Teen Sues Christian High School For Expulsion Over Lesbian Kiss

[ruggerson]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ct/20051208/cr_ct/teensueschristianhighschoolforexpulsionoverlesbiankiss

<snip>

A lesbian teen who was expelled in April for kissing another girl is suing her private school to ensure other students never have to experience what she went through.

Jessica Bradley and her father, Ronald Bradley, claim that Covenant Christian Academy in Loganville, Ga., breached its contract with them by expelling the ninth-grader for carrying on an "inappropriate relationship" in violation of the school's standard of conduct on "sexual immorality."

The suit filed in Gwinnett Superior Court last Friday also claims the school invaded Jessica's privacy by airing details of her personal life and outing her to the community, even though her conduct was "private, protected behavior that did not have a direct and immediate effect on the discipline or general welfare of the school."

In addition to asking for a pro-rated tuition refund plus $1 million in damages, the suit seeks an injunction on the "sexual immorality" clause in the school's code of conduct so that other students will not "suffer the unexpected harassment and humiliation that Jessica Bradley did."

<snip>

[VegasWolf]

1. One million sounds fair to me as punishment for the Jesus school! nt

[darkism]

2. It's good to see that her father is supportive.

Here's wishing her luck!

[Bassic]

10. It's nice to see a parent accept his childs nature. nt

[Centered]

27. Is he supportive of her sexual preference?

or he is supportive of her becoming a millionaire?


I don't know this man from adam but I do know that money makes the medicine easier to swallow.

[JoFerret]

44. What "medicine" is that then?

.

[foreigncorrespondent]

45. Number one...

...it isn't a preference.

Number two.. what medicine would that be? The medicine needed to make one stronger to support a gay child? Not all people are as cold and callous as your words are.

[Sapphocrat]

60. Medicine, eh?

Explain that to me.

If you ever return to this thread.

[foreigncorrespondent]

61. ROFLMAO

That's a good one. Maybe we need a hit and run icon?

[Sapphocrat]

63. That wasn't the first icon I thought of, but I like yours too. n/t

[LostinVA]

69. WTF is that supposed to mean? The medicine that his daughter is gay?

WTF is wrong with DU the last few days? Man... out of the woodwork....

[DanCa]

3. God Bless her :) and everyone should take notice

We have to unite to stop the fundies. We can't ignore thier tyranny any more.

[BR_Parkway]

4. Much as I'd like to agree with her, this was a private Christian school?

Seems like they can have rules about sexual immorality if they want and can define them as they see fit. Totally different situation than if this were a public school.

[noamnety]

5. Does a private school

have a legal right to discuss your personal relationships with the general public?

Would a private employer?

[onenote]

6. they might

Lots of "private" entities set rules that relate to personal relationships (i.e., morality clauses).
In fact, some public ones do as well...like the military, for instance.

onenote

[foreigncorrespondent]

48. Sorry!

No one has the right to drag anyones personal life into the public arena.

They can have as many rules as the like. And if they had of kept this a private matter between the school and the girl, my opinion would be different. But when these dirty bastards use humiliation as a tactic, then that is when they cross the line of decency and deserve whatever they face themselves.

[BoneDaddy]

72. I hear ya

I hear your passion, you simply are very ill informed about the way things work...this will never hold up in court, regardless of whether or not you like it.

[Sapphocrat]

75. Do you think you could possibly manage...

...to keep personal attacks out of the debate? "I disagree with you 100%" works. "(Y)ou simply are very ill informed about the way things work" won't win you any friends or influence your opponents.

[foreigncorrespondent]

76. You certainly have a lot to learn.

Perhaps you should try reading the DU rules before actually posting. Especially when one is posting personal attacks about the intelligence of other members.

Funny that you say to someone who works in the security industry who passed their law exams 100% that they are very ill informed about the way things works.

I'm sorry but privacy laws are privacy laws. And that school broke privacy laws and deserve everything they can get. If you do not see that, then you obviously couldn't give a shit if your private life became public knowledge.

Have a good day. Enjoy your time on DU.

[LostinVA]

15. No -- THIS they can sue for and will win

It doesn't matter if they're a minor or not.

[JudyM]

18. They took their actions based on actions she took OFF the school property

or that's what I deduce from the article. In such a case, they have no justification for making this public, except to pander to their fundie funders by using the poor girl as 'an example' of what they stand for.

[NashVegas]

21. Don't Have Much Choice

If you're going to expell a student, you've got to be able to explain why you're doing so.

