http://www.breitbart.com/news/2005/09/23/D8CPU38G8.html

This may sound strange coming from me, but since this is a private school, I believe that they should be entitled to do whatever they wish to.

The issue here, IMO, should not be whether or not you agree or disagree with the basis for the school's ruling, but whether or not the school has the right to make such a ruling in the first place.

The link to the story doesn't work for me, but I based on what's been posted so far, I'm going under the assumption that this girl is being tossed out of a private school because her parents are in a same-sex partnership.

Plaw, what are you thinking?? Have you gone mad? Have you perhaps hit your head and are bleeding profusely from an open wound, so you're temporarily taken leave of your senses? Because it's a PRIVATE school?????

I'm sure the school has an admissions policy. If so, I would imagine it to be based on academic performance and the ability to pay the tuition. And I would think in the case of certain financially challenged children, perhaps scholarships are made available.

If this child meets those criteria, what does it being a private school have to do with it? What if she were black? Or Latina? Or Jewish? Or green with purple polka dots? What if she had nine arms and six legs? If she can meet the admissions criteria and can either pay the tuition or qualify for a scholarship, then she deserves to be admitted.

I agree with PLaw. The private school is Christian and they don't want kids with Homosexual Parents in the school.

Stob wrote that school policy requires that at least one parent may not engage in practices "immoral or inconsistent with a positive Christian life style, such as cohabitating without marriage or in a homosexual relationship," The Los Angeles Times reported in Friday's edition.

I don't particularily agree with them, but it is the right of the Private School to do as they want.

No plaw, is correct. Having same sex parents may be part of the criteria. I didn't open the link, but the key word is private. It has nothing to do with money or brains.

If so, then why should private country clubs have black or Jewish members? If so, why should restaurants, which are private institutions, have to serve someone if they don't like the color of their skin or their eyes, or maybe they don't want to admit women.

You can't make those rules. If the school has certain academic standards, and the girl doesn't quite cut it, then fine. Otherwise, you MUST let her in.

They don't have to let her in. Period. It's a PRIVATE school. Not to mention religious, and if she doesn't meet some criteria that the school inforces, she won't be let in.

Country Clubs letting in minorities is entirely diferent from this situation. If the school didnt let the girl in because she was black or hispanic, then yes there is definetly something wrong there. But this is a private school with strict religious and moral beliefs. Whether or not you agree with homosexuality, you have to concede that it is highly frowned upon by Christianity, and a private Christian School definetly should be able to do what it did.

The community will vote with their feet on this issue. Let the school live with the stigma of being discriminatory.

Discrimination is discrimination. It shouldn't matter if it's based on the color of her skin or if her parents are two people of the same sex. What if her parents were a heterosexual couple, but it was discovered that one of them had an affair? Should the "sins" of the parents be taken out on the child? Should she be ripped from her friends and teachers, where she feels comfortable?

If this is so against the school policy, how was she admitted in the first place?

My guess is that the identity of the parents sexual orientation was not revealed to the school when the student was admitted.

And regarding discrimination... Maybe discrimination is discrimination in most cases, but i think its different in this situation. When it comes to the Catholic Church and homosexuality, what can you really say? This school is a private school, which believes strongly in a Christian God and the bible. I think it would be more of an injustice if the school was forced to readmit the student. Who are any of us to judge how a PRIVATE school picks its students?

What if the principle of the school discovers he's gay tomorrow. Sacked?
And what if the principal is being caught with porn on his computer? Sacked?

Discrimination is always bad. Plawrence can be as liberal as he wants with all his
"Doesn't matter what other people do, it's not my business"
"It's a private school, they can do what they want"
"If an employer decides not to hire someone cause he has black hair, then that's okay for me"

, but I have to disagree with him. If some parts of the population are discriminated, then the government has to solve that. But that's a socialist speaking

Here's the article:

School Expels Girl for Having Gay Parents
Sep 23 7:05 AM US/Eastern
ONTARIO, Calif.

A 14-year-old student was expelled from a Christian school because her parents are lesbians, the school's superintendent said in a letter.

Shay Clark was expelled from Ontario Christian School on Thursday.

"Your family does not meet the policies of admission," Superintendent Leonard Stob wrote to Tina Clark, the girl's biological mother.

Stob wrote that school policy requires that at least one parent may not engage in practices "immoral or inconsistent with a positive Christian life style, such as cohabitating without marriage or in a homosexual relationship," The Los Angeles Times reported in Friday's edition.

Stob could not be reached for comment by the newspaper. Shay and her parents said they won't fight the ruling.

School administrators learned of the parents' relationship this week after Shay was reprimanded for talking to the crowd during a football game, Tina Clark said.

Clark and her partner have been together 22 years and have two other daughters, ages 9 and 19.

