There's nothing wrong with fighting the establishment of parallel and extralegal courts. That's not a "sharia" thing so much as a tribal or local thing, and I would imagine is already illegal anywhere that has a functioning court system. That might be assuming a lot for Tennessee, though.
But banning worship is bonkers.
Except I think in the US if both parties agree you can use religious arbitration to settle civil disputes and things like that with some amount of judicial oversight? So...
HamHamJ on
While racing light mechs, your Urbanmech comes in second place, but only because it ran out of ammo.
So the four remaining Iowa supreme court justices that decreed that a ban on same-sex marriage violated the Iowa state constitution in 2009? Let's impeach them.
Iowa GOP Tries To Impeach State Supreme Court Over Marriage Equality
The four House resolutions target Supreme Court Chief Justice Mark Cady (HR 48) and Justices Brent Appel (HR 47), Daryl Hecht (HR 49) and David Wiggins (HR 50) for “malfeasance in office” specifically for their ruling in the Varnum v. Brien case, saying that each justice “exercis[ed] functions properly belonging to the legislative and executive departments.”
"functions properly belonging to the legislative and executive departments."
Look. It would be nice if the legislative and/or executive branches of your government would actually take the constitutionality of the things you try to do into account. But since you won't, it's kind of those guys' job.
Impeaching them for doing exactly what they were supposed to do is stupid, and a great illustration of why you're pissed off in the first place.
There's nothing wrong with fighting the establishment of parallel and extralegal courts. That's not a "sharia" thing so much as a tribal or local thing, and I would imagine is already illegal anywhere that has a functioning court system. That might be assuming a lot for Tennessee, though.
But banning worship is bonkers.
Except I think in the US if both parties agree you can use religious arbitration to settle civil disputes and things like that with some amount of judicial oversight? So...
That situation in Iowa just makes me sick, and it's more than a bit frightening. When the dominant branch of government begins ripping out its constitutionally-mandated checks and balances with no sign of public outcry, that's a pretty dire prognosis for democracy in that region.
There's nothing wrong with fighting the establishment of parallel and extralegal courts.
Funny, I don't see anyone arguing that we should start jailing rabbis who have beit din to weigh the admission of converts, because those are parallel courts and all treasonous and shit.
mythago on
Three lines of plaintext:
obsolete signature form
replaced by JPEGs.
It might benefit the two of you to look up the definition of extralegal.
Binding arbitration occurs within the framework of legal contracts.
Sentencing a woman to death by stoning as a result of infidelity doesn't.
I don't think the sentencing part would be the illegal part there.
Sentencing and carrying out death by stoning of a woman as a result of.. If you want to be pedantic. Which you seem to.
The point is there's an interest in keeping extralegal tribal systems of justice from operating parallel to the actual justice system, assuming the actual justice system is impartial and equitable.
That goes for rural Appalachia just as much as it does for Sharia.
But banning otherwise legally enforceable religious-specific contracts based on the religion they stem from is just dumb. Which is what the Tennessee legislation is.
There's nothing wrong with fighting the establishment of parallel and extralegal courts.
Funny, I don't see anyone arguing that we should start jailing rabbis who have beit din to weigh the admission of converts, because those are parallel courts and all treasonous and shit.
Funny, it never came up in this thread before for anyone to express an opinion on it.
Anyway, this is a tangent that's not worth discussing here.
There's nothing wrong with fighting the establishment of parallel and extralegal courts.
Funny, I don't see anyone arguing that we should start jailing rabbis who have beit din to weigh the admission of converts, because those are parallel courts and all treasonous and shit.
mythago on
Three lines of plaintext:
obsolete signature form
replaced by JPEGs.
I half expected someone to post an example of a stoning adulterers law that was still on the books somewhere in this country. Because I'm fairly sure they were out there, but there's no way they'd stand up to constitutional challenge today.
