from attending an event based on your beliefs or discriminate against you in any way.

Why does this not work both ways? That is the crux of the problem, isn't it? People like you cannot accept that there are others with differing views, so instead of acknowledging that you can disagree without discriminating, you preach hate and inequality. This is what the issue it, it's not about having more rights or being "special" - it's about being treated as an equal - no more, no less.

Originally posted by sos37
Hold on. The reason people like Constance are living lives of desperation is because they are trying to change everyone ELSE's view instead of accepting that some people just don't accept their perverted lifestyle.

You're wrong. She's not trying to change anyone's views. She's trying to demand her Constitutional rights IN SPITE OF other people's views. It matters not whether the school accepts her lifestyle. But it DOES damn well matter if they violate her rights.

It's like the Constitutional right of religious freedom. I don't agree with religion and I wouldn't have it in my house, but I will DAMN well fight to protect the right of ALL people to practice their religion!

The first amendment isn't just for those with whom you agree. You call me a hypocrite all the time. Look in the mirror, pal.

reply to post by Benevolent Heretic


What constitutional right guarantees her a lesbian prom date? How does the constitution have anything at all to do with this misguided youth and her prom? Please explain this to me.

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic

I'm not even going to go look.

There's plenty of haters right here on ATS - I don't need to read that ignorance elsewhere. But thanks for the update.

The Facebook page is actually quite funny - in a way.

Last time I looked there were over 1200 "friends" in support of Constance.

The only negative I read was a complaint about spamming the page. Everything else got "buried" with the pro-Constance and anti-bigotry posts.

reply to post by sos37


Your projection on what other people think - feel - etc. astounds me.

"Constance was happy with her prom"?

Could you please speak only for yourself?

Originally posted by sos37

Originally posted by JohnnyCanuck
...are living lives of desperation as a result of hate-filled invective such as yours.

Hold on. The reason people like Constance are living lives of desperation is because they are trying to change everyone ELSE's view instead of accepting that some people just don't accept their perverted lifestyle.

Perhaps people like Constance ought to move to areas where there are more people like her and more accepting of that lifestyle. Their lives would be a lot easier to live and less dramatic.

Yes, it's a segregated, non-idealistic society that's sad in many ways, but it's also more in reality with human nature than expecting everyone to suddenly become all-tolerant and all-accepting.

This story proves that while courts may rule that someone like Constance had her rights violated, they cannot force society to become accepting of a gay lifestyle - at least until they start mind-controlling people. People resistant to it will find ways to resist. And I applaud them for that, whole-heartedly!!!!

Gee...substitute 'Negro' or 'mixed race couple' for homosexual and it all has a familiar ring. As our French cousins are wont to say "Plus ca change, plus c'est la meme chose”

self edit to correct my clunky French

[edit on 7-4-2010 by JohnnyCanuck]

Originally posted by Christian Voice
What constitutional right guarantees her a lesbian prom date? How does the constitution have anything at all to do with this misguided youth and her prom? Please explain this to me.

OK. That's easy. She proved that the school board violated her first amendment rights. Read the Judge's Findings in the case. If you start here, you will find the reasons.

For all of the foregoing reasons, the Court finds that Constance's First Amendment rights have been violated and therefore, she has established, by a preponderance of the evidence, a substantial likelihood of success on the merits with respect to her First Amendment claim.

Originally posted by sos37
Yes, it's a segregated, non-idealistic society that's sad in many ways, but it's also more in reality with human nature than expecting everyone to suddenly become all-tolerant and all-accepting.

Don't blame your bigotry on "human nature". It is NOT human nature to hate and fear those who are different than ourselves. That's bigotry and that's TAUGHT.

When I read your posts, I am reminded of this quote:

The doctrine which, from the very first origin of religious dissensions, has been held by bigots of all sects, when condensed into a few words and stripped of rhetorical disguise, is simply this: I am in the right, and you are in the wrong. When you are the stronger, you ought to tolerate me, for it is your duty to tolerate truth; but when I am the stronger, I shall persecute you, for it is my duty to persecute error. ~Thomas Babington Macaulay

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic

When I read your posts, I am reminded of this quote:

The doctrine which, from the very first origin of religious dissensions, has been held by bigots of all sects, when condensed into a few words and stripped of rhetorical disguise, is simply this: I am in the right, and you are in the wrong. When you are the stronger, you ought to tolerate me, for it is your duty to tolerate truth; but when I am the stronger, I shall persecute you, for it is my duty to persecute error. ~Thomas Babington Macaulay

And that quote depends ENTIRELY on the perspective of the individual. In my case, I believe I am right and you are all wrong. I think you are all making a huge deal over someone trying to impose a LIFESTYLE, not who they are, on the unwilling majority of the population. In my mind, YOU are the ones trying to OPPRESS a majority because of what YOU THINK IS RIGHT. So what makes your cause any better?

