Is High School Article Criticizing Homosexuality Really Bullying?
By Eugene Volokh
The Shawano High School newspaper decided to run dueling student opinion pieces on whether same-sex couples should be able to adopt children; the student article that answered the question “no” said, among other things, quotes Leviticus 20:13 (“If there is a man who lies with a male as those who lie with a woman, both of of them have committed a detestable act; they shall surely be put to death.
Their bloodguiltiness is upon them.”). The school district then publicly apologized for the column, as an “[o]ffensive article[] cultivating a negative environment of disrespect,” and said that it is “taking steps to prevent items of this nature from happening in the future.” And in a Fox interview, the school superintendent labeled the column a form of “bullying.”
Now I’ve long thought that Hazelwood School Dist. v. Kuhlmeier (1988) was correct, and that public K-12 schools should be free to control what is published in the school newspaper. If a school wants the newspaper to be its voice, it should be entitled to dictate which subjects and which viewpoints it chooses to carry, even when it speaks through the speech of students.
But what troubles me here is the superintendent’s willingness to label such speech as a form of “bullying,” which is speech that schools often ban even outside the school’s own newspaper, that schools often try to restrict even when it is said outside school, and that legislatures sometimes even try to criminalize. Indeed, the Shawano School District’s bullying policy provides that “bullying” may lead to “warning, suspension, exclusion, pre-expulsion, expulsion, transfer, remediation, termination, or discharge. Disciplinary consequences will be sufficiently severe to try to deter violations and to appropriately discipline prohibited behavior.”
I’ve long been troubled by anti-bullying policies and criminal laws, partly because “bullying” is a vague and potentially very broad term, which could easily be used to refer to political advocacy and expression of religious views. This incident, it seems to me, helps illustrate that some school officials indeed view the term “bullying” this broadly.
Sign up for the OV Daily Newsletter
Sign-Up Now for the Opposing Views Daily Newsletter
Sign up for the OV Daily Newsletter
I dunno, seems to me that saying you think someone should be killed might qualify as bullying...
That being said I haven't seen the whole article; I'm reluctant to come out in favour of censorship unless there was an unambiguous call for violence.
I would argue that this school is violating the First Amendment's establishment clause where no laws can prohibit "the free exercise thereof" of religion. The writer of the piece in the HS paper was exercising not only his right to free speech, but his right to freedom of religion.
As one of the comments above states, the problem with any bullying laws is how do you define bullying? We have become a society where anything can be defined as bullying by anyone who doesn't happen to like or agree with another. This can said about discrimination as well. In the interest of making everyone "feel good" and "equal treatment" we have put everyone into their own group and treat them differently, more equal if you will, by coming up with laws especially for them.
If you are a Christian who truly believes in the teaching of the Bible, then you believe homosexuality is wrong. Those who believe it is not wrong, will have to take the chance when and if there is a judgement day to see how they are judged.
The article itself is only expressing an opinion, albeit one that does not belong in a tax-supported forum, even with the despicable bible quote, it wold be a freedom of speech issue were it in a private venue.
The problem is, it encourages people already of a delusional mind set to engage in bullying and outright violence.
For most rational people, using the bible as a justification, even foundation, of an argument demonstrates a void of logical content.
Most of the problems of the world are, and always have been, caused by religion. For example, Northern Ireland, the Middle East, 9/11, gay bashing, and family planning clinic bombing in the USA. Then there were the crusades, the inquisition, witch burnings, the suppression of women, and the dark ages. Get the idea?
Humanity will never truly be free until the black yoke of religion is lifted by the clear light of truth and rational thinking.
If freedom means anything, it is the liberty to tell others what they do not want to hear.
It's a dangerous slippery slope here to label one's religious view as "bullying" - did the author threaten gay persons in any way?
I would say that quoting Leviticus, which says that gay men should be put to death, is a direct and unambiguous threat.
It was dumb for the paper to allow this sort of dueling debate to occur. It is not an appropriate subject for a school debate. It is more appropriate for something like OV, but not a public school, which is charged with providing a safe place for all students.
By the same token, I don't think gay students should be allowed to harass christians in school either. School should be a neutral zone where no form of bullying or harassment is tolerated.
I am glad that the person who used the bible as their argument against same sex marriage. Because let's face it, the only reason same sex marriage is opposed, is because of religion. Any supposed secular or non-religious arguments are just cover for those already pre-determined to oppose same sex marriage because of their religious beliefs. They detest gays and homosexuality because of the bible, and probably also, their own repressed homosexual feelings.
Jerome McCollom