Two 14-year old girls committed suicide last week in Marshall, Minn., and the evidence suggests they’d been bullied. Relatives of Haylee Fentress and Paige Moravetz told Meredith Viera of the TODAY Show that the girls may have been more than just friends. Fentress had hyphenated her last name on Facebook to include Moravetz’s last name, and Fentress had been expelled from school recently for defending Paige in a fight. The pair’s deaths add to a growing list of suicides in Minnesota and around the country where bullying is suspected to have played a factor.
14 Years old. So yeah, totally no need for teachers in Tennessee to be able to discuss anything relating to homosexuality in grades 6, 7, and 8.
The teacher can still tell the kid it's not cool to make fun of a kid regardless of the slur. Just tell them it's not cool to make fun of other people PERIOD!
I apologize if the discussion has already moved on, but I feel the need to respond to this.
Removing the ability for a teacher to even acknowledge the fact that LGBTQ people exist gives institutional consent (whether intentional or not) to the idea that being LGBTQ is wrong. It contributes to a homophobic culture because it displaces homophobia entirely as a problem that can even be addressed, and replaces it with the idea that the existence of LGBTQ people is the actual problem.
A problem that arises from addressing behavior that dehumanizes individuals and groups in a general way is the ambiguity inherent in such an approach. If a student calls another student a "fag" and I simply tell them not to make fun of others, the lesson learned (for the bully, the victim, and any bystanders) may very well be that it is terrible to call someone a fag because being LGBTQ is terrible. Without the ability to provide context, there is no way to help guide the lesson or even to know what was ultimately learned.
Anecdote time:
I work at a university. A few years back one of my students shared a story from her childhood. She attended a predominately white, rural elementary school. There was a single Black student in her class. One day at recess the children were playing a game in which winners were called "kings" and "queens" and losers were called "slaves." When the black student was called a slave by the other kids, he was upset and offended. A teacher rushed in and reprimanded the children, telling them they could not call the black student a slave. The other kids did not know the history of race and racism in this country and were bewildered by the response. When they asked why they could not call the black student a slave, the teacher (who was in this case personally unprepared to have a frank discussion about race) gave them the equivalent of the "just because" answer.
The take away lesson for my student was that black people are too sensitive and she might get in trouble for upsetting them so it was better to just not play with black kids. She meant well and had a good heart, but without context she had no other conclusion to draw. The lack of dialogue regarding the real issues at play had cemented a negative stereotype in her mind.
The problem with this law is the chilling effect it has on anyone who might be willing to stand up for the humanity of LGBTQ people and the fact that it institutionalizes homophobia (without even having to acknowledge the fact).
I never understood why there was such a movement around gay rights, just didn't understand that there was any kind of problem. Now I have a few gay friends and from talking to them about their childhood and even stuff that happens now I can't believe the kind of crap they go through. Gay rights doesn't even seem like the right term to me anymore, it's just play human rights.
I think there would be a lot more support if everyone had a gay friend/son/daughter :P
Anyway, not sure if that's even a contribution.
Edit: Guess I'm saying I'm hugely in support of the side that thinks it should be talked about and treated as normal.
Two 14-year old girls committed suicide last week in Marshall, Minn., and the evidence suggests they’d been bullied. Relatives of Haylee Fentress and Paige Moravetz told Meredith Viera of the TODAY Show that the girls may have been more than just friends. Fentress had hyphenated her last name on Facebook to include Moravetz’s last name, and Fentress had been expelled from school recently for defending Paige in a fight. The pair’s deaths add to a growing list of suicides in Minnesota and around the country where bullying is suspected to have played a factor.
14 Years old. So yeah, totally no need for teachers in Tennessee to be able to discuss anything relating to homosexuality in grades 6, 7, and 8.
I was wondering the same thing when I first read about this yesterday. They mentioned she had hyphenated her last name, but there was no mention of a more-than-friends relationship between the two, but did mention she had be incessantly bullied because of her weight. Which is just as cruel and why I find it distasteful to make fun of Maggie of NOM for being obese. She's a hateful person trying to take away people's rights, that should be enough.
