In a recent article from the AFA‘s pseudo-news outlet One News Now, attorney Mat Staver of the anti-gay Liberty Counsel claims that students today, during the Day of Silence (DoS), will refuse to answer questions from teachers in class and otherwise disrupt the operation of the school day.
‘Number one, if students will not speak up in these classes when they’re called upon, that’s disruptive — and they [the schools] don’t have to tolerate students who will not speak because of the Day of Silence,’ he suggests.
One News Now writer Jeff Johnson also chimes in:
The Day of Silence is an allegedly student-led event designed to highlight purported suffering of homosexual students. Throughout the day, students who participate in the protest refuse to talk, even when teachers or administrators ask them to respond to questions.
First of all, there is nothing “purported” about the suffering and death of Lawrence King. And denying that goes way beyond an ideological disagreement. Secondly, the ACLU has made clear that students are required to speak in class when called on by a teacher, etc. There is no ambiguity here so one has to ask why Staver and Johnson are pretending this is so.
For the record, GLSEN’s DoS manual does not once ask or recommend students not respond to teachers. It does say to discuss their plans with school administrators ahead of time, and ask permission to officially participate. If this permission is not given, it is suggested that they might plan activities outside the school. Or if silence is not preferred or practical, other activities are suggested.
This is a far cry from the attitude revealed by Staver, who tries to put the fear of legal sanctions into those who would participate:
Staver contends that schools across the country may be breaking the law by allowing students to participate in the pro-homosexual event. He notes that roughly half of the states require that if ‘sexuality is taught or discussed, it has to be done from an abstinence-based perspective.’ And he points out that ‘schools would be, literally, violating the law, if these [homosexual] clubs on campus discuss [any type of] sexual activity ….’
He goes on to inform conservative parents who keep their kids out of school today that they would have legal recourse if the absence is held against them, saying “they need to contact us so that we can resolve the matter.” Frivolous litigation is a bit of a hobby for Staver, as XGW has experienced first hand.
It’s sad that grown men and women will resort to such tactics. And it is especially ironic on a day when so many students will be showing a strength and maturity that belies their years. You could learn from them, Mr. Staver.
I get the impression that this is driving them particularly insane because they have no discernible “offense” to grasp onto.
How dare those pro-gay activists stop making sound without my permission!
LOL! I never thought of it that way.
David – The ACLU guidance on the matter also specifies that students do not have the right to remain silent if a response is requested by a teacher.
The smarter and or more supportive teachers are probably
a) Doing an activity that day that doesn’t require verbal responses.
b) Not calling on the students who’ve said they are participating in the DOS.
A school where the principal has okayed and is endorsing the DOS, has probably already talked with his teachers on structuring the day to allow for silent students –otherwise, what is the point?
This is so yucky from them. This is not a “pro-homosexual” event. It is a LIFE event. If this is their behaviour then there is something seriously wrong with their core values of humanity, since they choose to be intolerant towards lives of some of LGBT students.
This is blatantly disrespectful to the dead and those who suffered much in the hands of discrimination. It is a shallow attempt to undermine the impact of what prejudice could bring to the future of any decent society at large.
I wonder what Staver hope to get from this. Maybe a “Congrats! You have successfully made students speak up on behalf of discriminated LGBT students”? So to voice out is wrong for them and to be silent about obvious issues is also wrong?
Warren Throckmorton said:
Which is why I put that in the article – skimming are you?
There is a concerted effort to say the word “disrupting” every time the DOS is mentioned. In the discussion between Barber and Hutcherson, Barber mentioned the children remaining silent and then went back to repeat it with “disrupt the school day” in front.
My wife taught Head Start for a number of years. Any “disruption” caused by the students being silent would have been a blessing I can assure you.
If ex-gay ministries and their followers told the truth, there would be no ex-gay ministries or their followers.
For the record—Mat Staver’s argument in front of the California Supreme Court, as to why gays should not be allowed to wed:
that’s hilarious to me.
