... I think you know, or should know, what my attitude on gays being able to attend the prom is, nevertheless I don't like this assumption everyone displays that this is 'innocent girl vs tyrannical school' - I think they are wrong, I do not think we should just assume they are spitefully taking these actions because they can't do what they'd prefer to and dump queers down a well or something.



Well, having actually read the legal brief filed by the ACLU on this matter I have to say, I didn't see any mention of people being expelled previously for being gay. Maybe I missed it, I'm hardly devoting lots of time to intense study of this issue, but it was also absent from any of the half-dozen or so news articles I read on this. Not saying it didn't happen but lacking any proof of this, I tend to give people the benefit of the doubt. As I've said - repeatedly - I am not of a mind to defend Miss. nor would I be surprised to find their were some raging bigots there even as a super-majority. I try to assume people are not without evidence to the contrary.



I don't think she's a selfish bitch, I don't think she ruined it for everyone. I just think that it's worth considering that maybe both 'sides' on this issue might be pursuing their ideology while forgetting about everyone else getting trampled. I'm not ripping at the school board simply because I consider it redundant, you have an issue with me raising the possibility that this might not be entirely a case of innocent do-gooders vs evil bigots? Personally I have no problem with them banning girl's from tuxedos, I do have a problem with them banning gays. As I said, I consider their motives with all of this rather transparent, I am not on their side... I would respectfully requesting you not say or imply I am. I would also point out that the faculty and the board do not always have the luxury of being able to operate freely regardless of local parental opinion.



Yet I have not seen anything backing Macharius's comments. This is not to say there is not, and yes, it would change my stance, but none of the articles I have read have mentioned ejecting students from previous proms strictly because they were gay. If that is the case, I would say it shows a degree of homophobic malice well in excess of what might be excused for the sake of tradition.



I do not need stronger arguments, since I am merely assuming that without evidence to the contrary the situation is probably not as lop-sided as it appears to be. Yes, I take note of the boy-girl specific comment in their rules, I did not see a ban on people attending alone and then gathering together, that could easily be a policy meant just to ensure the King and Queen are gender-appropriate, though I rather doubt it. Anyway, it doesn't seem to relate to the tuxedo rule and as long as that is part of the suit we might assume, legitimately I think, that some of the objections have to do with that, though possibly as a strawman for many. I do not think while she insists on that people can totally black and white this.