And really didn't mean to start an argument about sharia law. It was just another law being pushed by the TN legislature to take away rights from a minority. There are already laws on the books making it illegal to stone someone to death and it's clear from the legislation that it was intended as a way to arrest muslims and suppress their religious freedom. The guy behind it won't even discuss it with people, when some stopped by his office he had a police officer remove them (other proponents of the bill have met with detractors and have basically said they don't know WTF he wouldn't even speak with them) and the new bill removes references to specific religions but still gives the AG the power to investigate groups and label them as domestic or foreign terrorist operations. Which of course goes back to the Republicans wanting to make the AG an elected official, but I digress and I'm getting way off topic.
And all of this completely ignores the gay kid sitting there, learning that homosexuality is something that is shameful and should never be talked about.
Yeah, this. Basically, no kid would be allowed to say, "Hey, I'm gay" which some kids do want to do. I guess kids with gay parents also wouldn't be allowed to mention that fact. This law is trying to erase gays from the public consciousness. Plus it prevents educators from explicitly telling kids gayness isn't bad. Not only is this troubling within the context of bullying, but if a gay kid seeks out a teacher for support, the teacher can't tell the kid there's nothing wrong with him.
There's a lot of remarks about "kids don't listen to teachers! They will bully anyway!", and that is true of some kids. But when I was in grade/middle school my teachers were a huge influence; they were some of the first adults I regularly interacted with who weren't my parents, and who had ideas that weren't the same as my parents'. This made them very exciting people.
This is the part that's truly horrifying. If a kid goes to the school counselor and says they're considering suicide because the other kids keep bullying them for being gay, the counselor can't even begin to help them. I can't even imagine what a counselor with good intentions would be able to do now.
And all of this completely ignores the gay kid sitting there, learning that homosexuality is something that is shameful and should never be talked about.
Yeah, this. Basically, no kid would be allowed to say, "Hey, I'm gay" which some kids do want to do. I guess kids with gay parents also wouldn't be allowed to mention that fact. This law is trying to erase gays from the public consciousness. Plus it prevents educators from explicitly telling kids gayness isn't bad. Not only is this troubling within the context of bullying, but if a gay kid seeks out a teacher for support, the teacher can't tell the kid there's nothing wrong with him.
There's a lot of remarks about "kids don't listen to teachers! They will bully anyway!", and that is true of some kids. But when I was in grade/middle school my teachers were a huge influence; they were some of the first adults I regularly interacted with who weren't my parents, and who had ideas that weren't the same as my parents'. This made them very exciting people.
This is the part that's truly horrifying. If a kid goes to the school counselor and says they're considering suicide because the other kids keep bullying them for being gay, the counselor can't even begin to help them. I can't even imagine what a counselor with good intentions would be able to do now.
I can. He'd say "fuck that bullshit law!" and help the kid anyway.
And all of this completely ignores the gay kid sitting there, learning that homosexuality is something that is shameful and should never be talked about.
Yeah, this. Basically, no kid would be allowed to say, "Hey, I'm gay" which some kids do want to do. I guess kids with gay parents also wouldn't be allowed to mention that fact. This law is trying to erase gays from the public consciousness. Plus it prevents educators from explicitly telling kids gayness isn't bad. Not only is this troubling within the context of bullying, but if a gay kid seeks out a teacher for support, the teacher can't tell the kid there's nothing wrong with him.
There's a lot of remarks about "kids don't listen to teachers! They will bully anyway!", and that is true of some kids. But when I was in grade/middle school my teachers were a huge influence; they were some of the first adults I regularly interacted with who weren't my parents, and who had ideas that weren't the same as my parents'. This made them very exciting people.
This is the part that's truly horrifying. If a kid goes to the school counselor and says they're considering suicide because the other kids keep bullying them for being gay, the counselor can't even begin to help them. I can't even imagine what a counselor with good intentions would be able to do now.
I can. He'd say "fuck that bullshit law!" and help the kid anyway.
And then he'd lose his job and be replaced by someone who wouldn't help the next gay kid.
