Showing posts with label ACLU. Show all posts
Showing posts with label ACLU. Show all posts
Wednesday, March 27, 2019
Thursday, February 02, 2017
Random Musings
Tuesday, November 01, 2016
On This Date In ISBL History: Miss Lesbian Prom
Monday, November 25, 2013
Julia Frost Was Fired For Being Gay?
For two years Julia Frost taught
English at Sultana High School in the Hesperia Unified
School District in San Bernardino and then she was fired. She says it’s because
she’s openly gay and that the school is a “hostile environment” for her and gay
students.
Maybe so …
The trouble seems to have begun when
Front, along with a fellow teacher who isn’t gay, co-sponsored a GSA
[Gay/Straight Alliance] at the school and began working with students, teaching
them how to make formal complaints regarding "criticism and
open-hostility" directed at them by other students and teachers.
In other words, she was trying to help
bullied students stand up for themselves.
Frost says when students told her of
being bullied because of their sexual orientation, school administrators
tried to discourage them from filing formal complaints, and she was told administrators
also threatened to out those students to their parents.
Shortly after Julia Frost helped a student file a about another
teacher who told a classmate to "take the gay headband off" in class
and then commented "that's so gay" in a disparaging manner, she was
told her contract would not be renewed.
“Today I’m sitting here, and I’m not in a classroom, and that’s just really, really devastating to me” -- Julia Frost
And so she filed a lawsuit against
Hesperia Unified School District that alleges unlawful discrimination,
harassment and retaliation because of her sexual orientation. The suit alleges that administrators
created a hostile environment for Frost and LGBTQ students, and investigated
Frost for "teaching homosexuality."
“I heard things from teachers like, ‘Which one is the man and which one is the woman in your relationship?’” -- Julia Frost
Odd though, that while allegedly “teaching homosexuality” Julia Frost also received
an outstanding performance review.
The lawsuit also alleges that the Gay/Straight Alliance’s club's
activities and announcements were censored and blatantly left out of the student
handbook listing school organizations.
David McLaughlin,
the district’s superintendent, said:
“While the district may not discuss personnel matters, Ms. Frost’s allegations that the district dismissed her because she ‘blew the whistle’ with the ACLU about students’ equal rights, specifically the rights of our LGBT students, is absolutely false. Sadly, her efforts serve only to fuel the argument that public education cannot dismiss teachers who do not meet district expectations without controversy and, potentially costly, legal battles.”
McLaughlin is
referring to an incident last March, when some students went to the ACLU for help, alleging that the school tried to censor the Gay/Straight
Alliance and tried to impose unfair gender-specific dress codes. Frost said the
complaints were made independent of her.
Since then, the ACLU
has praised the school for making adjustments:
“They are implementing concrete changes to improve the climate for LGBT students in the district. We are very pleased the district took our allegations very seriously.”
Whether or not
those students contacted the ACXLU with the help of Frost or not, is irrelevant.
It seems to me she was, as I said earlier, teaching these students to stand up
for themselves, to ask to be respected for their sexual orientation; to ask,
simply, for respect. And for that this teacher who received positive performance
reviews during her two-years at the school was fired.
Frost is suing for
unspecified damages and demanding to be rehired.
Friday, July 12, 2013
Good News Friday: Pennsylvania Attorney General Won't Defend State’s Same-Sex Marriage Ban
I usually end posts like this with the line ‘The march goes
on ….’ But I think it best to start that way, today.
Up there, round Pennsylvania way, state Attorney general,
Kathleen Kane, has announced that she will not defend Pennsylvania in a federal
lawsuit filed this week that challenges the constitutionality of the state’s
ban on same-sex marriage. In fact, Kane called the ban “wholly unconstitutional.”
Holy unconstitutionality, Batman!
It all began when the American Civil Liberties Union [ACLU]
filed suit on behalf of twenty-three Pennsylvania residents naming Kane and
the state’s Republican Governor Tom Corbett—who supports a ban on same-sex
marriage—as defendants. But, with Kane’s move, the onus of defending the law falls
on the governor’s general counsel.
Kane—who endorsed the idea of gay marriage while running for
her post last year—said she was obligated to drop the case “because I endorse
equality and anti-discrimination laws” and if “there is a law that I feel that
does not conform with the Pennsylvania state constitution and the U.S.
Constitution, then I ethically cannot do that as a lawyer.”
Kane also says the Pennsylvania General Counsel, James Schultz,
was fully capable of defending the governor: “I’m not leaving them high and
dry,” she said. “They have their own team.”
Thomas Peters, spokesman for the National Organization for
Marriage, said Kane’s refusal to defend the ban represented a sort of “pocket
veto” of the law: “This is just one more example of how the Supreme Court set
a bad precedent [last month] in allowing elected officials to not represent the
will of the people when they find it expedient.”
