Eugene Volokh at The Volokh Conspiracy takes a look at a bill in Minnesota that would have caused many of my classmates back in my school days to stand mute.
use of one or a series of words, images, or actions, transmitted directly or indirectly between individuals or through technology, that a reasonable person knows or should know, under the circumstances, will have the effect of interfering with the ability of an individual, including a student who observes the conduct, to participate in a safe and supportive learning environment. Examples of bullying may include, but are not limited to, conduct that:
- places an individual in reasonable fear of harm to person or property, including through intimidation;
- has a detrimental effect on the physical, social, or emotional health of a student;
- interferes with a student’s educational performance or ability to participate in educational opportunities;
- encourages the deliberate exclusion of a student from a school service, activity, or privilege;
- creates or exacerbates a real or perceived imbalance of power between students;
- violates the reasonable expectation of privacy of one or more individuals; or
- relates to the actual or perceived race, ethnicity, color, creed, religion, national origin, immigration status, sex, age, marital status, familial status, socioeconomic status, physical appearance, sexual orientation, gender identity and expression, academic status, disability, or status with regard to public assistance, age, or any additional characteristic defined in chapter 363A of a person or of a person with whom that person associates, but the conduct does not rise to the level of harassment.
Go here to read the rest. This is being done under the rubric of anti-bullying, that movement by the forces of gay intolerance to make certain that kids are taught early and often which group has the whip hand currently in our body politic. Kids of course have no freedom of speech at school, nor should they since they are not adults and they are there to learn and not to mouth off, but we see in this bill precisely the same type of legislation that most Leftists in this country are eager to impose on adults if they had the political strength to do so. The Whatcott decision by the Canadian Supreme Court, read about it here, is their dream. Unless we are very vigilant in this country one day we will wake up and find that the Bill of Rights is merely a quaint historical artifact by Dead White Males, and of no consequence as to how we will be hereafter required by the authorities to lead our lives.
7) “sexual orientation, gender identity and expression,” Sexual orientation and gender identity, are physical conditions. “expression” is an act of the will and the person may be held accountable for it. For the government to protect “expression” is prejudiced and biased of the law for vice and against virtue. Confounding the act of free will exercised by the homosexual individual to act out his homosexuality, with the condition of homosexuality of the homosexual individual, prohibits the freedom of all men to act out the Justice of God, and the virtue of Justice among the constituents of the government, and their freedom to exercise their free will. This regulation criminalizes every human response to the evil of anal penetration, the evil of homosexual behavior and the evil of the act of free will to choose to commit the vice of sodomy.
Just received a USCCB Media email in Spam rather than the usual Inbox.
Also, National Review.
PRESUMED INNOCENCE
A person is presumed innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. The William Whatcott decision presumes that the person is guilty of malicious intent before being charged in a court of law for distributing WARNINGS AGAINST A PATH TO PERDITION taken from the Bible. The Bible is a warning and a path to a decent life. If the warnings go unheeded and souls are lost, whose fault is it? The person who warns or the person who chooses to live an unholy life of fornication and the court that chooses to deny the warning? People reading the Bible as HATE SPEECH are hateful people.
Censorship of the Bible as HATE SPEECH cannot be legalized because the Bible belongs to the church. The Bible does not belong to the state. If sinners do not repent and accept the warnings of the Bible and the path to heaven spelled out in the Bible, censoring the Bible as hate speech, as the state is doing, will not prevent or forestall the damage souls have done to themselves on their way to perdition. “I put before you a blessing and a curse, choose life then.”
There is another matter and that is this:
If the recipients of the warning of the Bible accepted the warning, the flyer on which it is printed:
1) The have freely entered into a conversation about a lifestyle against which they are being warned. If the person who accepts the flyer does not agree, he is free to return it to the giver. This too, is free speech. This law infringes of free speech between giver and recipient.
2) The persons who accepted the flyer are also censored in the manner of protective custody. The flyers were of a warning. The recipients are being denied their free speech. The Bible belongs to all people and the state may not decide for Bible readers their choice between blessing or curse, that is, their point of view. The principle of separation of church and state explicitly frees men from such tyranny.
God created man, woman, gender, race, color, etc. Man distorted God’s creation into a transgendered creature and protects their monstrosity. Bathrooms for Male, Female and Altered are in short supply.