Yeah, because I'm sure he'll shout it from the rootops --> "I'm violating this law! Kid's gay, and we should be okay with that! You over there on the PTA with the Bible? YOU HEAR ME?!?!? What're you going to do about it?"
That or he could, you know, just have a private conversation with the kid. That might work better.
But seriously, taking away the ability for teachers to speak openly and honestly to their students about age appropriate things is horrific. I can imagine a teacher or counselor could still lend a caring ear, and refer the student and his parents to counseling outside the school system.
The intent of these kinds of laws seem to be to never change social norms, never have them be challenged or discussed. All school is suppose to do (apparently) is to teach math and [strike]science[/strike] reading and get kids into college. Honestly people who can't be bothered to expose their children to the world for fear it will corrupt them should just get them textbooks, it will do them as much good.
Void Slayer on
He's a shy overambitious dog-catcher on the wrong side of the law. She's an orphaned psychic mercenary with the power to bend men's minds. They fight crime!
Except if you stop and think about the steps you need to take to actually help a kid in that situation, it's extremely unlikely that you can resolve it successfully without other adults becoming involved. I mean, what are you going to say, 'hey kid it gets better you just have to put up with them bullying you for 6 more years'? No, you have to go talk to the other students, their teachers, and the parents, and this law specifically forbids that. And it being Tennessee, as soon as the counselor in question said word one about a gay kid to a parent he'd get fired. This is terrifying, honestly. Bullying sucks and all that but this completely hamstrings the abilities of adults to step in and help kids who contemplate suicide.
I'm extremely lucky in that my parents literally did not give a shit that my sister is gay, so I can't honestly say I know what it feels like to have parents who wouldn't accept that. But if a 7th or 8th grade kid is getting bullied and tormented at school for being gay and can't go to their parents about it because they're terrified of them, and also can't go to their teachers because their teachers literally cannot help, what are they going to wind up doing?
Yeah, because I'm sure he'll shout it from the rootops --> "I'm violating this law! Kid's gay, and we should be okay with that! You over there on the PTA with the Bible? YOU HEAR ME?!?!? What're you going to do about it?"
That or he could, you know, just have a private conversation with the kid. That might work better.
Kids talk. Adults can connect dots. If the rest of the faculty sees Jimmy visiting the councilors office after being teased for being gay, then he comes out looking somewhat better, they're going to know what kind of conversation took place.
And if the PTA bible beater hears from her kid that the gay kid they were bashing on talked to the councilor, she's going to follow up.
'Probably'? Really? Every gay kid in Tennessee is 'probably' going to kill themselves?
Come on. It sucks. It hamstrings the ability of non-bigot teachers to respond to bullying. It does not stop it completely, and it sure as shit is not a death sentence for every gay child in Tennessee.
'Probably'? Really? Every gay kid in Tennessee is 'probably' going to kill themselves?
Come on. It sucks. It hamstrings the ability of non-bigot teachers to respond to bullying. It does not stop it completely, and it sure as shit is not a death sentence for every gay child in Tennessee.
I thought it was clear we were discussing a pretty extreme case? Unless you're saying that every gay kid contemplates suicide? I didn't think that was the case. Apologies if I implied that.
'Probably'? Really? Every gay kid in Tennessee is 'probably' going to kill themselves?
Come on. It sucks. It hamstrings the ability of non-bigot teachers to respond to bullying. It does not stop it completely, and it sure as shit is not a death sentence for every gay child in Tennessee.
No, but it closes a door children with such concerns can use to resolve it in a non-violent way. Every kid picked on isn't going to commit suicide or bring a gun to school or become self hating or abusive, but some will and this law removes an avenue for them not to do those things. Lots of people go through terrible childhoods with only minimal scars, but that is not everyone.
Void Slayer on
He's a shy overambitious dog-catcher on the wrong side of the law. She's an orphaned psychic mercenary with the power to bend men's minds. They fight crime!
'Probably'? Really? Every gay kid in Tennessee is 'probably' going to kill themselves?
