posted on Mar, 11 2010 @ 03:43 PM
Late to the party, but interested in making a comment here....
There are several core issues being debated here, some of which are (in my opinion) beside the point of the OP (assuming the title is the defining
element "Mississippi School District Cancels Prom Amid Lesbian Date Controversy").
First and foremost is that societal constraints and cultural norms are not subject to 'natural law.' If a people collectively wish to impose a
policy on their community, it is up to the community to change it, should they so desire.
What is or isn't natural about this person's behavioral choices are outside of our ability to control; and as a nation, we are generally committed
to the concept that such matters are not subject to government rule unless they represent meaningful danger to others.
The second point I would like to make is that to live within a society one must be willing to abide by its constraints, and we have social
institutions and legal constructs to challenge those we wish to reject or change. So this does not amount to some monumental example of
institutionalized homophobia. It is a remnant of a different culture that has yet to be addressed by the people of Mississippi, by choice or
otherwise.
The third point I would like to make is that this young lady (is that misogynistic to say?) is pursuing a rather aggressively disruptive activist
course of action. As Frederick Douglas once said to a young admirer who wanted to make a difference in the world, "Agitate, agitate!" Logic
dictates that agitation of the status quo will inevitably be ... agitating. Mission accomplished.
The fourth point (are we tired yet?) is that we are talking about POLICY which is often misrepresented by officiates and office drones as "law". It
is not law. The escalation of this event into a national spectacle was avoidable, but evidently, a matter of someone's desire to be politically
relevant. It may have been the girl, it may have been the school board, but in either case it is the business of Mississippi either way.
If the school was to have hosted this prom, what would have been the net result? The tragic forbearance of a policy that belongs in the history
books?
Had the girl not been admitted because of her attire or companion, what would it have been, a homophobic-frenzy holocaust?
The drama is a bit over the top.
If I had been a class-mate I personally would have asked her why she had to exacerbate this issue to the point of excluding everyone from the prom?
Perhaps she could have convinced me that it was a worthwhile cause - maybe not. Some seem inclined to characterize this as student activism. I am
disinclined to accept the net result as anything other than a Jerry Springeresque spectacle.
I am certain the lawyers will use their media resources to elevate the friction. It enhances their political relevance.
But in the end, a bunch of kids who would have liked to have partied as they planned have to forgo that luxury. Which is what a prom is. A luxury.
You know, the kids who can't afford nice clothes and tuxes have to go without those luxuries all the time... who weeps for them? Irrelevant I
know...
But really people, will we remember this 'travesty' of intransigent policy worship in 100 years? Will she define her life based upon her insistence
on the apparent monumental importance of wearing a tux and holding her girlfriend's hand for a few hours during a party?
I expect that the things that matter about life rarely reveal themselves at a prom. This is not an issue upon which people should divide a
community.
However, the damage is done, and the young lady is probably very well received because of the attention it brings to those who have a larger
agenda.
/rambling off