school administrators try to physically block parents from hosting jesus lunch

[Daelak]

So they are using the first amendment as intended?

The first wasn't intended to indoctrinate children to a specific religion.

- - - Updated - - -

In a way that coincides with the first amendment. I get that you don't like it...but there is no legal means to interfere with it.

The first amendment has nothing to do with using existing case law, public leases to get closer to young impressionable minds to indoctrinate about your specific sky god.

[Tijuana]

No, because Christianity is a belief, an idea. It's up for discussion. Being anti-LGBT is by definition bigoted, an intolerance for certain people based on who they are.

You're also conflating discussion with disruption.



Because we don't have to limit ourselves that way, to begin with.

But, this is specifically the issue at hand: that Christians do not believe that being gay is something they are born with; that it is a choice. There would be no logical other way for them to think like they do. We could get in to the various reasons they think this but, I fear it would cross the lines of the forum rules. But, the bottom line is, this is exactly where the disconnect between pro-gay rights and anti-gay rights originates: choice or not choice.

[Evil Midnight Bomber]

The first amendment has nothing to do with using existing case law, public leases to get closer to young impressionable minds to indoctrinate about your specific sky god.

The first amendment allows for the free practice of religion...and that's all that's happening here. The children are not being forced into anything.

[Daelak]

The first amendment allows for the free practice of religion...and that's all that's happening here. The children are not being forced into anything.

Next to a school, during school hours, encouraging school children to come. This would be different if it was outside of an office building or a business park, where adults are during the day.

[Endus]

But, this is specifically the issue at hand: that Christians do not believe that being gay is something they are born with; that it is a choice. There would be no logical other way for them to think like they do. We could get in to the various reasons they think this but, I fear it would cross the lines of the forum rules. But, the bottom line is, this is exactly where the disconnect between pro-gay rights and anti-gay rights originates: choice or not choice.

All that argues is that those particular Christians are true bigots, rather than ones who merely pretend to believe in their bigotry. It doesn't mean they aren't homophobes.

All bigots really believe in the nonsense they spout. That's what makes them bigots, in the first place. Pointing to the teachings of their faith just labels what variety of bigot they are, it doesn't make their stance "okay".

And just to emphasize before anyone takes this out of context; I'm speaking of specific individuals, who happen to be Christian. This description doesn't apply to most Christians, who are in no way like this.

[frogger237]

Should have just said they were doing away with the open campus lunch policy because of all the school shootings in recent years.

[Evil Midnight Bomber]

Next to a school, during school hours, encouraging school children to come. This would be different if it was outside of an office building or a business park, where adults are during the day.

In a public park...during the students free time in which they are allowed off campus. They are not interrupting classes and they are not doing anything on school grounds. You might not like it...but, again, there are no legal grounds to stop them.

[Daelak]

In a public park...during the students free time in which they are allowed off campus. They are not interrupting classes and they are not doing anything on school grounds.

It is used by the school during school hours, probably for P.E. or athletic events. The Jesus people knew about this beforehand and wanted to exploit this public lease agreement for their own religious benefit of converting children.

[Evil Midnight Bomber]

It is used by the school during school hours, probably for P.E. or athletic events. The Jesus people knew about this beforehand and wanted to exploit this public lease agreement for their own religious benefit of converting children.

The lease is not exclusive and the Jesus people are free to use the park. If it were an exclusive lease then the school could shut it down on the grounds that the Park would then be considered an extension of the campus...but it is not.

[Tijuana]

All that argues is that those particular Christians are true bigots, rather than ones who merely pretend to believe in their bigotry. It doesn't mean they aren't homophobes.

All bigots really believe in the nonsense they spout. That's what makes them bigots, in the first place. Pointing to the teachings of their faith just labels what variety of bigot they are, it doesn't make their stance "okay".

And just to emphasize before anyone takes this out of context; I'm speaking of specific individuals, who happen to be Christian. This description doesn't apply to most Christians, who are in no way like this.

I still think you miss the point, though. The point is they are ignorant, and think being gay is a choice. If you accept that premise, what they do isn't bigotry. If they were to accept that being gay is not a choice, and still were anti-gay, that would of course be intentional bigotry. It's a finer and less relevant point, but a distinct one, in my opinion. At the end of the day, the details matter little, however. If a serial killer is a terrible person, or a sociopath matters little. The end result is you don't want to be alone in a room full of knives with them.

[Daelak]

The lease is not exclusive and the Jesus people are free to use the park.

Then what is the point of the lease agreement? I am not familiar with restrictions on free speech in places where children are present, but this is one hell of a case that would help determine the limitations religious organizations have when conducting religious activities in the vicinity of children.

[Kathandira]

This situation seems like it needs the assistance of the Church of Satan.

They can serve cookies, and cakes to the kids during lunch, and spread the message of Satan! That will show the true colors of the Jesus Lunch. Because anytime the Church of Satan stands beside the Christians, the Christians begin to aim their attention at them, showing the true extent of their intolerance.