When it comes to my personal feelings, I'm about as non-discriminatory as anyone gets. If I were the superintendent of this school, I wouldn't be expelling anyone because they had gay or lesbian parents.

But I don't think I'd find myyself as the superintendent of Christian school, either.

The issue here is not our personal feelings about discrimination. The issue, I think is protecting our rights to do with our private property or businesses as we see fit.

Personally, if I owned a two family house, I would have no peoblem renting the apartment to a family of African Americans. But not everyone fels that way, and I object to the anti-discrimination laws which make it a crime for a homeowner to not rent his apartment - his private property - to someone on the basis of race, religion, nationality, sexual orientation, or whatever.

A country club is composed of its own membership. They don't run ads in the newspaper inviting members of the general public to join. If they wish to discriminate for any reason, and not admit someone for membership, it should be their right to do so.

As Don Sicilia pointed out, people will vote with their feet. If a business feels that it is in their best interests to be discriminatory in some way - in, say, their hiring practices, or the way they choose to deal with their customers - that should be up to them.

If their decision helps business, all well and good. If it hurts business - if they lose customers because they don't hire minorities and word of that policy gets out - then they will change their policy quickly enough.

These types of decisions made by businesses are, I believe, for what they perceive as beneficial economic reasons, rather than outright discrimination.

In this case we are dealing with a private school that apparently has as one of its goal the teaching of what they preceive to be "Christian values".

Whether or not expelling a student because her parents are lesbians is a good demonsration of these values is not the point.

It's a private school. Regardless of how much you may disagree with the school's policy, I don't see how you can argue that they don't have the right to have such a policy and enforce it if they wish.

Socialist or not, do you want the government telling you that you have to rent your apartment to two homosexuals because you object to that lifestyle on moral grounds and you don't wish to have your children exposed to it?

If you own a store, do you want the government to tell you that you have to hire a Black clerk, if you know that most of your customers are racist, do not wish to be served by a Black person, and would take their business elsewhere?

Any School Principal should be sacked if they find porn on his work computer.

If the pricipal discovers he's gay at a private Catholic school, he would be sacked .....unless he is a Priest

I mean porn at home.

But why would that principal have to be sacked because he is gay at a catholic school?

People, what do you believe in? Jesus and God?
Or the powerlusting Catholic Church, that kept Europe stupid from the 5th century until the 20th century?

I believe it is that Church that wants all those things like "being gay is immoral" and other nonsense. Kicking a child out of school because her parents are gay????
Punishing a girl because her parents are gay? Isn't anyone seeing how ridiculous this is???

Are they also going to expell the daughter of a killer? I don't think they will, IMO. And what is more worse? Having gay parents or having a parent that killed people?
None, cause the child can't help it!!

And now back to Jezus, the Church, and being gay:
Jesus tought all people were equal, he loved all people. Period.
Then why is the Church, centuries later, against that 5% of the population that is gay???

I dunno who you believe: Jezus, or an archaïc Church with a senile panzercardinal (former Hitler-jugend) in charge? I've made my choice.

It's interesting to finally agree with you on something Plaw, but I feel like you may be contradicting yourself and your liberal views. Arent you a supporter of the ACLU?

I'm with Plaw on this one, too. I am all for gay rights and all that - but it is a Catholic school, after all. They have their (dated) standards, and the families of the other 99.9999999% of the student body probably expect the school to uphold those standards - as Catholics.

If, God forbid, the KKK was running a school, there'd be no way they'd have anyone but those students enrolled that they deemed worthy. Discriminatory? Sure. But so is the Catholic Church.

Besides - the kid is better off in a public school. I wonder if the family was kicked out of their church as well?

Sad.

I think it's very admirable of Plaw to take his own personal stance on this issue. It shows he has the ability to think on his own and not just read a party statement about what he's supposed to think. It's not contradiction, it's personal opinion.

I would have to agree with most of the previous posts. Since it is a private school, they have the ability to base their standards on whatever they feel is appropriate. If we disagree, we simply don't send our children there. If their standards are too ridiculous to build an enrollment, then a change will have to made or the school will cease. Evidently, there are enough people who aren't disgusted with the standards to keep the school open. If they want to send their children there, far be it for me to tell them they can't.

Now if it was a public school, it obviously would be a gross injustice. Everyone is guranteed a free and appropriate education, regardless of factors such as race, religion, sex, etc.

Plaw, so now you have no problem with employers who discriminate in their hiring practices? And the Fair Housing Act is just utter nonsense? How can you honestly say that??

If you and I were interviewed for a job for which I was vastly more qualified, but the interviewer didn't like to hire women and gave the job to you, you think that's just fine? But they will allegedly lose business because word is going to get out about this? Puh-leeze.

