Flaw in Anti-Bullying Law

[Hero in a half shell]

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.

 

[Slaanesh]

So a gay kid kills himself because he was being bullied about it. Now this law can technically excuse a bully that antagonized a gay kid because his religion views gays as an evil abomination. Faaaaaaaantastic.

I remember the anti-bullying law that helped me in middle school. Left my bully breathless. Cause the law was my fist. And I punched him in the throat. Good times.

 

[Something Amyss]

"Personal Responsibility" only applies to economics, it seems.

And only selectively, at that.

 

[ReservoirAngel]

Republican anti-bullying law: Because your kids don't need to be well-adjusted to pay taxes.

 

[Darkmantle]

so... if a bully smacks down a gay kid, he can say it's against his religion and get off scot free?

 

[000Ronald]

...This confuses me on many levels. What exactly IS a "religious or moral" reason? I would have thought the only thing that constitutes was self-defense.

Actually, now I think about it, that could be a good thing. Morally, you can now step in and punch a guy in the face if he's picking on someone else.

Hey, that's great!

"Now, Ronald, you're in huge trouble for punching our star quarterback in the face. Can you explain yourself?"

"He was a douchebag."

"...that's not an explanation. What reason would you have for assaulting-"

"Oh, but it is, you see, I'm part of a moral minority that beleves douchbaggery ought to be punishable by death. Examples of douchebags include homophobic douchebags, racist douchebags, sexist douchebags, douchebags that deny the holocaust, douchebags that park in handicapped spaces when they're clearly not handicapped, douchebags that don't pay their taxes, douchebags that think that rock music is the devil, douchebags that listen to Tool, douchebags that quit without giving a two-weeks notice, douchebags that let twelve-year-old children play Modern Warfare online, Scientologists, douchebags that think they're better because they've grown beyond something as ridiculous as 'religion', douchebags that think their religion makes them somehow superior to other people, and people who think that having rules makes them better than other people, and magicians."

"...wouldn't several of those make you a hypocrite?"

"There have been plenty of hypocrites with very strong moral compasses. Like Gandhi. Are you saying you're better than Gandhi?"

 

[Shoggoth2588]

I don't get it. Who has religious reasons to bully someone? Even if they did, it shouldn't be allowed.

Look, I can't help if the Jesus (speaking to me through the lunch-lady's hair net) wants me to give you a titty-twister.

In all seriousness, that sounds pretty stupid and, this is coming from Michigan?! It sounds more like a southern loop-hole (no offense to the south)

 

[Kimarous]

Speaking as a person who considers himself both religious and moral, there is NEVER justification for bullying! I may not dislike something you do and I may be "intolerant" of such behaviour, but I'm at least going to be tactful about it. To torment somebody about anything is NOT moral, and to use moral grounds as an excuse is hypocrisy at its finest!

 

[2xDouble]

...This confuses me on many levels. What exactly IS a "religious or moral" reason? I would have thought the only thing that constitutes was self-defense.

Bullying the bullies. On the internet it's called "counter-trolling". Law enforcement call it "good samaritan".

so... if a bully smacks down a gay kid, he can say it's against his religion and get off scot free?

No. Hate crime is still hate crime... and is not the same as bullying.

 

[Gmans uncle]

Grats Michigan, you've officially joined Texas and the deep south on my "PLACES TO AVOID IF POSSIBLE" list.

 

[000Ronald]

Okay. Calmed down a bit. I wish there were Right-Wing nuts I could argue this with here on the Escapist. It is times like this I wish I wasn't banned from Moonbattery.com.

I'm not a right-wing nut, but I know some. You could argue with me, so long as we both understand that I'm agreeing with you, and just reiterating some of the points I've heard.

EDIT:

Grats Michigan, you've officially joined Texas and the deep south on my "PLACES TO AVOID IF POSSIBLE" list.

Wait, it was this that tipped you off, and not DETROIT being there? How could you not notice FRIGGIN' DETROIT!

 

[000Ronald]

Okay. Calmed down a bit. I wish there were Right-Wing nuts I could argue this with here on the Escapist. It is times like this I wish I wasn't banned from Moonbattery.com.

I'm not a right-wing nut, but I know some. You could argue with me, so long as we both understand that I'm agreeing with you, and just reiterating some of the points I've heard.

No, no, it just won't be the same. The ones on MB were so delightfuly silly, they can't be replaced. I mean, outside of "MY RELIGION IS RIGHT AND THAT MAKES THIS RIGHT!" there is no way to justify this. Zero. Zip. Nada.

But I could do that! And I could throw you a curveball by actually making valid points every now and again!

Please?

 

[lacktheknack]

I don't see how this would ever be applicable, to be honest...