[LostinVA]

24. Not publicly, you don't --

[foreigncorrespondent]

49. What utter bullshit!

No school has to explain why they expel students to the PUBLIC! They crossed the line here!

[NashVegas]

78. They Didn't

The suit claims that Jessica was expelled after school officials questioned her and other students about her kissing a girl at a sleepover and her relationship with another female student "off-campus and in private."

By bringing other students into the discussions, the suit claims, rumors and gossip about Jessica spread around the school community and beyond.

Had it been a different type of incident, such as cheating on an exam or hazing, the other students who were witnesses would have been questioned as well.

Just as it was another student (or their parent?) who would have been the one to tell the school authorities about the kiss, odds are good that it was also the students explaining to their classmates why they were getting called to the office. What, do you think the principal got on the school's PA or something and made an annoucement? Someone in the school's office might have been spreading things around, but I think it more likely that whomever brought things to their attention in the first place continued to make an issue of it.

I wonder if the person(s) who originally spilled was also named in the suit?

I don't think this suit will have much merit in court, but I do think its publicity will give the school a beauty of a black eye, and that's not such a bad thing.


On edit: in my above post, I was specifically referring to the school informing the girl's parents why she was expelled.

[knitter4democracy]

8. Still doesn't make it right.

I went to an evangelical college, and how they treated the gay and lesbian students there was disgusting. I still feel guilty that I didn't do more to fight for my friends who were hazed, vilified, and ultimately ruined in that community just because the others were afraid of them for some reason.

One friend was forced by the administration to come out to all of her friends. When she did, one of them freaked out and threatened to sue her for sexual harrassment because she'd seen her undressed in the women's dorm communal bathroom. I tried to cut her off when she came out to me, but she said that the school was randomly checking her friends (she'd had to submit a list) to see if she'd followed through. She managed to graduate, but some of her so-called friends did their best to ruin her behind her back. I didn't know about it at the time, or I would've called them on it. Disgusting.

Another friend was forced to go to "therapy" conducted by one of the school counsellors to "fix" him and make him straight. That didn't go well, and he ultimately left the school, as it was leaked to the students what he was in therapy for. You can imagine what happened to him in the men's dorm he was living in at the time.

Just because it's private doesn't mean it's off the hook. That school's administrators did the wrong thing, and they need to know that it won't be tolerated.

[Bassic]

11. People will typicaly use religion as an excuse for

the most cruel behavior.

It is nauseating really, and makes me extremely angry.

[knitter4democracy]

41. Amen to that.

It makes me horribly angry, too. I saw too much, and I just couldn't stomach it most days. It was all I could do to go to some of my classes and be around those people.

[Sapphocrat]

62. Besides being disgusting, you know what that kind of treatment really is?

Voyeuristic. 10:1 these sadists get off on Ilsa, She-Wolf of the SS, too.

[BoneDaddy]

14. agree

I totally agree.

[foreigncorrespondent]

50. Then you must...

...also agree to having your private life dragged out into the public for all to see?

[BoneDaddy]

73. sheesh

you really are not seeing my point of view are you? I have conceded multiple times over that I agree with you in principle. I disagree when iit comes the reality of the situation... you are reacting from an emotional position and not seeing reality.

[foreigncorrespondent]

77. Sorry guy...

...but you are the one who is living in dream time here, not me. I see that the school broke privacy laws, you don't. And if the school gets away with breaking said privacy laws, when will it stop? Whose privacy will be next? YOURS?

[foreigncorrespondent]

46. Yes they do...

...and normally I would side with the school. But in this case the school humiliated the girl by making her private life public.

BR you know the humiliation we all face. If we don't take a stand against the humiliation then it will continue. Seem as how the government is hell bent on letting religious groups continue to humiliate us, then we need to fight it through the courts.

I for one am getting bloody tired of these idiots dragging our personal lives out into the public light. They do it with all of us by not giving us equal rights. What goes on in our bedrooms and our homes is private. This girls kiss was private. That private school had every right to expel the girl, but they certainly didn't have the right to drag her life into the public arena.

I hope she wins this. It might just teach these fascist religions a thing or two about actually being human for a change.

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

7. For those wishing to express their displeasure.

Here is contact information for the school:

http://www.covenant-cougars.org/page.aspx?id=37187

No yelling, now.

[Vidar]

9. I don't think there is any Biblical reference to lesbians.

Leviticus has a number of "man shall not lie with man" statements but I believe that's it, though it's been years since I've read it. I hope some of DU's intelligent Christians can confirm this.