First of all, this story is an utter crock. These women have been together for 22 years, and they have two other children. How did the school NOT know? How was it possible that they didn't notice until they heard the girl speak to the crowd at a game over the weekend?

I can guarantee you what happened. I can guarantee that the school knew all along. However, some tightass parent(s) learned about it at that game, and went to the school, threatening to pull their kids and/or their donations. Instead of doing the CHRISTIAN thing and standing by those who need protection, the school weaseled out. Weenies.

Whatever the rights or wrongs of the school's decision, this is one in the eye for those who argue that children of gay parents are not disadvantaged.

I will grant you this SB... If your theory about how the school knowing all along is true, then that proves that the school doesnt have much integrity. And yes your right, it really wouldnt be the moral thing to do from their part. But maybe the school didnt know. Maybe the family kept it in the closet. And even if the school did know, as a private organization they should be allowed to do what they see fit, even if alot of people dont agree with it.

We all are seeming to forget here that the school is Catholic, and with one of their criterias is not having any Homosexual Parents, etc... So this school has the right, if it's in their guidelines, to not let this girl go to school ther. PLUS it is the school's right ANYWAY. It is a PRIVATE school.

If it was public, they wouldn't be able to do that. OBVIOUSLY.

I see your point, though Enzo. That if it's private, why should they go into it. But unfortunatley, the school doesn't see it that way, and it is their right, as a religious and private school, to not do so.

What you must realize, and what it seems as though many members here don't, is that just because you are liberal or conservative in your viewpoint on one issue, that doesn't mean you have to have the same POV on every issue.

Too many people label themselves, and then feel that they have to adopt a certain stance on an issue because that's what's expected of them.

Sure I support the ACLU - on most things. But not necessarily all things. And I don't see any contradiction there.

Correct. It's my business - my private property - and I feel that I should have the right to hire whomever I please for whatever reason I please.

As far as the Fair Housing Act goes, I'm not really familiar with its details. But if it tells me that I can't choose who I wish to sell my house to, or rent my apartment to - again, my private property , then yes, I'm against it.

In this case, the interviewer is an idiot if he passes up someone more qualified because he doesn't like to hire women. And eventually, he will lose his job I would think. But if that's his company's policy, as stupid a policy as it is, it's their company and I believe that they should have the right to hire whomever they wish for whatever reason they wish.

And yes, they might lose business if word of their practices leaked out.

I remember being in High School atround 1965 or so, and picketing a branch of what was then First National City Bank because the supposedly wouldn't hire minorities.

I remember thinking to myself that while the bank should have the right to hire whomever they wanteed to, that their policy was stupid and wrong, but it should not be the government that should try and change their policy through legislation, but the people who should change it by not patronizing the bank.

So yes, in general housing discrimination and employment discrimination are not good things, and in principal I'm against them.

But I think a far more important principle to protect is the rights that people should have to deal with their own private property in any way they see fit.

It's the slippery slope again. First there are laws telling us we can't discriminate. And before you know it, there could be quotas, requiring apartment house owners to rent a certain percentage of their apartments to a specific group, or telling business owners that they had to hire a certain percentage of minority group members.

I would agree. The weaseled out, they are weenies, they probably knew all along, it may very well have been pressure from other parents that caused their action, and it was not, IMO, the "Christian" thing to do.

But none of that changes the fact that I believe that they had an absolute right to do what they did.

Stupid ruling. I go to a Roman-Catholic High School, and they accept Muslims, Atheists, Jews, homosexuals, whatever.
--------

A 14-year-old student was expelled

.....
Clark and her partner have been together 22 years and have two other daughters, ages 9 and 19

What?

Do you go to a Public or Private school? Because as I've stated, the situation would be totally different if it was in Public School.

Private.

It is a private school, so it's really up to them. Do I think it's prejudice? Yes. If this were a public school, I'd be outraged, but it's not. I don't agree with that they did, but it's ultimately up to the school. If they want to make their decision based on their religious identity, than they have every right to do that. -Pat

There isn't anything "MUST" about it. They don't have to let her in if they don't like the way she carries herself, heck, they can decide to not let her in if she isn't blonde haired and blue eyed. They are a PRIVATE school, which does not derive benefits from public funds.

Consequently, they are wholly within the law to reject members based on a set criteria. Granted, I'm sure there will be some kind of legal appeal here by the parents, but I wonder whether a court would force a school to accept someone who doesn't match the criteria set forth in the application. Maybe they could prove that they instituted this criteria after she was already accepted, or something along those lines?

Granted, I think it is rather silly to dismiss her simply because of her parents, because it isn't taking into account her academic merits or her as a person.

Surprising as it may seem, I agree with Plaw on this one. If it were a public school, this would obviously be illegal. But because this is a private school where membership is designed to be exclusive, there really isn't anything she can do.