[Evil Midnight Bomber]

Then what is the point of the lease agreement? I am not familiar with restrictions on free speech in places where children are present, but this is one hell of a case that would help determine the limitations religious organizations have when conducting religious activities in the vicinity of children.

Probably something to do with the School using the park for educational purposes...but the terms do state that it is still a public park and is still open for use by the general public during school hours which means the first amendment would still apply.

[Super Friendly Kitty Cat]

Then what is the point of the lease agreement? I am not familiar with restrictions on free speech in places where children are present, but this is one hell of a case that would help determine the limitations religious organizations have when conducting religious activities in the vicinity of children.

I have said it before and let me say it again.

It probably is just a formal agreement between the school and the city that in case there is a conflict between the school and someone else needing to use the park at the same time, the school's arrangement with the city would supersede anyone else's usage during school hours.

For example, the school without the "lease" is still able to use the park. It is a public park. Without the lease, they would never have "dibs" on it in case a conflict of usage arose.

[Daelak]

I have said it before and let me say it again.

It probably is just a formal agreement between the school and the city that in case there is a conflict between the school and someone else needing to use the park at the same time, the school's arrangement with the city would supersede anyone else's usage during school hours.

For example, the school without the "lease" is still able to use the park. It is a public park. Without the lease, they would never have "dibs" on it in case a conflict of usage arose.

And if that is the case, then the school can go to court, if it wants, since their lease supersedes the permit of someone else.

[Evil Midnight Bomber]

And if that is the case, then the school can go to court, if it wants, since their lease supersedes the permit of someone else.

Only if they are actively using the park...specifically the part of the park that the Jesus Lunch is being held at.

[Super Friendly Kitty Cat]

And if that is the case, then the school can go to court, if it wants, since their lease supersedes the permit of someone else.

It doesn't supersede people using the park when the school isn't using it for anything.

I don't understand why you aren't getting this very clear and very easy point.

1. The School has a lease; An impromptu hacky sack jamboree happens at this park during school hours and 500 hacky sack people show up. The school wants to use the park at the same, the school can ask them to leave.

2. The School has a lease; An impromptu hacky sack jamboree happens at this park during school hours and 500 hacky sack people show up. School doesn't have any plans to use the park that day so the hacky sack jamboree happens.

3. The School doesn't have a lease; An impromptu hacky sack jamboree happens at this park during school hours and 500 hacky sack people show up. The school wants to use the park at the same, the school can't ask them to leave.

This Jesus Lunch can continue to have their luncheon, as long as the school isn't specifically using the park for a School function or event.

If in the future the school wanted to use the park during the same time as the Jesus Lunch for a Homecoming Event, the Jesus Lunch would have to leave.

In order for the school to have the power to make anyone leave, they would have to be actively using the park for something. Otherwise it is open to the public

It really is that simple. Please I beg. Myself and others have tirelessly worked to make you understand such and easy and simple point.

Please understand it.

[Daelak]

Only if they are actively using the park...specifically the part of the park that the Jesus Lunch is being held at.

They are, it was for official school lunch and lunch hour P.E. periods.

[Evil Midnight Bomber]

They are, it was for official school lunch and lunch hour P.E. periods.

If the School wants to set up its own lunch at the park on the day in question...then they might have a case.

The School has no "official school lunch" use regarding the park. The school's policy on lunch is "open campus". Students are free to use the park during their lunch break if they so choose, because it is a public park...but there's no school event.

[Daelak]

If the School wants to set up its own lunch at the park on the day in question...then they might have a case.

The School has no "official school lunch" use regarding the park. The school's policy on lunch is "open campus". Students are free to use the park during their lunch break if they so choose, because it is a public park...but there's no school event.

They did have school lunch on the park, and the proselytizers interceded, using the christian persecution meme as a way to attack the schools normal operation events and functions.

- - - Updated - - -

It doesn't supersede people using the park when the school isn't using it for anything.

I don't understand why you aren't getting this very clear and very easy point.

1. The School has a lease; An impromptu hacky sack jamboree happens at this park during school hours and 500 hacky sack people show up. The school wants to use the park at the same, the school can ask them to leave.

2. The School has a lease; An impromptu hacky sack jamboree happens at this park during school hours and 500 hacky sack people show up. School doesn't have any plans to use the park that day so the hacky sack jamboree happens.

3. The School doesn't have a lease; An impromptu hacky sack jamboree happens at this park during school hours and 500 hacky sack people show up. The school wants to use the park at the same, the school can't ask them to leave.

This Jesus Lunch can continue to have their luncheon, as long as the school isn't specifically using the park for a School function or event.

If in the future the school wanted to use the park during the same time as the Jesus Lunch for a Homecoming Event, the Jesus Lunch would have to leave.

In order for the school to have the power to make anyone leave, they would have to be actively using the park for something. Otherwise it is open to the public

It really is that simple. Please I beg. Myself and others have tirelessly worked to make you understand such and easy and simple point.

Please understand it.

The school has ongoing classes and lunch in the park. The proselytizers interceded with bringing food and eventually speakers to the children out on lunch or during their P.E. class.