Can we all just agree that prom is a government benefit for hetro couples to encourage them to have children?
- Forums
- Cross Site
- The Asylum
- Lesbian Teen Sent to Fake Prom
Lesbian Teen Sent to Fake PromFollow
There's no law that a school has to hold a prom idiggory. I don't know where you got that from. All it was is that if there is a prom the school is involved with, it can't exclude her.
Edited, Apr 6th 2010 1:02pm by Xsarus
Edited, Apr 6th 2010 1:02pm by Xsarus
01001001 00100000 01001100 01001001 01001011 01000101 00100000 01000011 01000001 01001011 01000101
You'll always be stupid, you'll just be stupid with more information in your brain
Forum FAQ
You'll always be stupid, you'll just be stupid with more information in your brain
Forum FAQ
idiggory wrote:
If the parents held the private event without constance, the school would likely have been forced to host the official prom.
If the school didn't sanction the private event (which they did in court), then they would have had to hold an official prom.
If the school didn't sanction the private event (which they did in court), then they would have had to hold an official prom.
So it sounds like the prom that Constance attended was the "official," school sanctioned prom, and the parents just threw together a "hetero only" prom at a different venue.
Either way, I feel badly for this girl. And I'm ashamed that these parents would teach their kids that excluding someone different than you is the right thing to do. They didn't do anything wrong legally, but it seems cruel to me.
Quote:
There's no law that a school has to hold a prom idiggory. I don't know where you got that from. All it was is that if there is a prom the school is involved with, it can't exclude her.
I never asserted there was. The ruling was a response to the school canceling the prom, which can be considered an act of
discrimination against Constance. The judge said he would not force the district to reinstate it as parents were already planning a new one--there was no point, as long as Constance was invited. He was perfectly able to do so, however, if he considered the cancellation to be a violation of Constance's rights.
IDrownFish wrote:
Anyways, you all are horrible, @#%^ed up people
lolgaxe wrote:
Never underestimate the healing power of a massive dong.
Samira wrote:
The Glorious Atomicflea wrote:
Gbaji is the Assylum sand trap.
Or wolf spider.
Nah, he doesn't scare Kao. And gbaji's view of reality is likely far dangerous than a wolf spider's bite.
publiusvarus wrote:
we all know liberals are well adjusted american citizens who only want what's best for society. While conservatives are evil money grubbing scum who only want to sh*t on the little man and rob the world of its resources.
idiggory wrote:
I like how we have 2 pages of us telling Gbaji he has the wrong order of events, and it isn't until the 3rd that he accepts that he was wrong.
So, I'll say it again.
Learn to @#%^ing read.
So, I'll say it again.
Learn to @#%^ing read.
Um... First off, the points you kept making were unrelated. And had you responded as Poldaran did (with a quote), I'd have read it, realized that I had missed the bit about that dance being canceled, and acknowledged it. What you did was continue to make incorrect and unrelated claims, while insisting that I "lern2read" whenever I disagreed. That's not terribly helpful.
Secondly, the issue of the precise order of events doesn't change the argument I've been making one bit. It simply doesn't matter which dance was planned when, or which dance was the "real" prom. As I asked at the very beginning. The "real" prom in this context, is the one which the court ordered be provided for the girl in this case. As I have stated over and over, she got *exactly* the prom she demanded.
The specifics of how the majority of the rest of the school arranged an alternative dance to attend and left her out of it are largely irrelevant. As I've also stated repeatedly, it's not illegal to organize a private dance and invite whomever you want (and not invite whomever you don't want). Unless we're chucking out the entire principle of individual liberties in this country, this should still be the case.
It's a mistake to get so caught up in details that you miss the larger picture. Was it "mean" of them to do this? IMO, no more mean than her suing the school in the first place...
Oh. And if the school didn't require tickets to be purchased by couples (something I haven't read one way or the other), then why was this an issue at all? She could have just bought two tickets and barring her making a freaking announcement at the door or something, no one would have cared. I admittedly assumed that there was some rule requiring pairs of tickets (or tickets for non-students) to be purchased in a particular manner. If that was not the case, then her actions are even more moronic and reprehensible than I thought.