I told my partner and he joked, “Gay people shouldn’t get married and save money on their taxes because they’re not going to need expensive abortions. It’s not like they’ll ever need their tubes tied or a vasectomy.”
Since when is accidentally pregnancy desirable? Don’t we have too much of that to begin with?
If anything that’s almost a backhanded endorsement. I joked with my mother after I came out, “Well, at least you don’t have to worry about me accidentally getting someone pregnant. If I have kids it won’t be an accident, there will be a lawyer and lot of planning involved.”
As Dan Savage put it , we can’t get liquored up one night and adopt.
When you see a gay couple with kids, the odds are that not only was this planned, it involved a great deal of planning and effort. The hurdles involved, I imagine, make for parents who are absolutely interested in being parents and who have presented themselves as responsible adults ready for the responsibility.
We’re not likely to see the scenario of a gay couple with 7 unruly kids, more on the way, with as much ignorance to birth control as they have to common sense, honesty, hygiene, decency, etc.
Sounds like a better parenting model to me.
Yeah, I watched him on the live video feed that morning. Honestly, even if I didn’t already think so little of his character, I would have to say that he was so far out of his league just being there. He looked like a not so bright boy in a room full of grown ups. That impression seemed to be shared by the judges as well from their expressions and questions of him.
Also,
from his (Mathew D. Staver) book “Same-Sex Marriage: Putting Every Household at Risk” ©2004:
Which is footnoted by the number 92 — which then states:
Personally I like his ‘absence of spontaneous creation’ antigay argument better. Much more to work with.
Unplanned pregnacy has been the backbone of civilization!
Did you give that to Jim Burroway for his collection? What an idiot. I’m sorry, but that is just so irresponsible.
If I had a nickel for every Paul Cameron citing…
Seriously though, I just checked and it’s already listed.
That Burroway… he’s… he’s on top of things.
“The hurdles involved, I imagine, make for parents who are absolutely interested in being parents and who have presented themselves as responsible adults ready for the responsibility.”
Or that want to propogate the evil ways. LOL.
“Same-sex relations will not accidentally, unintentionally, in an unplanned fashion, produce children.”
How is that an argument?… andyou dont need to have/want children at any moment before, during or after a marriage for the marriage to be valid.
First they ENCOURAGE children to stay out of school, and then if they are challenged or even punished in some way for doing so…make a stink by litigation?
And THIS is less disruptive than the intended actions on DOS?
Do I have that right? And in WHAT court, could they defend staying out of school, because ‘uh….OTHER students didn’t say something?’
And if the judge throws it out of court for lack of merit, will that judge then be called and activist working for the homosexual agenda?
Is there no end to the torturous and convoluted way some folks get around to saying…
“we don’t like homos who don’t know their place!”
Why don’t they just SAY THAT….and get it over with?”
Yeah, and that ‘purported’ bullying and assault crack got me going too.
Lawrence King isn’t a purported victim of an execution?
But somehow Brian McInerney’s defense attorney can assert that McInerney was DEFINITELY the victim of an unwanted homosexual pass?
I mean, that is sooo low.
“gay panic” defense isn’t allowed in California, I believe. So King’s murderer can’t claim that legally.
It all comes down to us “knowing our place.” We’re too “uppity” for some people.
But frankly, it’s society’s own assumption of what a homosexual is that will get people murdered. If someone sees my dad walking down the street and decides he “looks gay,” he could be murdered then and there. But if someone sees my uncle (who IS gay) walking down the street and decides he doesn’t “look gay,” he’ll be left alone by the homophobes. That’s why, on the legal end of things, ENDA should be something the stereotypically gay-looking or gay-acting ex-gays should be rallying for. Hear that, Alan Chambers?
The more we come out of the closet and are seen by normal people, the more we are exposed to society, the more people like Staver will fight back. Jim Burroway said something on BTB to the effect of “the more we’re humanized, the more the conservatives will feel threatened.” I think he has that exactly right. Also, the more they fight our peaceful demonstrations like DOS, the worse they will appear.