Okay, so a federal judge ruled that officials at Itawamba Agricultural High School in Mississippi violated senior Constance McMillen’s civil rights when they refused to let her wear a tuxedo and bring her sophomore girlfriend as her date to the senior prom.
- Constance McMillen
When Constance, represented by the ACLU, took the case to court, the school cancelled the prom. But the judge didn’t order the school to reinstate the prom, because the school said some parents would be holding a private prom instead, and they insisted that Constance and her girlfriend would be invited and that Constance could wear a tux.
The prom was supposed to be last Friday. But early last week, the parents sponsoring it said it had been cancelled. Then the school officials said, no, the prom WOULD be held on Friday night at the Fulton Country Club.
So Constance and her girlfriend showed up. But there were only seven other students there. Seems the REAL prom was being held somewhere else, in secret, so that all the straight students could have fun without having to worry about the lesbians messing things up.
And according to Ya’ll Politics, where I found this info, school officials were in on the secret and helped the parents plan the “real” prom somewhere else. The Ya’ll Politics page says they got the story from “NMC,” but I can’t get the page they linked to to load.
You can not think it seemly, but once it became “private” there is still freedom of association in America. You can’t make people socialize!
Keep your chin up Candice! Go away to college at a big city and leave the rednecks to continue inbreeding at their Hater Prom each year.
Her name in Constance, not Candace….
How ironic that this story appears next to an ad for…get this, “Dirty Rotten Scoundrels”. I’m sure it’s purely coincidental, but appropriate nonetheless.
Mary: Thank you. Stupid mistake on my part. I have corrected it.
If the public, tax-payer-supported school -which promised a Federal judge there would be a parent-supported prom open to Constance- was involved in organizing the secret prom, the ACLU likely will be able to go to court and sue the school system AGAIN and win. If the secret prom was completely at the hands of private, non-school personnel, then it is like a private party and no laws broken. If the school staff participated, I hope the judge throws the book at them and forces them to hold a second, public prom as Constance first asked. If the school did participate, they re beyond stupid legally to think the news wouldn’t leak out.
It was not a fake prom. Get your facts straight if you are going to write about it. The official prom was held at the country club. However her classmates did not want to attend the school prom so they held a private party outside of the community. It is their right to choose not to attend prom and hold a private function. It was not sponsored by the school.
Thomas: How convenient…
1. Thomas: Who exactly are YOU to be privy to such information?
2. I find it extremely interesting that a private prom that Constance was invited to originally was cancelled less than a week prior to the event….then a school prom was created in less than a WEEKS time…..then ANOTHER private event was held elsewhere also created in less than a WEEKS time??? Something smells VERY fishy…..and its NOT Constance or those who write on the NMC blog. I have the feeling that the District was in on this and that there is going to be one hell of a lawsuit when the entire truth comes out.
Constance, you are beloved the Nation over…..and many stand with you.
So Constance gets a scholarship to college in NYC and tons of support from Real America. What I would give to attend her 10 year reunion, with all those hillbilly asshats with meth addiction and ten year old kids. (because I promise you half those redneck cum-buckets got pregnant on prom night.) FU, Thomas, and all your anti-American, redneck ignorant f-tard friends!
Haha. Fatty got rickrolled.
Thomas, let’s talk ethics and not law. Private party or not, the “secret prom” was based on bigotry and ignorance. There is not one bit of it that is morally justified. That’s the problem. Not the law. Not the ACLU. Simply that so many people would lie to an American citizen due to said person’s sexual orientation.
# MarcDom7 Says:
April 6th, 2010 at 2:53 pm
Thomas, let’s talk ethics and not law. Private party or not, the “secret prom” was based on bigotry and ignorance. There is not one bit of it that is morally justified. That’s the problem. Not the law. Not the ACLU. Simply that so many people would lie to an American citizen due to said person’s sexual orientation.
=====================================
The left pushes bigotry and racism every day. Just with PC they’ve made it ok to be bigots against white, Christian, or other designated groups ok.
You can only push so far before people push back. Maybe liberals need to look at their own bigotry and stop doing things like dishonorably exploiting race to bully in leftist policies.
Cryos, it seems you just stereotyped the hell out of me without even knowing me. I am a liberal firmly against PC labels, but I AM against bigotry and derrogatory remarks. There is a difference, but it seems that You don’t feel like taking a closer look. I believe, and I believe that my fellow personal liberal acquaintances, are for equality, and actions such as this pushes against the idea that we are all created equal. Nowhere did I make fun of Christians, and nowhere did I make fun of white people. And, honestly, neither do the majority of liberals I have known my whole life. As is par with modern American politics, it’s all spin.
Exploit race? Please. I’m a wealthy white man who doesn’t want to live in a culture where people of different races and different sexual orientations are treated any differently than anybody else. Yeah, I’m totally pushing bigotry there. You got me.
To those of you using the Bible as a weapon against homosexuality, you are wrong. Homosexuality is not a sin. The Bible is constantly being taken out of context to support anti-gay views. Scholars who have studied the Bible in context of the times and in relation to other passages have shown those passages (Leviticus, Corinthians, Romans, etc) have nothing to do with homosexuality. These passages often cherry-picked while ignoring the rest of the Bible. The sins theses passages are referring to are idolatry, Greek temple sex worship, prostitution, pederasty with teen boys, and rape, not homosexuality or two loving consenting adults.
https://www.soulfoodministry.org/docs/English/NotASin.htm
https://www.jesus21.com/content/sex/bible_homosexuality_print.html
https://www.christchapel.com/reclaiming.html
https://www.stjohnsmcc.org/new/BibleAbuse/BiblicalReferences.php
https://www.gaychristian101.com/
Thats why Jesus never mentions it as well. There is nothing immoral, wrong, or sinful about being gay. Jesus, however, clearly states he HATES hypocrites. If you preach goodness, then promote hate and twist the words of the Bible, you are a hypocrite, and will be judged and sent to hell. Homosexuals will not go to hell, hypocrites will.
This is very similar to the religious bigots of the past, where they took Bible passages to condone slavery, keep women down, and used Bible passages to claim blacks as curses who should be enslaved by the white man. People used God to claim that blacks marrying whites was unnatural, and not of God’s will.