Replies

I see, so the parents can only have a say in how things are run at election time, in spite of the fact that most legislators run on a broad basket of issues most of the time. Apart from that, and perhaps writing the occasional letter to a legislator, they simply have to lie back and put ice on that when it comes to how their school is run on a day to day basis. Pardon me?

There are several options available to parents who think their children's PUBLIC school policies are misguided. However, the issue here is something else entirely---that is, the school must act according to the law.

You really don't want to concede the point that it might be a good idea to ask the parents and the students what they actually think and base any decisions on that. Secondly, if the child's right to participate in class is reinforced, then there is no discrimination.

Sure, if you wanted to base policy on "feelings" vice law and justice it might be a good idea, but the school didn't even do that. It acted on its own, and in all probability, it broke the law.

Say your daughter told you she was uncomfortable changing around Jews. What possible recourse would you have?

Judaism is not a sexual preference. I was wondering when this tactic would be tried. Act Up uses it all the time.

Thanks for the momentous revelation that Judaism isn't a sexual preference. However, it most certainly is a religious preference, and as such, it has as much bearing on one's ability to attend a gym class with other children as one's sexual preference does. Unless, of course, you feel that the rational basis for determing law or justice is everyone's personal "comfort level" with the choices other people make, even when those choices have no bearing on other peoples' lives whatsoever.
That's not very conservative. There's a set of rules for everyone, or there's no set of rules for anyone---just a hobgob amalgamation of "feelings"-based bullsh*t for protected special interest groups, no matter what side of the political aisle they're on.
What possibly could be a rational solution to this "problem"? Separate changing areas for girls, boys, female homosexuals, and male homosexuals? Specific changing times for homosexual girls and straight girls in the girls' locker room, and specific changing times for homosexual boys and straight boys in the boys' locker room? How much time would such an allowance for everyone's sensitivity cut into actually doing something productive in a gym class? And what's next---what happens when the trans-sexuals and transvestites demand similar treatment? This useless stratification based on assauging everyone's tender feelings is identity politics at its worst---again, not very conservative, if you ask me.

There are several options available to parents who think their children's PUBLIC school policies are misguided. However, the issue here is something else entirely---that is, the school must act according to the law.

In so far as the girl has to be allowed to participate in gym class, I concede. Not in that she has any right to use the girls changing room any more than the boys do.

Sure, if you wanted to base policy on "feelings" vice law and justice it might be a good idea, but the school didn't even do that. It acted on its own, and in all probability, it broke the law.

According to you. The school only has an obligation to see that she gets to participate in the class, not that she uses a changing room.

Thanks for the momentous revelation that Judaism isn't a sexual preference

You brought in this tired old Act Up tactic. Sexual preferences are completely different from religions. Remember what I said at my very first post - the reason why men and women are segregated into different changing rooms has to do with it not turning into a peep show. A student being Jewish does not do this, unless you're some wacko anti-Semite.

That's not very conservative. There's a set of rules for everyone, or there's no set of rules for anyone---just a hobgob amalgamation of "feelings"-based bullsh*t for protected special interest groups, no matter what side of the political aisle they're on.

Quite touching that you defend the rules when you like them. I seem to recall that your grasp on drug laws in the United States was lex mala, lex nulla.

However, you can only say that the school "probably" or "possibly" broke the law, not that they did.

Secondly, you seem to not want to accept the societal norm about why changing rooms are segregated by sex.

Separate changing areas for girls, boys, female homosexuals, and male homosexuals...This useless stratification based on assauging everyone's tender feelings is identity politics at its worst---again, not very conservative, if you ask me.

No, it's not very conservative to steamroll over parents in favour of a special interest group, which you are so strenously defending.

Ivan