5 ms·

>Does that go for "let humans decide for themselves whether to accept homosexuality as normal for some people?" If so, would you agree that the state must remai

>Does that go for "let humans decide for themselves whether to accept homosexuality as normal for some people?" If so, would you agree that the state must remain neutral on that issue? And if so, then would you agree that expressing hostility to gay rights can never be harassment or bullying in the eyes of the state? The issue is not with taking a position, it's with suppressing opposition to that position. My school encouraged tolerance for the LGBT community in its promotion of diversity, but I could stand up in a school-sponsored Debate extracurricular and oppose gay marriage. I could write a persuasive paper against gay marriage and submit it to my English teacher. I could campaign against gay rights in the Republican club. If I were the editor, I could run a front-page school newspaper article opposing the administration's decision. I'd probably lose a lot of friends that way, but the school couldn't stop or punish me. This is one of the strengths of public education. Nobody, however, gets to bully or harass individuals for any reason, including their homosexuality. As with parents and children, your rights end and the other person's rights begin.

einhverfr 13y ago
> The issue is not with taking a position, it's with suppressing opposition to that position. If that is the case, then allowing parents to teach opposing viewpoints should be a good thing, right? Saying parents can't teach such viewpoints would be suppressing opposition, right? > I could write a persuasive paper against gay marriage. I could campaign against gay rights in the Republican club. If you wore a T-shirt that said "Aristotle said the fundamental union of society is between man and woman and he was right" would that get you in trouble I wonder? Would that be seen as bullying? Should it be seen as bullying? One problem I am seeing today is that there is a trend towards seeing such things as bullying today and therefore schools end up in the position of imposing cultural ideals, and that I think runs right up against the suppression of opposition that I think you are saying is not ok.
- superuser2 13y ago
  >If that is the case, then allowing parents to teach opposing viewpoints should be a good thing, right? Saying parents can't teach such viewpoints would be suppressing opposition, right? Earlier in this thread I explicitly supported parents' rights to say whatever the want at home. My objection is to preventing their children from hearing what the school has to say. >If you wore a T-shirt that said "Aristotle said the fundamental union of society is between man and woman and he was right" would that get you in trouble I wonder? Would that be seen as bullying? Should it be seen as bullying? No, no, and no. It would lose you the respect of your liberal and/or LGBTQ peers, but the school can't stop you unless it stops all controversial or political speech on clothing (which is a Time, Place, and Manner restriction). I've not heard of students opposition to gay rights in general getting them in trouble for bullying, although it sounds like something that could happen. That would be an inappropriate restriction of free speech. I have heard assholes defending the right to personally bully specific gay kids with derogatory language directed specifically to them, threats, physical violence, etc. That shouldn't and doesn't fly.
  - foobarbazqux 13y ago
    At a very practical level, society needs heterosexual unions (however brief) to survive, but it doesn't need homosexual ones. Why does stating this basic fact lose me the respect of my liberal and queer peers? It's about as accurate and offensive as a t-shirt that says, "We are the descendants of apes, not Adam and Eve."
    - einhverfr 13y ago
      People can respect or not what they want. If culture flows from the grass roots this is a part of it. The question is what role the state has to play in this. Either the state must enforce respect for whatever groups should be respected (you? gay rights advocates?) or they must remain neutral. I don't really see a viable third way. If the state must remain neutral (and hence same with public schools) then the state has no reason to say people must respect you for your political views any more than the other side.
      - superuser2 13y ago
        The issue is to separate respect for opinions from respect for human beings. I don't have to hold you in high regard or accept out your company, but I do have to be civil. You don't get to harass or beat the crap out of someone because "the state should remain neutral."
        einhverfr 13y ago
        Is a T-shirt which states we should move back towards traditional marriage as the retirement safety net one which is harassment? What if one has a T-shirt advocating banning sperm banks or IVF? My problem is that if the state does not remain neutral on political issues then we have no semblance of democracy.
  - einhverfr 13y ago
    > No, no, and no. It would lose you the respect of your liberal and/or LGBTQ peers, but the school can't stop you unless it stops all controversial or political speech on clothing (which is a Time, Place, and Manner restriction). What about the argument that it creates a hostile learning environment for GLBT folks and therefore denies them their right to an equal opportunity for education? What about the argument that such a T-shirt amounts to reinforcing discrimination regarding gender roles? In other words, to what extent does this put schools in a circumstance where if they tolerate the t-shirt they get sueed by one group under Title VII and if they don't tolerate it they get sued by another group under Section 1983? The problem as I see it is that both sides end up with colorable arguments. Moreover suppose the school decides to teach Aristotelian social theory and starts out at the married household level. Is this discrimination? Is this a one-way street? Aristotelian social theory basically states that men and women come together in procreative unions which form households and these form the basic mechanisms of cultural transmission and development. Households come together to create communities. Therefore instead of the Lockean two-level contract (individuals and states) you have three (people and households, households and state). Aristotelian theory thus supports localism and local culture in ways that the theories of folks like Locke, Hobbes, and Hume do not.