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
gbaji wrote:
Oh. And if the school didn't require tickets to be purchased by couples (something I haven't read one way or the other), then why was this an issue at all? She could have just bought two tickets and barring her making a freaking announcement at the door or something, no one would have cared. I admittedly assumed that there was some rule requiring pairs of tickets (or tickets for non-students) to be purchased in a particular manner. If that was not the case, then her actions are even more moronic and reprehensible than I thought.
The girl wanted to buy a couples ticket (which is cheaper) for her and her girlfriend. She wanted to make sure that when she showed up with her girlfriend, and showed up in a Tux, the two of them wouldn't be escorted out. So when she asked the principal if she could do so, he said no, she couldn't buy a couples ticket for her and another girl, as that might lead to other same-sex pairs that are just friends purchasing a couples ticket for a lower price. He also told her that she was not allowed to wear a tux.
I don't see how her actions are moronic or reprehensible. She asked permission instead of simply breaking the rules and taking her chances. It was rather respectible and polite. I assume she also didn't want her prom night ruined by being escorted out of the venue in front of her entire class. Not that it ended up much better for her, of course.
gbaji wrote:
Oh. And if the school didn't require tickets to be purchased by couples (something I haven't read one way or the other), then why was this an issue at all? She could have just bought two tickets and barring her making a freaking announcement at the door or something, no one would have cared. I admittedly assumed that there was some rule requiring pairs of tickets (or tickets for non-students) to be purchased in a particular manner. If that was not the case, then her actions are even more moronic and reprehensible than I thought.
Dude.
If you don't want people to tell you to learn to read, learn to freaking read. From the very beginning the problem was that she asked if she could bring her girlfriend as a date, told no, and was told that if they danced together they could be told to leave.
Belkira the Tulip wrote:
The girl wanted to buy a couples ticket (which is cheaper) for her and her girlfriend. She wanted to make sure that when she showed up with her girlfriend, and showed up in a Tux, the two of them wouldn't be escorted out. So when she asked the principal if she could do so, he said no, she couldn't buy a couples ticket for her and another girl, as that might lead to other same-sex pairs that are just friends purchasing a couples ticket for a lower price. He also told her that she was not allowed to wear a tux.
So this whole thing wasn't even over her not being allowed to bring the date she wanted, but that she couldn't get a discounted price on the tickets? Yeah. That's so much better!
Quote:
I don't see how her actions are moronic or reprehensible. She asked permission instead of simply breaking the rules and taking her chances. It was rather respectible and polite. I assume she also didn't want her prom night ruined by being escorted out of the venue in front of her entire class. Not that it ended up much better for her, of course.
Yes. And she was told no. told why no. And didn't like it.
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
gbaji wrote:
So this whole thing wasn't even over her not being allowed to bring the date she wanted, but that she couldn't get a discounted price on the tickets? Yeah. That's so much better!
Yeah, try to be funny. I'll just call you out for being an moran right here and save you the trouble of having people throw tomatoes.
Quote:
Yes. And she was told no. told why no. And didn't like it.
And she was in the legal right, as a judge ruled that the reasons why violated her first amendment rights. No wonder she didn't like it!
gbaji wrote:
Belkira the Tulip wrote:
The girl wanted to buy a couples ticket (which is cheaper) for her and her girlfriend. She wanted to make sure that when she showed up with her girlfriend, and showed up in a Tux, the two of them wouldn't be escorted out. So when she asked the principal if she could do so, he said no, she couldn't buy a couples ticket for her and another girl, as that might lead to other same-sex pairs that are just friends purchasing a couples ticket for a lower price. He also told her that she was not allowed to wear a tux.
So this whole thing wasn't even over her not being allowed to bring the date she wanted, but that she couldn't get a discounted price on the tickets? Yeah. That's so much better!
