well, aren't Lutheran schools Private Schools? if so, they can expel whoever the fuck they want. Free country.

but if it's a public school, then it's wrong. in fact, i find some of the rational laws in Public Schools to be bullshit already. (you know me, the less rules the better).

Troll? hmmm typical last resort argument. Apparently troll means somebody on the internet who you dislike.

And don't go to Wikipedia to copy and paste the definition for troll.

"Expelled for behaving in a manner consistent with lesbians" is a politically more-correct way of saying "expelled for being lesbians."

Fine but the ruling is that a private school is not considered a business. And I agree.

"No I don't think all beliefs that conflict with my own are nonsense. I think all beliefs that conflict with the vast majority of the scientific community are nonsense."

So you agree that my beliefs are not nonsense? Or are you so arrogant that you assume without reseach that my religiouse beliefs are nonsense? Or are you a genius that has all the answerers?

It's so typical for uneducated people that just don't like church to be like, "oh, science". As if religion and science can't coexist.

"All black colleges were set up because blacks were not allowed into almost every other college especially in the south. So they really had no other options."

I already knew that. I told you that.

"Apparently you didn't read it though."

What makes you think that?

The article said; And you quoted " "conducting themselves in a manner consistent with" ".

Now onto the arrogance of your last statement.

"nonsense"

All different beliefs that conflict with your own are nonsense then? If I called your views "nonsense", plain and simple as if it weren't even debatable, you would have been all over me. Would you not!?

You sir, are a hypocrite.

1. Never said they do.

2. I already did this homework when I was in grade school don't you worry.

3. It wasn't for sexual orientation alone. It was for the relationship between the two students. "a bond of intimacy" to be exact.

4. If you would have read the article you would understand.

Thank you, oh provocative one.

All of what you just said is true except for the last five words.

I actually happen to agree with this one:

In response to that suit, an appeals court decided this week that the private religious school was not a business and therefore did not have to comply with a state law that prohibits businesses from discriminating. A lawyer for the girls said Tuesday that he would ask the California Supreme Court to overturn the unanimous ruling by a three-judge panel of the 4th District Court of Appeal.

1. That doesn't matter. Equal means equal. Not; "oh remember that? Where never gunna let you forget it".

2. When will we be forgiven!? "when the white will do what's right" I thought we where already past this!

3. You don't give me homework.

It was a private school. If a private school has students that do not obey the rules of the school (like homosexuality in a CHRISTIAN school), said school has every right to kick them out. It's a shame that it happened, but Christian schools don't really have to follow the law of public schools.

Yes, many of them are. But, there are wackos of all kinds. I hate a lot of people though.

but that's then asking for colleges to not allow people based on beliefs.

someone wants to go to a Lutheran school and all of a sudden can't get into a University because the school didn't allow people engaging in lesbian acts. because of this person's religious pursuits, he is not allowed to get into Universities.

Because the school was a private school, nothing can be really be done.

Does it make it right? Certainly not. If it was a public one it'd be completely different.

So yes, private schools should be allowed to expel anyone they want, even though it may not always be morally right. Public schools? Nope.

True, and that is what the judges ruled. On the other hand, the school makes money and provides a service (education) for students. I guess since the students are not employees the law doesn't apply.

As I said in one of my other arguments I think that going through the law in this case might not be the best option, but instead approaching universities and getting them to agree to only accept students from non-discriminatory schools.

Yeah, you're right on all those points. I guess I'm more complaining about how religious people are fucking wackos.

that isn't for the school to worry about since it is an issue that is indeterminable.

the fact is, they did engage in a relationship that the school did not allow, so they were kicked out. could they control it? of course they could. did they? no. if anything, though, they're better off not going to a school where they would probably be hated by everyone there.

we find it acceptable because this is a free country where private schools can determine any of this. Most people don't find it MORALLY right, but they accept the rights provided by this country. Just how we accept the KKK not letting anyone who isn't white protestant in.

I didn't really state my point clearly. What I meant was that sure, the school is allowed to do it. There are black-only schools, and female-only schools, and no one objects. But the only reason we consider this acceptable is that gay rights haven't progressed as much as minority rights.

Most experts agree that homosexuality is natural, not a choice. Gays appear in every part of every society of every culture on Earth. And if young people date and fuck, in spite of the many restrictions in the way, then it is safe to assume it's natural behavior. It is a choice, yes, but when instinct comes into the question, the line between choice and non-choice is blurred a bit.

Eg, Jean Valjean steals bread on a windowsill, because he's starving. Is it still a choice if he's nearly delirious from malnutrition? Is pursuing homosexual relationships fully a choice if you respond to pheromones of the same sex, and your brain is clouded by hormones and immaturity? Looking at all the teen pregnancies (I live in San Antonio, the capitol), it doesn't seem like kids are fully in charge of their ability to make a rational choice when it comes to sexual relations.

The school is considered a sort of private institution (club), not a business.

The difference in the situations is that the girls were expelled for their ACTIONS. They engaged in a relationship while attending this school.

Being black is uncontrollable. It's a skin color, not an action.

I find it appalling that blacks are now compared with gays... actually, it's kind of racist.

But the Lutheran PRIVATE School has a right to let anyone in or kick anyone out if they do not meet the standards of their school. It's technically considered a private club, and in America, we consider that personal liberties.

Ethically they shouldn't have but the school was a private and discriminatary one so they have the abilty and they uphold the right to expel anyone they wish to expel.

i'll drink to that ;)

What about the all black schools? They get to have their own private schools, why can't white people?

Equal rights ring a bell?

They were not expelled just for being lesbians they were expelled for being intimate during school. Being a lesbian is a choice black is not a choice. So no it would not be acceptable to expel black students.

They're expelled for engaging in lesbianism. It's an action. Being black is a skin color, something that can not be controlled. So it wouldn't be acceptable (in a way, technically, we should be living in a FREE country where the government doesn't determine what private institutions should allow).

Ok, well we have made it clear that it was a private school, so they were infact allowed to expel them.

So was it the right choice?

Yes I believe it was. Now I don't know all the details but it is a church school so whatever the students were doing was probably against the rules and the rules should be respected.

Plus they were not expelled for who they are, they were expelled for what they chose to do.

I don't know for sure but I doubt they would be expelled for simply being gay, only for acting on it. Therefore the school would not be discriminatory.

A private program can exclude anyone it wants. No rights where violated. This is not a public school. They can still choose to go to any public school, or even a more liberal private school. So I wouldn't pair them up with others in history that suffered greatly for race do to discrimination. But I'm sure that's not what you where doing?

"invisible sky daddy"? That's stupid.

"Regardless of whether it's legal for them to do so or not, that's still discriminatory."

What do you suggest? We make it illegal to exclude certain people from private organizations!? Say I wanted to have an official private study group for people with freckles.[silly I know, it's just an example] Should I have the freedom to do so? What about those poor non freckled people that want to pay to join my group?

Your argument is a poor one.