Be homosexual all you want, but do it in the privacy of your own home. Don't bring that perverse lifestyle into the public where there are already a set of rules and expectations and expect everyone else to change just to accomodate you! This is what I've been trying to say ALL ALONG!

[edit on 7-4-2010 by sos37]

Originally posted by Annee
reply to post by sos37

 

Your projection on what other people think - feel - etc. astounds me.

"Constance was happy with her prom"?

Could you please speak only for yourself?

Actually I'll give you this one. I mis-read a reference BH had posted:

"Two students with learning difficulties were among the seven people at the country club event, McMillen recalls. "They had the time of their lives," McMillen says. "That's the one good thing that come out of this, [these kids] didn't have to worry about people making fun of them [at their prom]."

I misread "they had the time of their lives" to mean all of them including Constance and her date, but I see now it was Constance speaking of the disabled kids.

For the record, I do think it was crappy of the school to include disabled kids in this fake prom (if it was done intentionally) - to me there's a world of difference between them and Constance "Bend to my will" McMillan.

Originally posted by sos37
I think you are all making a huge deal over someone trying to impose a LIFESTYLE, not who they are, on the unwilling majority of the population.

Tell me what that means. "Imposing a lifestyle". What is that? How are gay people "imposing their lifestyle" on you? Are they making you go to gay bars? Are they making you have same-sex relationships? Are they making you watch "Brokeback Mountain"?

Tell me how, specifically, gay people impose their lifestyle on you.

Look, I don't want to see fat women in tight shorts either, but I can't and wouldn't relegate them to their homes or outlaw it. I avert my eyes. There are people out there who aren't like you, honey, who have the VERY same rights that you do as citizens of this country. If YOU can't handle seeing it, then it's YOUR responsibility to turn your head. You don't have the power to control their lives.

In my mind, YOU are the ones trying to OPPRESS a majority because of what YOU THINK IS RIGHT.

What am I oppressing? Can you speak your mind? Yes. Can you hate gays? Yes. Can you violate their rights? NO! So, I'm oppressing your ability to violate people's rights. Yes, I am! And proudly so! You CANNOT do that in America. You CANNOT violate another citizen's Constitutional rights just because you disagree with them or get queasy when you look at them. Look the other way.

Be homosexual all you want, but do it in the privacy of your own home.

Only if heterosexuals are also restricted to the privacy of their own homes. No holding hands, kissing your wife, dancing with her, revealing your children, or giving the appearance that you're heterosexual.

Don't bring that perverse lifestyle into the public where there are already a set of rules and expectation and expect everyone else to change just to accomodate you!

Sorry, honey. "Perverse lifestyle" is a moral judgment and you've every right to have it. But homosexuality is already in the public. The social rules are changing, as they have many times in the past. You can accept it or not, but it's happening.

This isn't about accommodating me. I'm straight. It's about equal treatment of ALL citizens under the law. Like it or not, accept it or not, I don't care.

This is what I've been trying to say ALL LONG!

I know. I hear you. I just strongly disagree with you and I have the Constitution on my side.

Originally posted by sos37

Originally posted by Annee
reply to post by sos37

 

Your projection on what other people think - feel - etc. astounds me.

"Constance was happy with her prom"?

Could you please speak only for yourself?

Actually I'll give you this one. I mis-read a reference BH had posted:

"Two students with learning difficulties were among the seven people at the country club event, McMillen recalls. "They had the time of their lives," McMillen says. "That's the one good thing that come out of this, [these kids] didn't have to worry about people making fun of them [at their prom]."

I misread "they had the time of their lives" to mean all of them including Constance and her date, but I see now it was Constance speaking of the disabled kids.

For the record, I do think it was crappy of the school to include disabled kids in this fake prom (if it was done intentionally) - to me there's a world of difference between them and Constance "Bend to my will" McMillan.

What's the difference to you?

Both sets of students gay and disabled are treated like dirt in this town.

The hate don't end with gays in this mississippi town. Apparently it extends to anyone these bigots think are different.

But look at you and your compassion for the disabled kids.

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic

I know. I hear you. I just strongly disagree with you and I have the Constitution on my side.

That pesky Constitution. It doesn't take sides.

Equality for all.

reply to post by Benevolent Heretic


I read absolutely nothing that lead me to believe that her constitutional rights had been violated. She couldn't bring her gay lover to a prom as a demonstration. I would stand behind the school until the end. The school is not the place for it. And since when are minors guaranteed rights under the constitution?

I didn't want to reply and I know most of you will say why did I but...

Part of me feels that uniform is uniform... when one enters a 'uniform' agreement then one has to accept it. If you purchase or obtain tickets to a 'uniform' event where FEMALES are expected to wear a chicken mask and MALES are expected to wear a duck mask then don't get your knickers in a twist about being 'forced' to conform... the rules or in this case uniform has been set so either don't go or conform. It's like accepting free tickets to a Liverpool football match and then insisting you turn up in the opposing teams strip... it's just impolite and rude... shows a lack of class and maturity in all honesty.