No, you moron. It wasn't about the discount, it was about bringing another girl as a date. She was also told that, if she danced with her girlfriend, she'd get tossed out of the prom. You're not that ******* stupid, gbaji. She asked if she could bring another girl as a date, adn the principal said no and made up some excuse about other students taking friends of the same sex and getting discounted tickets.
The point being, single tickets were sold on a regular basis, so your "their prom had a rule about no going stag" is moot.
gbaji wrote:
I wrote:
I don't see how her actions are moronic or reprehensible. She asked permission instead of simply breaking the rules and taking her chances. It was rather respectible and polite. I assume she also didn't want her prom night ruined by being escorted out of the venue in front of her entire class. Not that it ended up much better for her, of course.
Yes. And she was told no. told why no. And didn't like it.
And realized that it was a violation of her rights. And she won. She stood up for her rights and showed more backbone than most people twenty years her senior.
I'm being totally serious here: it seems with each passing month, gbaji slips even further into his own, scary world. He really used to make a bit of sense a few years ago. I think it's time for some strong meds.
Assassin Nadenu wrote:
I'm being totally serious here: it seems with each passing month, gbaji slips even further into his own, scary world. He really used to make a bit of sense a few years ago. I think it's time for some strong meds.
gbaji wrote:
It's a mistake to get so caught up in details that you miss the larger picture
01001001 00100000 01001100 01001001 01001011 01000101 00100000 01000011 01000001 01001011 01000101
You'll always be stupid, you'll just be stupid with more information in your brain
Forum FAQ
You'll always be stupid, you'll just be stupid with more information in your brain
Forum FAQ
I could never do enough cocaine to understand gbaji.
#141gbaji,
Posted: Apr 06 2010 at 3:21 PM, Rating: Sub-Default, (Expand Post) She has a "right" to buy discounted tickets? Look. If we operate under the assumption that tickets can only be purchased by couples, it's a silly thing for her to do because there are ways around it. But if we assume that tickets could be purchased individually, with only a discount at stake then her actions become even more stupid.
#142gbaji,
Posted: Apr 06 2010 at 3:32 PM, Rating: Sub-Default, (Expand Post) It's because far too often the arguments in here do focus on details that don't matter though. At the end of the day, what some unnamed school official may or may not have told the student about her dancing with her date, doesn't really impact the larger issue as to whether the constitution prohibits a school from requiring that "couples" at a dance be boy/girl, or what dress is allowed at said dance.
How can you be this ******* stupid and still be considered human?
IDrownFish wrote:
Anyways, you all are horrible, @#%^ed up people
lolgaxe wrote:
Never underestimate the healing power of a massive dong.
#144gbaji,
Posted: Apr 06 2010 at 3:34 PM, Rating: Sub-Default, (Expand Post) I'm going to assume that you're using the typical definition of "stupid" which means: "Someone who disagrees with me". Maybe you should look in the mirror?
Quote:
I'm going to assume that you're using the typical definition of "stupid" which means: "Someone who disagrees with me". Maybe you should look in the mirror?
Because I disagree with myself? Good one.
Look up "stupid" in a dictionary. You literally fulfill every criteria. Not that you'd accept that, as you are incapable of thinking rationally.
IDrownFish wrote:
Anyways, you all are horrible, @#%^ed up people
lolgaxe wrote:
Never underestimate the healing power of a massive dong.
#146gbaji,
Posted: Apr 06 2010 at 3:47 PM, Rating: Sub-Default, (Expand Post) Dude. I'm not even going there. Do you have anything rational to comment on about the topic? Or just spewing garbage?
I'm not going to bother arguing with you. If we give you a valid argument, you completely ignore it. Or, on the off chance that you actually address it, you do it in a way that completely misinterprets what we said or its context. Then you try and offer some completely irrelevant argument that is completely devoid of support--logical, scientific or anecdotal. Often your arguments will contradict each other from one post to another.