[LostinVA]

16. As a one-time comparative religion student, and someone who

can read Koine Greek (and has thus read the NT), you are correct! So, lesbians have the Biblical seal of approval, if we're talking Fundamentalist interpretation. *giggle* I love telling that fact to homophobic "Christians."

[Vidar]

42. I thought so--delicious. Thanks for the confirmation.

[JVS]

32. The question of whether women had their own souls was debated until...

well into the middle ages, so the lack of many rules being made out in a manner inclusive of women is not surprising. If I had to make a bet on it, the early church who wrote and compiled the bible probably wouldn't look too happily on women's sexual behavior of either the hetero or homosexual manner. This is after all the religion of the virgin mother and monasticism. To read the lack of specific mention of lesbianism as permission, would be an aggressively literal interpretation against many centuries of traditional understanding, and to be consistent with such a literal reading you'd have to start applying many discarded rules which would be unpleasant for the modern person.

[Vidar]

43. No doubt the scholastic philosphers would have extended the

"crime" to lesbianism had they thought of it, and a Catholic could possibly make such an argument. But the fundamentalist scum claim to be purely Biblically based and therefore can make no such claim.

[Sapphocrat]

64. Intelligent non-Christian here

It's in Romans (figures, as Paul was a misogynist and probably a closet homo) -- 1:18-28, in which Paul is talking about people who turned away from God and worshipped their own pagan/animal idols instead. Here's 1:21-27 from the NIV, because the KJV is too murky:

For although they knew God, they neither glorified him as God nor gave thanks to him, but their thinking became futile and their foolish hearts were darkened. Although they claimed to be wise, they became fools and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images made to look like mortal man and birds and animals and reptiles.

Therefore God gave them over in the sinful desires of their hearts to sexual impurity for the degrading of their bodies with one another. They exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served created things rather than the Creator -- who is forever praised. Amen.

Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural ones. In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed indecent acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their perversion.

That's as close as a reference to lesbianism there is in the Bible -- and even the KJV doesn't explicitly state that the women had sex with one another; it just mentions "chang(ing) the natural use into that which is against nature." For all anyone knows, that could mean they were getting it on with donkeys, or cucumbers.

Anyway, didja notice? God didn't condemn the pagans for engaging in same-sex behavior -- it was because they were pagans, he turned them into homosexuals! What a great punishment: Turn a person into a pariah everybody loves to hate!

That Paul cracks me up.

[LostinVA]

66. AS a student of Koine Greek who read the NT and many commentaries

This does NOT refer to lesbianism -- it refers to... errrr.... other sexual practices with their men. Some commentators also believe it means that women either tried to be head of household OR had the top position during sex. There was/is a Greek word specifically for lesbians/lesbian sex, but it is not used in these verses.

[Sapphocrat]

71. Yeppers!

That's just the only verse the Radicals have been able to contort to get anything close to a "lesbian" reference out of the Bible. I should think that if lesbianism were an issue, somebody would have made it an issue. (Of course, women weren't actual human beings, etc. ... It must really piss off the fundies that they can't subjugate both their own wives and lesbians through a literal reading, no matter how much they cherry-pick.)

And I humbly defer to your expertise. I'm no theologian -- just a damaged ex-Catholic who enjoys the Bible far more now than I ever did when I believed in it. I should really memorize some of the questionably-interpreted Greek and Aramaic words for my own reference -- but the Gene Scott reruns lose me after five minutes or so.

[noonwitch]

12. Does the school similarly punish straight kids for kissing?

If they apply a no PDA standard across the board, then I support the school. A lot of christian schools do. Public schools have rules, too about things like that.

[BoneDaddy]

13. My unpopular opinion

I know I will get flamed regardless for this opinion...but here goes.

Let me clarify some things first:
1. I am totally for same sex MARRIAGE
2. I believe the GLBTG lifestyle is normal and natural
3. I believe that was wonderful for the father to support his daughter
4. I believe that fuandamentalism is a bastardization of the tenets of their faith.
5. But... I don't believe they have a case against the school

That said, I think it is totally within the school's rights to expel her.
Let me explain.
It is a private school with a clear and consistent message of their views (however warped and wrong) about homosexuality, but as a private institution they have a right to set the rules. Don't go there if you are not of their ilk. Are they actually surprised by the school's reaction? If the girl is indeed lesbian, why set her up this way to be ridiculed, unless this was a planned act? I don't know the motivation, but how could they possibly be surprised?

