Flaw in Anti-Bullying Law

[Drave]

Religious reasons? F*ck.

I was the only white in my Year 7 class. I was kicked/punched, beaten with cricket bats, thrown in front of traffic and knocked unconscious most days, all because my (predominantly Muslim) classmates assumed I was Christian or Jewish.

After about 12 months of spending most of the time waking up after classes in a pool of blood, the police made the LEA transfer me. There were several expulsions, though under the system proposed here, the students would have a carte blanche to beat the sh*t out of me. How the f*ck can that be right?

[I realise that I've had a more atypical experience than most, but this still sends a chill down my spine].

no no, gay kids in some parts of my state get treated similarly. difference is the police doesn't give a fuck.

 

[dmase]

Religious/moral... thats so damn general it could really be anything.

 

[Owyn_Merrilin]

I'm gonna say now that I really don't understand this law.

so I'm reserving this post while I research the bill a bit further.

In recompense, here's an adorable kitten while you wait:

Spoiler: OH NO, Mr. Bush, put down that Kitten, what are you doing? NO! Oh my...

Sorry about that. Silly Ex-President.

*********************************************************
EDIT:

OK, so after following a breadcrumb trail of links all pretty much saying the same thing, I got to this link: http://michiganmessenger.com/53702/senate-passes-license-to-bully-legislation Despite the clearly loaded attention grabbing headline it contains pretty extensive quotes from all sides of the arguement.

If you are not going to read it then this is probably the most important passage:

But Glenn says that the new legislation does not allow bullying based on religious beliefs or values.

?It does no such thing,? Glenn said in response to a series of email questions from Michigan Messenger. ?The religious free speech protections included in the bill, consistent with the First Amendment, simply ensure that students won?t be bullied or punished ? as occurred last year at a high school in Howell ? for daring to say they believe a certain behavior is wrong as a matter of sincerely held religious or moral conviction. The First Amendment and other free speech protections do just that, protect free speech, not bullying. And students, like all other Americans, are free to verbally express their opinions ? including religious and moral views ? without fear of government repression or persecution, including under anti-bullying or harrassment laws.?

That is the Republican side of the argument.

I think whats going on here is that the Republicans, being traditionally anti gay rights and pro Christian Ethics, were told to write up a Bill to protect mainly gay and other alternate lifetyle groups from bullying. They took this as "A Trojan Horse for the Homosexual agenda" (Actual quote) and believed their freedoms were being targeted and 'teh gais' just wanted the Bill to protect them when they attacked the Christian faith.

So the Republicans decided that instead of using the bill to enforce more protection for alternate lifestyle choices that they disagree with, they would make a general watered down law treating all students equally (so those nasty gays wouldn't get biased treatment towards them) Hence this statement:

?We?re pleased that the senate has passed an anti-bullying bill that will equally protect all children from all bullying for all reasons, based on their individual worth as human beings, not on being segregated into singled-out groups for special protection,?

The Republicans also snuck in a clause that protects Religious groups from being ostracised and excluded, because they believe that they are under attack from these pro-gay activists, and their freedoms are being weakened. So Creationists can state their beliefs in Evolution classes and have legal protection if they are called out on their beliefs, or indeed, if they say that they disagree with homosexuality then they will have legal protection and cannot be discriminated or repremanded by staff or pupils for their belief.

That is the logic behind the bill. It is purely religiously motivated. Of course in the big picture the Bill is still insane, but if you can identify the thought processes behind someones actions it is scary how rational they can be sometimes.

You've basically got it right, but you're giving a bit too much credit to the republicans here. It's not about keeping gays from defaming Christianity; it's about de-fanging a law that was initially written in response to the number of gay teenagers who have recently committed suicide thanks to bullying. It's a way to allow the gays to still be bullied, and an attempt to pander to the religious right -- a significant portion of the Republican base, known for being particularly fundamentalist.

 

[xXAsherahXx]

Proposing the law/bill/act/declaration etc. doesn't make sense to me. Bullying will never stop. Ever. That's just something we have to live with as children and possibly as adults. We can try to shape the opinion of the general public to accept different types of people and that is the best that can be done. Trying to eliminate it at the source won't work unless the child or possibly adult understands why he/she can't bully someone. That's a very difficult task. If we create an atmosphere that accepts others, bullying will seem vile.

Essentially, homosexuality won't go away and neither will bullying. The best we can do is make bullying cruel and mostly unacceptable in the public's view.