Furthermore, you don't even bother trying to do research on the topic itself before you jump in with your holier-than-thou attitude spewing crap from your soap box. Hell, you don't even read the links we PROVIDE. And you attack us when we tell you that you are completely wrong about the topic itself, due to the fact that you didn't bother to identify the issue in the first place.
And on the rare occasion you actually give us an argument that is logical, it is based on premises that are so obviously false that there is no reason we should accept it (example: marriage is about producing children).
So, yeah, I rarely even read your posts nowadays. I'll skim to see if you are specifically responding to me, and that's it. Because you have never added anything constructive to any discussion I've read in which you posted. People who post playing devil's advocate at least elevate the discussion by forcing us to address the shakier parts of a theory.
Furthermore, you don't even bother trying to do research on the topic itself before you jump in with your holier-than-thou attitude spewing crap from your soap box. Hell, you don't even read the links we PROVIDE. And you attack us when we tell you that you are completely wrong about the topic itself, due to the fact that you didn't bother to identify the issue in the first place.
And on the rare occasion you actually give us an argument that is logical, it is based on premises that are so obviously false that there is no reason we should accept it (example: marriage is about producing children).
So, yeah, I rarely even read your posts nowadays. I'll skim to see if you are specifically responding to me, and that's it. Because you have never added anything constructive to any discussion I've read in which you posted. People who post playing devil's advocate at least elevate the discussion by forcing us to address the shakier parts of a theory.
IDrownFish wrote:
Anyways, you all are horrible, @#%^ed up people
lolgaxe wrote:
Never underestimate the healing power of a massive dong.
I don't know how to speak crazy, so I'm going to have to just leave gbaji alone in his little world for now. I'll probably feel masochistic again later and pick the torch back up, but I can't do it anymore today.
Quote:
Was it "mean" for the other kids and their parents to hold a second prom and not invite her? Maybe. Maybe not. Was it "illegal"? Absolutely not.
Quote:
At the end of the day, what some unnamed school official may or may not have told the student about her dancing with her date, doesn't really impact the larger issue as to whether the constitution prohibits a school from requiring that "couples" at a dance be boy/girl, or what dress is allowed at said dance.
Edited, Apr 6th 2010 5:20pm by Xsarus
01001001 00100000 01001100 01001001 01001011 01000101 00100000 01000011 01000001 01001011 01000101
You'll always be stupid, you'll just be stupid with more information in your brain
Forum FAQ
You'll always be stupid, you'll just be stupid with more information in your brain
Forum FAQ
Rosa Parks should have been content riding in the back of the bus
It was the rule, after all.
It was the rule, after all.
gbaji, you're either a ******* idiot, or you're the most narrow-minded and ignorant **** I've ever encountered, or you're a homophobe. I'd dissect your posts and point out your idiocy, but that's too much damn work as a significant amount of your posts are filled with lunacy and all around ignorance.
If she had bought the couple's ticket and showed up at the dance with her date in a tux, she would have been denied entry because her school is full of a bunch of ******* homophobes. Her being denied entry is a VIOLATION of her civil rights. I do believe there's also a law that prevents discrimination against gay, lesbian, transgendered people but I'm too damn lazy to look it up, and you would also completely ignore it because it doesn't conform to what you want.
That's really messed up what those parents did. I hope that they find out the school had something to do with it and she sues those ******* twats. Would serve them right.
If she had bought the couple's ticket and showed up at the dance with her date in a tux, she would have been denied entry because her school is full of a bunch of ******* homophobes. Her being denied entry is a VIOLATION of her civil rights. I do believe there's also a law that prevents discrimination against gay, lesbian, transgendered people but I'm too damn lazy to look it up, and you would also completely ignore it because it doesn't conform to what you want.
That's really messed up what those parents did. I hope that they find out the school had something to do with it and she sues those ******* twats. Would serve them right.
Recent Visitors: 141
All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (141)
- Forums
- Cross Site
- The Asylum
- Lesbian Teen Sent to Fake Prom
© 2024 Fanbyte LLC