Don't go there, and if you do at least make a conscious choice of what to expect.

[LostinVA]

17. Yes, but they don't have a legal right to break privacy rules

And that they should be able to found a lawsuit on.

She can also sue if she has information about kids who have also broken the sexual misconduct rule and didn't get punished.

[BoneDaddy]

19. I am not sure about that

I think they do, which although not right may legally be the case. I am sure they have punishments for hetero kids' pda, but I imagine that same sex pda is deemed more punitive.

[LostinVA]

25. Why do you think they don't? Of course they go

Especially if the student is a minor.

[BoneDaddy]

33. Privacy

I am not saying I agree with them...I tend towards your view. But I think legally if a PRIVATE institution has set up rules, they have the right to enforce those rules.
Look... Disney has a ridiculous, stupid rule about men having facial hair. You can be dismissed for growing a mustache beard etc... Is it stupid, yes, but someone can be fired for it.
The girl essentially broke their contract, most likely signed when she joined the school. She broke the rules...stupid, yes, but this is a Private school and they have the right to set their rules, no matter how much we disagree with them. She doesn't have a case.

[foreigncorrespondent]

55. But...

...no school has the right to drag a students private life into the public. That is where they did wrong.

The girl has faced her punishment for breaking rules. Now the school has to face its punishment for dragging the private life of a student out into public.

[Sapphocrat]

65. She doesn't have a case against the EXPULSION.

This is a privacy issue.

Repeat after me: It has nothing to do with the expulsion. It's all about privacy. It has nothing to do with the expulsion. It's all about privacy. ...

They had EVERY RIGHT to expel her. Fine, good, agreed. But they have NO RIGHT to publicize the nature of the expulsion!

Jesus, man, if you got fired from a job for screwing two nuns and a sheep in your own home, you might not have any grounds to fight the termination, but I sure hope you'd have the sense to sue the company for everything it's worth if they MADE IT PUBLIC you were screwing two nuns and a sheep.

See the difference?

[LostinVA]

68. Dead on, Sapphocrat

My sister has a friend who's sister is principal of a Fundie school (I think that makes sense). So, because of this thread earlier, I made her get her friend to call her sister. And, yup, they cannot legally release ANY info about students publicly, just as public schools, universities, hospitals (private and public) etc. can't. She said especially where minors are concerned. That even a Boy Scout troop can be sued for this. There are Federal and State laws covering this.

And, as Sapphocrat (I think) said earlier, it's no different than your employer telling the paper you got fired for screwing a coworker -- you will get sued, and you will lose, UNLESS there's a compelling reason to tell (ie for a medical emergency).

[BoneDaddy]

74. Gotcha

I get your point...I would like to see how they aired her the situation. I still don't think they have a case however. We will see.

[NashVegas]

79. Nothing in the Story Indicates the School Went Public

Except in questioning other students who were witnesses to the behavior the school felt was a removable offense.

Would you rather they expelled her on pure rumor?

The story also does not indicate whether or not Jessica, when she was being questioned, said "yeah, I'm gay, I have a girlfriend and I kissed so-and-so at a party," or not, which would have required no further questioning.

[foreigncorrespondent]

53. Then you also agree...

...that DU has the right to break its privacy rules and give the government your private information?

On edit: Typo!

[northzax]

37. well, there's a problem

since the 'violation of privacy' that is mentioned in the suit is that the school asked other students who were at the party in question if they saw what happened. I went to a private school (non-religious) and I recall being asked once if I saw a classmate (we'll call "Bob") involved in an act worth of expulsion (drug use) I believe the question was, "did you see anyone smoke marijuana?" Everyone knew they were asking about "Bob" it was a small school. they already knew I was with "Bob" that evening, most of us were, since it was a school event. Now as it happens, I did not see "Bob" smoke marijuana, but I was aware that he had, so I was able to answer truthfully, "no" and not have to evade the question (which I would have done if I wasn't able to say 'no') did that question violate Bob's privacy rights? I might not have known, otherwise, that Bob was smoking weed (I did of course) so I learned something about him in the investigation. It's a small school, In conducting an investigation of misbehaviour, does asking other people if they witnessed the behaviour a violation of the student's right to privacy? I don't actually know, but I wouldn't think so, as long as it is done discreetly.

[primavera]

20. I wonder if they've accepted any public funding

A lot of private schools do in fact receive some funding from public sources, which would certainly make them accountable.

[karlrschneider]

22. I'm not sure that's germane since they apparently charge tuition.

...