Come on. It sucks. It hamstrings the ability of non-bigot teachers to respond to bullying. It does not stop it completely, and it sure as shit is not a death sentence for every gay child in Tennessee.
No, but it closes a door children with such concerns can use to resolve it in a non-violent way. Every kid picked on isn't going to commit suicide or bring a gun to school or become self hating or abusive, but some will and this law removes an avenue for them not to do those things. Lots of people go through terrible childhoods with only minimal scars, but that is not everyone.
Yeah this was the point I was trying to make. For every teen suicide in the news there are a probably at least a few kids that were talked off the edge, and this makes it much more difficult for that to happen.
I remember watching a PBS documentary on sharia/Muslim culture. One thing I found interesting is how they view a marriage as more of a business agreement between the man and woman, since they both sign a contract together at the wedding.
Meanwhile, under our USA FUCK YEAH laws, if you marry a man in some states as a woman, you become his property. In Nebraska, the husband can get a vasectomy without notifying his spouse. If a woman wants to get her tubes tied, she has to notify and have permission from her husband.
And we're saying Sharia is backwards?
That's probably why some people are against gay marriage. They can't decide which person should lose more rights.
I remember watching a PBS documentary on sharia/Muslim culture. One thing I found interesting is how they view a marriage as more of a business agreement between the man and woman, since they both sign a contract together at the wedding.
Meanwhile, under our USA FUCK YEAH laws, if you marry a man in some states as a woman, you become his property.In Nebraska, the husband can get a vasectomy without notifying his spouse. If a woman wants to get her tubes tied, she has to notify and have permission from her husband.
And we're saying Sharia is backwards?
That's probably why some people are against gay marriage. They can't decide which person should lose more rights.
That's.....gotta go unenforced, right? Or be an old law on books similar to 'ducks can't wear pants'? There's no way an adult can't control their own medical decisions.
Of course, a ton a doctors just refuse to do them on younger women because they 'know better', but fuck them. That's a bit of a different issue.
'Probably'? Really? Every gay kid in Tennessee is 'probably' going to kill themselves?
Come on. It sucks. It hamstrings the ability of non-bigot teachers to respond to bullying. It does not stop it completely, and it sure as shit is not a death sentence for every gay child in Tennessee.
No one should be required to be brave in order to do good.
It's good when people are brave and do good, but you should not be required to secretly and bravely do good acts in opposition to the prevailing attitude.
I mean, I doubt that this sort of law will eliminate good but it will sure as hell make timid well-intentioned people more timid and less able to act on those good intentions. It is an in-arguably bad thing not because it is impossible to get around but because "getting around it" is a vital concern.
If I told you that there was a new law saying I'd punch you in the teeth any time you tipped more than 5%, some people who thought they could take me would tip 15%. Some people would figure I couldn't possibly find them. Some people would band together, maybe (Knowing I'm super strong), but it would still be a net bad if your goal is "people should get tips above 5%".
I remember watching a PBS documentary on sharia/Muslim culture. One thing I found interesting is how they view a marriage as more of a business agreement between the man and woman, since they both sign a contract together at the wedding.
Meanwhile, under our USA FUCK YEAH laws, if you marry a man in some states as a woman, you become his property.In Nebraska, the husband can get a vasectomy without notifying his spouse. If a woman wants to get her tubes tied, she has to notify and have permission from her husband.
And we're saying Sharia is backwards?
That's probably why some people are against gay marriage. They can't decide which person should lose more rights.
That's.....gotta go unenforced, right? Or be an old law on books similar to 'ducks can't wear pants'? There's no way an adult can't control their own medical decisions.
Of course, a ton a doctors just refuse to do them on younger women because they 'know better', but fuck them. That's a bit of a different issue.
It's actually enforced. There's still drama amongst my relatives over it, so I know about it first hand.
I remember watching a PBS documentary on sharia/Muslim culture. One thing I found interesting is how they view a marriage as more of a business agreement between the man and woman, since they both sign a contract together at the wedding.
