Judge: No money for Mormon girl who sued over saying 'That's so gay'

Associated Press ^ | 05/16/07 | Lisa Leff

[BenLurkin]

"Rushing said the school district was not liable for monetary damages because the law under which the Rices brought the lawsuit specifically excludes schools."

Hmm....

[TommyDale]

What monetary damages did she suffer? Stupid to waste the court’s time, especially a “Peoples Republic of California” court.

[doug from upland]

Kids are mean. Life is tough. We all suffer during our lives. People in black robes should not be passing out other people’s money for that.

[PBRSTREETGANG]

[robertpaulsen]

"If the Rice family had not told everyone that Rebekah had been given a referral for saying 'That's so gay' then no one else would have know it either ..."

So if a homosexual publicly announces his perversion, he's fair game for ridicule since if he had not told everone he was a homosexual no one would know?

[Vigilanteman]

No, no, you don’t understand. Homosexuals are a protected class. Mormon girls aren’t.

[NorthFlaRebel]

What monetary damages did she suffer?

Always the first question I ask, regardless of the situation or what the suit is about.

[Piquaboy]

This PC BS drives me nuts.

[AmishDude]

I can't disagree with the judge, who I would love to laud for trying to cut down on the litigiousness of society, but lookee what I found:

Sonoma Judge Gets Jail Time For DUI Charge

Oh, and for the record, the BAL was 0.20.

[robertpaulsen]

I thought most teens used that phrase. Why is she being singled out?

[Spok]

“All of us have probably felt at some time that we were unfairly punished by a callous teacher, or picked on and teased by boorish and uncaring bullies. Unfortunately, this is part of what teenagers endure in becoming adults,”

Here is the heart of the double standard-if this girl was ‘of color’ or gay, or was complaining about any activity involving Christianity, any degree of offense, objection or discomfort would be determined to be intolerable and actionable at law. Hate is not only permissible but constitutionally permissible so long as its aimed in a politically correct direction.

[kitkat]

***”Through their many activities at their children’s schools, plaintiffs have generated a great deal of dialogue about the extent to which our schools should become involved in traditionally non-academic subjects such as morality, religion, sexuality and politics,” she said.***

<<<...such as morality, religion, sexuality and politics.<<<

That’s the money quote right there. The girl was reported because she said the “gay” word. But nobody was in trouble for insulting her religion. Apparently, there’s an effort to keep her parents from speaking out about “morality, religion,...” etc. etc.

[Jack Black]

Freep the school with “That’s so Gay” signs? That would be really fun.

[ccmay]

for the record, the BAL was 0.20.

Damn! That is roaring drunk. People that drunk normally can't figure out how to use their car keys, unless they're alcoholics who have been doing it for a long time.

-ccm

[AmishDude]

That was mentioned in some sort of disciplinary document I found online. I just searched on her name.

[wastedyears]

I’m 21 and I use that phrase.

[Pinkbell]

Flip the situation. If it was a gay person suing, I guarantee there probably would have been monetary damages. This girl didn’t mean to offend anyone, not even gays. The phrase can mean stupid or dumb. The school never defended her when she was being made fun of for her religion. This is a double standard. Bullying is bullying, but apparently California only goes after Christians.

[hockeyfan]

So does that mean the family can bring the lawsuit again under another law?

[ozzymandus]

I hear that phrase all the time on TV. Does every actor who uses it get sent to the principal’s office and have a note put in their file?