Actually, Thomas, it allows elected officials to enforce the
Constitution of their state, and of the country. And this could work out like it did in California back in 2008, when
then Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger and current Governor Jerry Brown—who,
at the time, was California’s attorney general—declined to defend the proposition.
It may go the the Supreme Court, but we already know how that story ends.
James Schultz, the Pennsylvania General, expressed his surprise
that Kane “contrary to her constitutional duty…has decided not to defend a
Pennsylvania statute lawfully enacted by the General Assembly, merely because
of her personal beliefs.”
Actually, what she has said is that she finds the ban runs
against the state Constitution, and therefore she finds it indefensible. And, for her part, Kane has said, time and again, that she made
her decision because, in a choice between defending the law and serving the
public, “I choose you.”
Mary Catherine Roper, a senior staff attorney for the ACLU
of Pennsylvania, calls Kane’s announcement a big step forward: “To have the
highest law enforcement official of the Commonwealth come out and say, ‘I agree
with you, this law is unjust, that’s huge for us.’”
Of course, the state GOP chairman Rob Gleason called it “unacceptable
for Attorney General Kathleen Kane to put her personal politics ahead of her
taxpayer-funded job by abdicating her responsibilities.”
She.Is.Upholding.The.Constitution. The GOP—like Corbett,
Schultz and Gleason—are the ones putting their personal beliefs before the law.
Finally, yes, you guessed it, the march goes on ….
Thursday, July 11, 2013
Random Musings
![]() |
| I have one request of the Tea Party: Spell-f&%$ing-check your signs before you head out of your trailers! |
Labels:
ACLU,
Alec Baldwin,
Anniversary,
Bob,
Carlos,
Daniel Craig,
Eddie Murphy,
Hot Men,
Lie,
Mama Grizzly Bore™,
Musings,
Pat Robertson,
Paula Deen,
Rick Perry,
Steve Grand,
Tea Party,
The View,
X
Tuesday, March 12, 2013
Kentucky Legislators Want To Use Religion As An Excuse For Hate
Ah Kentuckians, how it must feel waking up this morning to
the fact that your elected officials are trying to make discrimination legal,
and fun, if you do it based on your religious beliefs.
Yesterday, the Today Kentucky House passed House Bill 279—AKA
the Religious Freedom Bill—which is ostensibly designed to protect individuals'
religious liberty from undue governmental interference. But, as it is currently
written, the bill undermines existing civil rights protections in the State.
It moves on to the Senate where, I hope, smarter heads
prevail. But, if the Senate chooses to keep the bill's current language, and
not amend it to include specific protections for civil rights
laws, a religious individual could claim an exemption from any law
or policy that prohibits discrimination—leaving racial minorities, women, LGBT
people and others without adequate protections.
See, in Kentucky you’d be able to legally discriminate against Blacks, and Latinos, and woman or any
race or color, and LGBT people, if you say something like ‘God made me do it.’
And, if this bill passes, with the current language intact, it could undermine
existing LGBT Fairness protections in local statutes in places Louisville,
Lexington, Covington and Vicco, Kentucky.
And if you don’t think folks will use their so-called religion
as an excuse to discriminate, well, they have in the past, and here’s how and
where:
Against African-Americans: In 1966, three African-American customers brought a suit against Piggie Park restaurants, and their owner, Maurice Bessinger, for refusal to serve them. Bessinger argued that enforcement of the Civil Rights Act, which prohibits that type of discrimination, violated his religious freedom "since his religious beliefs compel[ed] him to oppose any integration of the races whatever."
Against women: In 1976, Roanoke Valley Christian Schools added a "head of household" supplement to their teachers' salaries – which according to their beliefs meant married men, and not women.When sued under the Equal Pay Act, Roanoke Valley claimed a right to an exemption. According to the church pastor affiliated with the school, "[w]hen we turned to the Scriptures to determine head of household, by scriptural basis, we found that the Bible clearly teaches that the husband is the head of the house, head of the wife, head of the family."
Against interracial marriages: In the 1980's, Bob Jones University, a religiously-affiliated school in South Carolina, wanted an exemption from a rule denying tax-exempt status to schools that practice racial discrimination. The "sponsors of the University genuinely believe[d] that the Bible forbids interracial dating and marriage," and it was school policy that students engaged in interracial relationships, or advocacy thereof, would be expelled.
As I said, hopefully the Kentucky Senate has more active
brain cells in it than does the House. If not, any religion, and we all know
they are some legitimate ones out there, but there are also some crazy ones,
too, would be able to legally discriminate
against minorities, women and the LGBT community.
In the 21st century.
via the ACLU
Labels:
ACLU,
Anti-LGBTQ+,
Discrimination,
Hate,
Kentucky,
Racism,
Religion
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)


