Meanwhile, under our USA FUCK YEAH laws, if you marry a man in some states as a woman, you become his property.In Nebraska, the husband can get a vasectomy without notifying his spouse. If a woman wants to get her tubes tied, she has to notify and have permission from her husband.
And we're saying Sharia is backwards?
That's probably why some people are against gay marriage. They can't decide which person should lose more rights.
That's.....gotta go unenforced, right? Or be an old law on books similar to 'ducks can't wear pants'? There's no way an adult can't control their own medical decisions.
Of course, a ton a doctors just refuse to do them on younger women because they 'know better', but fuck them. That's a bit of a different issue.
It's actually enforced. There's still drama amongst my relatives over it, so I know about it first hand.
That's fucking horrible. How have they not been laughed out of court over that yet?
I remember watching a PBS documentary on sharia/Muslim culture. One thing I found interesting is how they view a marriage as more of a business agreement between the man and woman, since they both sign a contract together at the wedding.
Meanwhile, under our USA FUCK YEAH laws, if you marry a man in some states as a woman, you become his property.In Nebraska, the husband can get a vasectomy without notifying his spouse. If a woman wants to get her tubes tied, she has to notify and have permission from her husband.
And we're saying Sharia is backwards?
That's probably why some people are against gay marriage. They can't decide which person should lose more rights.
That's.....gotta go unenforced, right? Or be an old law on books similar to 'ducks can't wear pants'? There's no way an adult can't control their own medical decisions.
Of course, a ton a doctors just refuse to do them on younger women because they 'know better', but fuck them. That's a bit of a different issue.
It's actually enforced. There's still drama amongst my relatives over it, so I know about it first hand.
That's fucking horrible. How have they not been laughed out of court over that yet?
Because women still don't have equal rights in the United States
FyreWulff on
0
Options
FencingsaxIt is difficult to get a man to understand, when his salary depends upon his not understandingGNU Terry PratchettRegistered Userregular
I remember watching a PBS documentary on sharia/Muslim culture. One thing I found interesting is how they view a marriage as more of a business agreement between the man and woman, since they both sign a contract together at the wedding.
That's pretty much what marriage is and has been. There are people who get mad at those who get married for financial benefits re: college (even if they were already engaged and just moving up the wedding!).
Anyone who promotes marriage inequality should be allowed give up the legal benefits associated with marriage to prove that it's really about the love between one man and one woman and nothing else.
Posts
Except I think in the US if both parties agree you can use religious arbitration to settle civil disputes and things like that with some amount of judicial oversight? So...
Look. It would be nice if the legislative and/or executive branches of your government would actually take the constitutionality of the things you try to do into account. But since you won't, it's kind of those guys' job.
Impeaching them for doing exactly what they were supposed to do is stupid, and a great illustration of why you're pissed off in the first place.
They tried to bury us. They didn't know that we were seeds. 2018 Midterms. Get your shit together.
They tried to bury us. They didn't know that we were seeds. 2018 Midterms. Get your shit together.
Binding arbitration occurs within the framework of legal contracts.
Sentencing a woman to death by stoning as a result of infidelity doesn't.
I don't think the sentencing part would be the illegal part there.
Funny, I don't see anyone arguing that we should start jailing rabbis who have beit din to weigh the admission of converts, because those are parallel courts and all treasonous and shit.
obsolete signature form
replaced by JPEGs.
Sentencing and carrying out death by stoning of a woman as a result of.. If you want to be pedantic. Which you seem to.
The point is there's an interest in keeping extralegal tribal systems of justice from operating parallel to the actual justice system, assuming the actual justice system is impartial and equitable.
That goes for rural Appalachia just as much as it does for Sharia.
But banning otherwise legally enforceable religious-specific contracts based on the religion they stem from is just dumb. Which is what the Tennessee legislation is.
Funny, it never came up in this thread before for anyone to express an opinion on it.
Anyway, this is a tangent that's not worth discussing here.
