Supreme Court declines anti-gay student case

Source: 365gay.com and Associated Press

Supreme Court declines anti-gay student case

(Washington) The Supreme Court said Monday that it would not take the case of a Kentucky high school student who wants to sue his school district over a policy that allegedly barred him from expressing opposition to homosexuality.

The justices did not comment in denying the appeal of Timothy Morrison, who alleges he was harmed by the policy of the Boyd County Board of Education.

The federal appeals court in Cincinnati ruled last year that Morrison failed to show how he was harmed by the policy and tossed out the lawsuit. The ruling was a reversal of a previous ruling that held Morrison should be allowed to pursue the lawsuit.

Morrison, a senior at Boyd County High School, sued the Boyd County school district over a policy that required students to undergo anti-harassment training. He claimed the policy threatened him with punishment for expressing religious beliefs in opposition to homosexuality. Morrison is a professed Christian who believes his religion requires him to speak out against what he sees as behavior that doesn’t comport with his understanding of Christian morality.

Read more: http://www.365gay.com/news/supreme-court-declines-anti-gay-student-case/

n.t.

What if someone came in and started harrassing this kid telling him his religion was stupid and it made him an idiot, I would bet he wouldn't be supported of someone having those rights! But he wants "special rights" for himself to be able to harrass other people and make their lives miserable because of his religion. Why does religion always demand "special" rights? Why can't they just live with the rights everyone else has?

Why does religion always demand "special" rights?

Religion is not demanding special rights. Religious zealots are demanding that, and are, correctly, being rebuffed at nearly every turn. The vast majority of religious people are not "demanding" anything other than the right to not be harassed ourselves.

Have you noticed how many on this board are constantly spouting off about how stupid religion is and how anyone who is religious is an idiot?

The one that some religious folk try to use against gays. "Seeking special rights".

The poster did not say that, however. "religion always demand "special" rights?" is how that was put...Not "some religious folks"....which is just how I put it, btw.

The Christian Right has been bringing cases like this left and right - this is only one of 5 that I know of right now that are in the court system - all based on the premise that disallowing Christian Bullying is discrimination.

Attorneys are attracted to money like blowflies to a corpse.

.

He claimed the policy threatened him with punishment for expressing religious beliefs in opposition to homosexuality.

Somehow, I can't see that saying "I disapprove of who you are and what you do, and I believe that God does, too" is "bullying" anybody.

Attemopting to define one's speaking as "not free speech" is very nice if you're a fascist.

The statment makes no threats, or intimidation, or anything else except a statement of disapproval and a religious belief. What's "bullying" about that?

Public schools are not the place for religious bigotry.

Just because you may not be intimidated or harassed by this sort of behavior does not mean others are not.

There are many good websites that describe "school bullying" that includes behaviors which are not the conservative traditional definition of bullying. You may look them up yourself.

edit for spelling

You're already wrestling with societal pressures on you. Adding the disapproval of your god isn't going to help much.

Harassment in any form based on your sex, race,religion,gender or sexual preference is bullying.

Attempting to pretend that in an environment where purportedly the purpose is for our children to learn basic communication, mathematic and other skills is a platform for Student A to harass Student B upon any of of the aforementioned criteria nevermind dozens of other issues is simply not acceptable.

Your freedom of speech does not apply in every circumstance. You may not yell 'fire' in a crowded theatre. Minors speech is also limited in some circumstances.

Standing in front of all of your classmates and saying "God says homosexuals are beasts and you are going to burn in hell!" would be bullying. We don't know what words this student was using, but I have heard those very words come out of someone's mouth at work in Oklahoma (thank goodness I no longer live in that state).

The bullying is peer pressure to conform to the majority mythology or 'burn' (the physical threat).

Oh, and I probably can yell "fire" in a crowded theater. That's what Brandenburg v. Ohio was about.

NT!

From the OP




harassment

http://thesaurus.reference.com/browse/harassment

Main Entry: harassment
Part of Speech: noun
Definition: badgering
Synonyms: aggravation, annoyance, bedevilment, bother, bothering, disturbance, exasperation, hassle, irking, irritation, molestation, nuisance, persecution, perturbation, pestering, provocation, provoking, torment, trouble, vexation, vexing
Antonyms: aid, assistance, facilitation, furtherance, help, support

a school has the right to abridge speech anyway if it disrupts the school. It's not 100% clear from the article, but I suspect the basis of this issue was that the kid was required to take the anti-harrassment training and felt *that* infringing his right of free speech and/or religion. Per the article, "Morrison was never punished under the policy, which was later changed to exempt speech that would normally be protected off campus." So at the time before it was changed, he was either being prohibited from making anti-gay statements at the school as a whole, or just in the training; either way I'd think the school district has every right to prevent that, the same way they'd need to prevent racist statements.