[primavera]

23. If they're open about their medieval policies...

... and people are stupid enough to voluntarily enroll their kids and pay tuition, knowing full well what it is that they're supporting, I don't see that there's any breach of contract. What other laws could be applied to a purely private, voluntary transaction between a private citizen and a private school? Don't get me wrong, I'd love to see this school razed to the ground in the greater interest of the public good, but I can't think of any way of getting at them legally.

[LostinVA]

26. It is germane -- if they do, then they have the whole Title IX

thing, plus other laws they have to conform to.

[WCGreen]

29. Really, the only recourse they have is if the School is

receiving any public monies....

Otherwise, they can pretty much do as they please...

There was a school, Catholic, in upper New York that fired a single teacher when she pregnant...

They, the church, got away with this discriminatory act because the church did not receive any public money...

Now if I was an attorney, I would reply that the Christian Schools and organizations do receive federal money in the form of tax deductible contributions from US taxpayers....

[foreigncorrespondent]

52. Oh please!

Do not insult our intelligence!

If you support us, then why do you call our life a lifestyle? You should know full well we don't interpret our lives as a mere lifestyle.

As I said to you above. Then you also agree your private life should be dragged out into the public eye.

[Javaman]

28. "have you ever been a communist or associated with a communist group?"

I totally support this young woman. It also appeared to me that it took place "off" campus.

Fuck these nazi schools and their totalitarian extremist "ethics".

We are living in the era of the new which hunt. If you are a liberal or have liberal leanings, you are blackballed or condemned by these idiots.

Screw them, it's liberal ideals that build this country.

[Exiled in America]

30. It's a private school, how does the teen have any case?

Ok, I know I'm low post count, but I want to make it clear I absolute do not condone discrimination. But I am confused. It's a private school. Don't they have the right to make their rules? A private school can be "girls only" or "boys only" right? They can say that in order to attend our school you have to follow a certain code, right?

So - how is there a case here?

And believe me, the side of me that cannot stand the hatred and discimination laid down upon GLTBs wishes these guys would have to pay. Would this be similar to buisnesses? I believe even a non-incorporated private business is still required to follow fenderal non-discrimination/harassment laws, right? They cant say "we're a private company, so bring on the harassment of women in our workplace!" But then again, in this case the issue is one of "religious" beliefs...

Hmm...well this post just turned into random thoughts. :D

[foreigncorrespondent]

56. Try...

...having her private life made public!

[VegasWolf]

31. Two cute girls kissing! Damn that is so Awfull!! Holding each other

close and snuggling. What would Jesus say?

:)

:taost:

[Sapphocrat]

67. Probably not much...

...since Jesus was a real kissy kind of guy -- well, at least he was until that whole Judas thing.

[proud2BlibKansan]

34. Private school

gets to do what it wants. If this was a public school, she might have a lawsuit. Other than the invasion of privacy, I don't think she has a case.

[VegasWolf]

35. Apparently some real life Kansas lawyers believe she has a case.

[proud2BlibKansan]

36. This happened in GA

Why would she be consulting lawyers from Kansas?

[VegasWolf]

38. My bad! Some real life Georgia lawyers believe that she has a case!

[proud2BlibKansan]

40. Maybe for invasion of privacy

[foreigncorrespondent]

57. OK...

...then with your way of thinking every Web forums/sites you are associated with have every right to break privacy policy rules and drag your personal and private information out to the public.

[proud2BlibKansan]

59. It helps to read my WHOLE post:

"Other than the invasion of privacy, I don't think she has a case."

[musette_sf]

39. I suppose they also teach

that Judas shook hands with Jesus at the betrayal. :eyes:

[Arkana]

47. I think she should triple it easy.

She's been discriminated against for her sexual orientation. I don't care WHAT religion you are, that's unacceptable.

[hezekkia]

51. more religious nuts?

:shrug:

[Xithras]

54. They only have a case if the school accepts any government money.

Sorry folks, there's no legal right to privacy when it comes to private parties...gossip is perfectly legal. Unless she can prove slander, freedom of speech issues trump all.

The only exception would be if the school accepts any government funds or scholarships. If they do, then FERPA kicks in and no personally identifiable information about students can be released, sexual or otherwise.

[foreigncorrespondent]

58. Then...

...you have no legal protection and DU can drag your private information into the public? And I say this because that is exactly what you are saying.

[LostinVA]

70. Read my post upthread -- they broke the law

This is not a First Amendment case.