Funny, I don't see anyone arguing that we should start jailing rabbis who have beit din to weigh the admission of converts, because those are parallel courts and all treasonous and shit.
obsolete signature form
replaced by JPEGs.
I was mostly joking. Otherwise, I was just pointing out that there are non-governmental options for civil litigation assuming both sides agree to it.
If the fear is that that kind of civil litigation is going to move to a non-secular venue, I can maybe kinda sorta see legislating against that.
This really doesn't change the fact that no court has the authority to sentence a person to be stoned to death legally.
And now watch an example prove me wrong.
They tried to bury us. They didn't know that we were seeds. 2018 Midterms. Get your shit together.
I was talking about the legitimate authority on American soil.
Should have been more specific.
They tried to bury us. They didn't know that we were seeds. 2018 Midterms. Get your shit together.
They tried to bury us. They didn't know that we were seeds. 2018 Midterms. Get your shit together.
Double teen suicide in western Minnesota.
http://minnesotaindependent.com/80582/haylee-fentress-paige-moravetz-bullying-suicide
14 Years old. So yeah, totally no need for teachers in Tennessee to be able to discuss anything relating to homosexuality in grades 6, 7, and 8.
I apologize if the discussion has already moved on, but I feel the need to respond to this.
Removing the ability for a teacher to even acknowledge the fact that LGBTQ people exist gives institutional consent (whether intentional or not) to the idea that being LGBTQ is wrong. It contributes to a homophobic culture because it displaces homophobia entirely as a problem that can even be addressed, and replaces it with the idea that the existence of LGBTQ people is the actual problem.
A problem that arises from addressing behavior that dehumanizes individuals and groups in a general way is the ambiguity inherent in such an approach. If a student calls another student a "fag" and I simply tell them not to make fun of others, the lesson learned (for the bully, the victim, and any bystanders) may very well be that it is terrible to call someone a fag because being LGBTQ is terrible. Without the ability to provide context, there is no way to help guide the lesson or even to know what was ultimately learned.
Anecdote time:
I work at a university. A few years back one of my students shared a story from her childhood. She attended a predominately white, rural elementary school. There was a single Black student in her class. One day at recess the children were playing a game in which winners were called "kings" and "queens" and losers were called "slaves." When the black student was called a slave by the other kids, he was upset and offended. A teacher rushed in and reprimanded the children, telling them they could not call the black student a slave. The other kids did not know the history of race and racism in this country and were bewildered by the response. When they asked why they could not call the black student a slave, the teacher (who was in this case personally unprepared to have a frank discussion about race) gave them the equivalent of the "just because" answer.
The take away lesson for my student was that black people are too sensitive and she might get in trouble for upsetting them so it was better to just not play with black kids. She meant well and had a good heart, but without context she had no other conclusion to draw. The lack of dialogue regarding the real issues at play had cemented a negative stereotype in her mind.
The problem with this law is the chilling effect it has on anyone who might be willing to stand up for the humanity of LGBTQ people and the fact that it institutionalizes homophobia (without even having to acknowledge the fact).
I think there would be a lot more support if everyone had a gay friend/son/daughter :P
Anyway, not sure if that's even a contribution.
Edit: Guess I'm saying I'm hugely in support of the side that thinks it should be talked about and treated as normal.
I was wondering the same thing when I first read about this yesterday. They mentioned she had hyphenated her last name, but there was no mention of a more-than-friends relationship between the two, but did mention she had be incessantly bullied because of her weight. Which is just as cruel and why I find it distasteful to make fun of Maggie of NOM for being obese. She's a hateful person trying to take away people's rights, that should be enough.
And really didn't mean to start an argument about sharia law. It was just another law being pushed by the TN legislature to take away rights from a minority. There are already laws on the books making it illegal to stone someone to death and it's clear from the legislation that it was intended as a way to arrest muslims and suppress their religious freedom. The guy behind it won't even discuss it with people, when some stopped by his office he had a police officer remove them (other proponents of the bill have met with detractors and have basically said they don't know WTF he wouldn't even speak with them) and the new bill removes references to specific religions but still gives the AG the power to investigate groups and label them as domestic or foreign terrorist operations. Which of course goes back to the Republicans wanting to make the AG an elected official, but I digress and I'm getting way off topic.
