ACLU Forces School to Ban Father-Daughter and Mother-Son Events

Well, the dumb voters can replace the idiotic school board.

 

This is not difficult, yet liberals with limited intellect struggle with it.

1) The woman is to blame, first and foremost, because she is an arrogant, bitter, liberal totalitarian whiner.

2) The ACLU is to blame because they are arrogant liberal totalitarian whiners who love to stick their lawyerly snoots in just these sorts of matters.

3) The school board is to blame because they're frightened liberal wusses without the backbone to stand up for the will of the vast majority and defend loved traditions simply because someone objects.

 

It's in the nature of the beast (the ACLU) to take cases like this. What I want to know is why the single mom was so mean-spirited as to bring the action? My bet is that she didn't want her ex to score points over her by taking his daughter to the father-daughter dance; if so, we're not talking the triumph of impartial principle here.

 

Several of the articles on the story say the daughter was precluded from attending for not having a father to come along.

I like both of these rationales.

We'll apply this to rape, shall we? Next time someone is put in jail for rape, we're going to blame the victim, because, hey, if she hadn't reported the rape, that guy wouldn't be in jail! Don't blame the law or the lawmakers, don't blame the criminal, don't blame the police. It's all the victim's fault, right?

 

deeeeeeeeeeeeerp. What a stupid thread. Us evil liberals want everyone to be gay or a single parent? Are you trolling or have you killed off every single brain cell in your head by listening to too much right wing talk radio?

 

With all due respect, I have seen you post some good analogies....this one is not one of them.

This was not a rape. This was a form of legal entertainment. Because one person could not attend because of their life situation, they decided that they would complain to the ACLU....not to the school or the school board....the ACLU...the American Civil Liberty Union. Apparently they felt that this was a violation of their Civil Liberties.....as if there is a fundamental RIGHT to attend father-daughter dances.

If you have read an article that the School specifically stated that the girl could not attend because she did not have a father, please provide a link. EVERY article I have read suggests and/or even states the student DECIDED not to attend as she felt unwelcome without having a father with her.

This situation is not new. Children have been fatherless (and some , even motherless) for years. My daughter went to the father-daughter dance without me (I was out of town) and enjoyed dancing with the fathers of her friends. I have know many mothers that have gone in place of the missing father and nothing was said about it.

If the girl was told by the school she could not attend, then that is wrong and should be the issue of discussion. The fact that future father-daughter dances are canceled just because one person is left out is a disgrace.....no matter who made the decision.

 

I asked you a question.

Since you are upset because not every girl has a father, so there should be no father daughter dance, than since not everyone is gay, there should be no gay pride parade.

 

Non sequitur, counselor: foundation/facts not in evidence.

You have a burden to equate the infraction of rape with allowing a father/daughter dance - and that's not something you'll be prepared to do.

There is a Boy Scouts of America which excludes girls as well. If you want a mother/daughter dance, by all means hold one.

Gotta love liberal lawyers. No wonder you can defend with a straight face so much transparent bullsh!t. Your powers of rationalization are incredible!

 

hahahahahahahahahhahahaha!


/thread

 

You think that she was not allowed to attend, but you haven't shown it. Who prevented her from attending, the school or the mother? Answer the question. If you claim that the school prevented the girl from attending, show us where the school said "she cannot come unless it's with her own father." Otherwise, you are arguing on an unproven assumption that the school prevented her attendance. I can just as easily assert that the mother chose to prevent her daughter from attending because she didn't want the hassle of asking a friend or family member to take her.

Pot, meet kettle.

 

Here you go:

http://cranston.patch.com/articles/father-daughter-dances-no-more-in-cranston

 

She wasn't banned from the school function. TFM interprets the article that way, but TFM, who usually takes a very literal route to argument doesn't like being faced with very literal arguments himself. In fact, the girl wasn't banned from the dance. They offered her options, and it was the mother who then decided the daughter couldn't attend.

 

I am reading this thread and wonder is there any limit to who the right hates and how much?

dont think so

 

You haven't been paying attention. The Left hates father/daughter dances.

 

Can you point us to these articles? I have not found one. They all say that the mother complained that her daughter could not attend. There's nowhere that she says why the daughter could not attend, such as the school prevented it.

This article states that the mother was given options but she chose to refuse them: http://cranston.patch.com/articles/father-daughter-dances-no-more-in-cranston

The girl is not a victim. She was not harmed. Neither was the mother. They were not defrauded either. Are you not able to tell the difference between harm to one's property or life and one simply being offended by feeling left out?

 

I'll answer for him.

"Nope."

 

The article didn't really give any details.

The school district seems to have banned the dances not the ACLU.

No child should be prohibited from attending a dance because their mother or father is not available, that is beyond inconsiderate and idiotic on the school administrations part. No harm is done by having another person step in for whomever's place at the dance. A mother or father could be serving overseas, deceased, not in the picture, in the hospital, the list could go on forever. The school should have just allowed the kid attend with a person of their choosing.

 

She wasn't pr


No harm is done by having another person step in for whomever's place at the dance. A mother or father could be serving overseas, deceased, not in the picture, in the hospital, the list could go on forever. The school should have just allowed the kid attend with a person of their choosing.[/QUOTE]

The girl was offered options, her mother refused. The reason the girl could not attend the dance is not because of the school.

 

The girl was offered options, her mother refused. The reason the girl could not attend the dance is not because of the school.[/QUOTE]

I couldn't find an article with any details in it. If that is the case and the options were viable to the girl, then the mother and daughter are in the wrong and not the school admin. I have no problem with having such a dance as long as they accommodate everyone. I.E. Johnny who has (2) dads and no mom, Sara who is in foster care, etc, etc.

 

I couldn't find an article with any details in it. If that is the case and the options were viable to the girl, then the mother and daughter are in the wrong and not the school admin. I have no problem with having such a dance as long as they accommodate everyone. I.E. Johnny who has (2) dads and no mom, Sara who is in foster care, etc, etc.[/QUOTE]

Right, there are no details. The articles all start with the "mother complained that the girl could not attend" which it seems many take to mean that the school prohibited the girl from attending. It's actually very vague language and it doesn't specifically state who prohibited whom from attending. It's typical of the media to create an impression in this way. A later article states that the girl was given options, and that her mother refused and went to the ACLU instead. There are no details as to what those options were, so they may not have been satisfactory to most people, or the mother was seeking to make a bigger issue out of it. What we know now is that it was the mother who prohibited her daughter for attending, whether she felt her hand forced by limited options or by a desire to seek more attention. Perhaps more will come out later.

Usually these dances are accommodating of differing circumstances. It's like "parents' day" at schools. Some kids don't have parents, so they go with their guardians. It wouldn't make sense to change the name to "Guardians' Day."

 

inconsiderate and idiotic to assume the administrators prohibited ANYBODY from attending, when you have no evidence that they did.

 

Lets see it. Sorry, but you have no credibility. Drag your mouse over the text that told you this and copy it here.

 

Start with the ACLU news release and the letters exchanged:

http://www.riaclu.org/20120918.htm

 

Well, thanks for the the fine demonstration of the fact that you have no credibility.

And how freely you resort to lies, in order to try and support your claims, and how foolishly you provide the evidence of your lies. Good god man, dig DEEP for some remaining shred of integrity.

 

Just one lie on top of another. At least you are predictable.