einhverfr 13y ago

> The issue is not with taking a position, it's with suppressing opposition to that position. If that is the case, then allowing parents to teach opposing viewpoints should be a good thing, right? Saying parents can't teach such viewpoints would be suppressing opposition, right? > I could write a persuasive paper against gay marriage. I could campaign against gay rights in the Republican club. If you wore a T-shirt that said "Aristotle said the fundamental union of society is between man and woman and he was right" would that get you in trouble I wonder? Would that be seen as bullying? Should it be seen as bullying? One problem I am seeing today is that there is a trend towards seeing such things as bullying today and therefore schools end up in the position of imposing cultural ideals, and that I think runs right up against the suppression of opposition that I think you are saying is not ok.

superuser2 13y ago
>If that is the case, then allowing parents to teach opposing viewpoints should be a good thing, right? Saying parents can't teach such viewpoints would be suppressing opposition, right? Earlier in this thread I explicitly supported parents' rights to say whatever the want at home. My objection is to preventing their children from hearing what the school has to say. >If you wore a T-shirt that said "Aristotle said the fundamental union of society is between man and woman and he was right" would that get you in trouble I wonder? Would that be seen as bullying? Should it be seen as bullying? No, no, and no. It would lose you the respect of your liberal and/or LGBTQ peers, but the school can't stop you unless it stops all controversial or political speech on clothing (which is a Time, Place, and Manner restriction). I've not heard of students opposition to gay rights in general getting them in trouble for bullying, although it sounds like something that could happen. That would be an inappropriate restriction of free speech. I have heard assholes defending the right to personally bully specific gay kids with derogatory language directed specifically to them, threats, physical violence, etc. That shouldn't and doesn't fly.
- foobarbazqux 13y ago
  At a very practical level, society needs heterosexual unions (however brief) to survive, but it doesn't need homosexual ones. Why does stating this basic fact lose me the respect of my liberal and queer peers? It's about as accurate and offensive as a t-shirt that says, "We are the descendants of apes, not Adam and Eve."
  - einhverfr 13y ago
    People can respect or not what they want. If culture flows from the grass roots this is a part of it. The question is what role the state has to play in this. Either the state must enforce respect for whatever groups should be respected (you? gay rights advocates?) or they must remain neutral. I don't really see a viable third way. If the state must remain neutral (and hence same with public schools) then the state has no reason to say people must respect you for your political views any more than the other side.
    - superuser2 13y ago
      The issue is to separate respect for opinions from respect for human beings. I don't have to hold you in high regard or accept out your company, but I do have to be civil. You don't get to harass or beat the crap out of someone because "the state should remain neutral."
      - einhverfr 13y ago
        Is a T-shirt which states we should move back towards traditional marriage as the retirement safety net one which is harassment? What if one has a T-shirt advocating banning sperm banks or IVF? My problem is that if the state does not remain neutral on political issues then we have no semblance of democracy.
- einhverfr 13y ago
  > No, no, and no. It would lose you the respect of your liberal and/or LGBTQ peers, but the school can't stop you unless it stops all controversial or political speech on clothing (which is a Time, Place, and Manner restriction). What about the argument that it creates a hostile learning environment for GLBT folks and therefore denies them their right to an equal opportunity for education? What about the argument that such a T-shirt amounts to reinforcing discrimination regarding gender roles? In other words, to what extent does this put schools in a circumstance where if they tolerate the t-shirt they get sueed by one group under Title VII and if they don't tolerate it they get sued by another group under Section 1983? The problem as I see it is that both sides end up with colorable arguments. Moreover suppose the school decides to teach Aristotelian social theory and starts out at the married household level. Is this discrimination? Is this a one-way street? Aristotelian social theory basically states that men and women come together in procreative unions which form households and these form the basic mechanisms of cultural transmission and development. Households come together to create communities. Therefore instead of the Lockean two-level contract (individuals and states) you have three (people and households, households and state). Aristotelian theory thus supports localism and local culture in ways that the theories of folks like Locke, Hobbes, and Hume do not.