This is the part that's truly horrifying. If a kid goes to the school counselor and says they're considering suicide because the other kids keep bullying them for being gay, the counselor can't even begin to help them. I can't even imagine what a counselor with good intentions would be able to do now.
This is a really fucked up law.
They tried to bury us. They didn't know that we were seeds. 2018 Midterms. Get your shit together.
That or he could, you know, just have a private conversation with the kid. That might work better.
But seriously, taking away the ability for teachers to speak openly and honestly to their students about age appropriate things is horrific. I can imagine a teacher or counselor could still lend a caring ear, and refer the student and his parents to counseling outside the school system.
The intent of these kinds of laws seem to be to never change social norms, never have them be challenged or discussed. All school is suppose to do (apparently) is to teach math and [strike]science[/strike] reading and get kids into college. Honestly people who can't be bothered to expose their children to the world for fear it will corrupt them should just get them textbooks, it will do them as much good.
I'm extremely lucky in that my parents literally did not give a shit that my sister is gay, so I can't honestly say I know what it feels like to have parents who wouldn't accept that. But if a 7th or 8th grade kid is getting bullied and tormented at school for being gay and can't go to their parents about it because they're terrified of them, and also can't go to their teachers because their teachers literally cannot help, what are they going to wind up doing?
And if the PTA bible beater hears from her kid that the gay kid they were bashing on talked to the councilor, she's going to follow up.
Schools are basically fishbowls.
They tried to bury us. They didn't know that we were seeds. 2018 Midterms. Get your shit together.
Come on. It sucks. It hamstrings the ability of non-bigot teachers to respond to bullying. It does not stop it completely, and it sure as shit is not a death sentence for every gay child in Tennessee.
I thought it was clear we were discussing a pretty extreme case? Unless you're saying that every gay kid contemplates suicide? I didn't think that was the case. Apologies if I implied that.
No, but it closes a door children with such concerns can use to resolve it in a non-violent way. Every kid picked on isn't going to commit suicide or bring a gun to school or become self hating or abusive, but some will and this law removes an avenue for them not to do those things. Lots of people go through terrible childhoods with only minimal scars, but that is not everyone.
Yeah this was the point I was trying to make. For every teen suicide in the news there are a probably at least a few kids that were talked off the edge, and this makes it much more difficult for that to happen.
Meanwhile, under our USA FUCK YEAH laws, if you marry a man in some states as a woman, you become his property. In Nebraska, the husband can get a vasectomy without notifying his spouse. If a woman wants to get her tubes tied, she has to notify and have permission from her husband.
And we're saying Sharia is backwards?
That's probably why some people are against gay marriage. They can't decide which person should lose more rights.
Of course, a ton a doctors just refuse to do them on younger women because they 'know better', but fuck them. That's a bit of a different issue.
It's good when people are brave and do good, but you should not be required to secretly and bravely do good acts in opposition to the prevailing attitude.
I mean, I doubt that this sort of law will eliminate good but it will sure as hell make timid well-intentioned people more timid and less able to act on those good intentions. It is an in-arguably bad thing not because it is impossible to get around but because "getting around it" is a vital concern.
If I told you that there was a new law saying I'd punch you in the teeth any time you tipped more than 5%, some people who thought they could take me would tip 15%. Some people would figure I couldn't possibly find them. Some people would band together, maybe (Knowing I'm super strong), but it would still be a net bad if your goal is "people should get tips above 5%".
It's actually enforced. There's still drama amongst my relatives over it, so I know about it first hand.
Because women still don't have equal rights in the United States
Edit: Well, also what Fyre said.
Anyone who promotes marriage inequality should be allowed give up the legal benefits associated with marriage to prove that it's really about the love between one man and one woman and nothing else.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5dmV1GoUGW4
what the fuck