|
...
|
gizmo_2655 wrote on Nov 12 th, 2010 at 1:23pm: ... wrote on Nov 12 th, 2010 at 1:17pm: gizmo_2655 wrote on Nov 12 th, 2010 at 1:12pm: ... wrote on Nov 12 th, 2010 at 12:58pm: gizmo_2655 wrote on Nov 12 th, 2010 at 12:40pm: Bobby. wrote on Nov 12 th, 2010 at 12:14pm: This whole thrtead is getting rather silly.
The girls need practice in dealing with males. They will have plenty of time for their carpet munching activities for the rest of their lives.
They should have gone to the function & picked a male partner. Ok so what do you think the girl would have 'learned' by going to the dance with a male??? That she's not attracted to males??? I think she already knows that.... Or could it be she'd learn that other people have the right to dictate her lifestyle choices??? This ban was simply based on the fact that her partner was another girl....it wasn't about 'Year 10 students can't attend', because a Year 10 boy did attend, and from the way the article was written, Hannah was the only one who wanted to bring a girlfriend, so that's unlikely to 'destroy' the balance of boy-vs-girl at the dance.... It was the bias of the Headmistress and, possibly, the school that caused all this ruckus.... No, it was the sensationalistic media that caused all this ruckus. Gotta give the army of clapping seals something to get all outraged about - and what fits the bill better than a good spot of christian bashing eh? And aren't christian schools and churches bound by the same rules as the rest of Australia???? Nope. Quote:ANTI-DISCRIMINATION ACT 1977 - SECT 49ZO Education 49ZO Education
(1) It is unlawful for an educational authority to discriminate against a person on the ground of homosexuality: (a) by refusing or failing to accept the person’s application for admission as a student, or (b) in the terms on which it is prepared to admit the person as a student.
(2) It is unlawful for an educational authority to discriminate against a student on the ground of homosexuality: (a) by denying the student access, or limiting the student’s access, to any benefit provided by the educational authority, or (b) by expelling the student or subjecting the student to any other detriment.
(3) Nothing in this section applies to or in respect of a private educational authority. And why should they be? They are entitled to their beliefs. What the shrill, screaming lefties need to understand is that forcing everybody to compromise whatever beliefs they may have, so as not to offend some whining jokers, is discrimination too. Ok so if the school objected to her lifestyle choice, why didn't they a) expell her, or b) admit that the reason she couldn't bring her girlfriend was, well, because she WAS a girl??? Why go through the song and dance about 'no Year 10 students' and then allow a male Yr 10 student to attend??? Because the reaction of the brainless PC clowns is as predictable as clockwork?
|