The other part of me, the BiPoly part that has had to explain to morons for the whole of my life that I am indeed of the human race and yes I can raise children, run a business, keep a husband and still have feelings for another female wants to argue that she should be able to represent herself at HER school function dressed in clothes SHE feels comfortable in with the person SHE loves.

But then does she normally trapes around in a tuxedo? I am guessing not...

I am sadly more leaning towards the 'token teen snogging in the supermarket for effect' syndrome rather than the liberated, comfortable lesbian fighting for 'our' rights...

I don't think the school were within their rights to cancel a school prom due to one persons 'costume & guest' choices... I do however think... no sorry I FEEL that this young lady is more reaction than demonstration.

If it were me?

I would have turned up wearing what I wanted with whom I wanted on my arm... if I was then turned away THEN would be the fight of the media...

namaste xx

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic

Originally posted by sos37
I think you are all making a huge deal over someone trying to impose a LIFESTYLE, not who they are, on the unwilling majority of the population.

Tell me what that means. "Imposing a lifestyle". What is that? How are gay people "imposing their lifestyle" on you? Are they making you go to gay bars? Are they making you have same-sex relationships? Are they making you watch "Brokeback Mountain"?

Tell me how, specifically, gay people impose their lifestyle on you.

This whole case is a HUGE example of one girl trying to impose her gay lifestyle on a school that already had a set of rules established. That she took the fight to the ACLU and was okay with the prom being cancelled for everyone says that she's selfish enough to try and impose HER will, HER way on everyone else there.

The rest of the kids in that town must agree because not one of them tipped her off about the private prom. When the ACLU got involved, they and the MSM turned it into a Fulton, Miss. versus the U.S. issue, when the reality is that in most states a majority are still uneasy with homosexuality, at least in terms of same-sex marriage. Even California just last year passed Prop 8! It may have been a slim majority but CA is one of the most liberal states in the nation.

And as for the Constitution - if the Constitution is on your side then why won't Congress amend the Constitution to include all of the U.S.? Right now the power is still up to the individual states (where I believe it should be). Why won't the Supreme Court hear gay marriage cases?

[edit on 7-4-2010 by sos37]

Originally posted by Christian Voice
I read absolutely nothing that lead me to believe that her constitutional rights had been violated.

Are you a judge? A constitutional lawyer? A paralegal? A legal secretary, maybe? I'm not asking you to make a judgment on the case. I just showed you the judge's findings in the case. And I'm going to take the judges word over yours, if that's ok with you.

Originally posted by sos37
This whole case is a HUGE example of one girl trying to impose her gay lifestyle on a school that already had a set of rules established.

Tell me how, specifically, she tried to impose her lifestyle on the school. Was she trying to make all the girls wear tuxes? Did she try to make all the students attend with same-sex partners? Did she try to make them watch a gay film? If anything, the school was imposing a strait lifestyle on HER.

BTW, she was NOT OK with the prom being canceled. That was the school's move entirely. She sued to have the prom reinstated, if you'll remember. So, she was NOT ok with it.

in most states a majority are still uneasy with homosexuality, at least in terms of same-sex marriage.

There was a time when people were "uneasy" with black folks, too. And interracial marriage. In fact, many still are. It matters not that people are "uneasy". You don't have a right not to be "uneasy".

What you're advocating here sounds eerily like political correctness. "Don't show that you're gay because people will be offended"!

And as for the Constitution - if the Constitution is on your side then why won't Congress amend the Constitution to include all of the U.S.?

It doesn't need to be amended to guarantee equal protection under the law of all US citizens. It already says that. We're not talking about marriage here. Don't change the subject. Constance isn't trying to get married.

Now, can you answer my question? How, specifically, did Constance try to impose her lifestyle on the school.


[edit on 4/7/2010 by Benevolent Heretic]

Originally posted by sos37

This whole case is a HUGE example of one girl trying to impose her gay lifestyle on a school that already had a set of rules established.

I wonder how many parents would have lost their collective nuts had this event been championed as a gay-positive event from the git-go? And while I really do hate to invoke the 'you people' clause, I also wonder why 'you people' are so afraid of what other people are doing with their naughty bits?

It's downright unseeming.

We have gay marriage up here...some folks still wince at homosexuality, but that's a natural thing. The sun still comes up every day, a whole lot of people are happier about themselves, and altogether, it's no big whoop.

Seeing this fooferah play out the way it has is like an anthropological study...and it will be studied. And people will shake their heads...and not over a gay girl who wanted to bring her girlfriend to a dance.

It's a vibrant new millennium...y'all might wanna catch up. (no rainbow joke here)