I am something of a first amendment absolutist. Like Justice Black, I read "no law abridiging" to mean "no law abrdiging." In my opinion, racist speech is absolutely protected. I have yet to see an example of so-called "hate speech" that I don't believe to be protected. Just so long as the context falls short of the Brandenburg v. Ohio, "speech brigaded with action" test.

Other than making people uncomfortable I don't perceive hate speech as being disruptive to a school or an educational environment. Controversy seems to me the essence of education. Otherwise, education becomes a catechism of orthodoxy.

If the prohibition was against Morrison's making anti-gay statements during the anti-harassment training, I have no problem with that. That is a time, place or manner restriction. But a threat of punishment has a chilling effect. And deterrence under threat from engaging in protected activity is all that is usually required for standing to challenge a limitation on freedom of speech. So, if he is prohibited from making his statements of belief at the school in general, I have real problems with that.

I just read the link to the ACLU article. The ACLU response makes sense to me.

I agree that controversey is educational if rational discussion is to be had, but unfortunately school-age children are often not very prone to that, and the school setting is easily disrupted by inflammatory statements. So when it comes to minors, I'm firmly on the side of allowing schools to abridge speech in the interest of fulfilling their compelling government purpose.

Hell, DU is easily disrupted by inflammatory statements!

I'm afraid that I do not see a "compelling governmental purpose" in the expression of ideas. The primary purpose of the school is to educate kids. When you're a kid, the school is the state consummate. In the words of Justice Brandeis, "Our government is the potent, the omnipresent teacher. For good or for ill, it teaches the whole people by its example. Crime is contagious. If the government becomes a law-breaker, it breeds contempt for law; it invites every man to become a law unto himself; it invites anarchy. " And when the state consummate suppresses though, belief and debate in the interests of good order and discipline it teaches. It teaches that good order and discipline are more important than these so-called freedoms you think you have. Making the public schools the womb of fascism.

I'll be glad to permanently disagree. Teach kids to speak up and you've actually taught them something worth knowing.

have been substantially restricted by the courts, and apparently this guy was unable to demonstrate how his free speech rights were being harmed by the policy in the first place.

against him, but also took the position the policy could be improved; it has since been modified.

Court won't revive Kentucky teen's lawsuit
February 23, 2009 - 10:10am
WASHINGTON (AP) ... Morrison was never punished under the policy, which was later changed ... The case is Morrison v. Board of Education of Boyd County, 08-701. http://www.wtopnews.com/?nid=343&sid=1608263

Morrison v. Board of Education of Boyd County
Sunday, August 20, 2006, 10:25 am
http://aclu-ky.org/content/view/102/5/

I'll take what both he and his lawyers allege with a grain of salt. Regardless, there are ways to express an opposition to a thing civilly, and there are ways to express that very same opposition to a thing that is indeed punishable.

the conservative Alliance Defense Fund.

http://www.365gay.com/news/supreme-court-declines-anti-gay-student-case/

religious beliefs on someone else. Not even the faith he claims.

It has a lot to say about how he ought to be treating other people, however.

It seems for some, it's much, much easier to point fingers and worry about someone else's purported sins, rather than spending some time working on their own.

Oh, hey, the 'christian' Reich is a Nazi Youth Group!

And before we know it, he'll be Diebolded into Congress, maybe even the White House.

If we really want to stop this fascist minority from destroying our country, we will....

THROW DIEBOLD & ALL 'TRADE SECRET' VOTING MACHINES INTO 'BOSTON HARBOR' NOW!

These bigots keep trying to claim their 'religion' tells them that their bigotry is okay. In fact what they are is simply bigots hiding behind a book and trying to make believe that it makes being an asshole a good thing. These people have their twisted ideas and then and only then do they try to find something in the Bible to corroborate those opinions. They are no more Christian than I am and I am an atheistic leaning agnostic so that says quite a bit.

NT!

It is one thing to disagree, it is another to insight hatred even if based of dark age religious nonsense. If we went around 'preaching' homosexuality as they go around 'preaching' their dogma, then I would have to say we were on even footing; however, we do not as no one does, 'Preach' homosexuality and if we did, it would come several fabulous colors.