****Under the new Utah law, every club will have to complete an activity disclosure statement that itemizes what it will do, and discusses how many members it will have, and whether tryouts are required. It mandates that any student joining any club needs a parent’s signature — though most public schools in Utah require that already — and specifically bans any discussion by any club of “human sexuality.”****
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/03/17/education/17utah.html?_r=3&ref=education&oref=slogin&oref=slogin&oref=slogin
State Senator D. Chris Buttars states "his bill was intended to bring uniformity to the rules. The centerpiece, he said, is a clause giving school administrators the authority to ensure that clubs do not violate “the boundaries of socially appropriate behavior.”
“If a gay-straight club wants to meet together, as they say they do, just for friendship, I have no problem with that,” Mr. Buttars said. “But I think school districts should have the authority to do whatever they need to do protect their schools — the law gives them authority to make decisions to protect the physical, emotional, psychological or moral well being of students.”"
this bill specifically states that: every club will have to complete an activity disclosure statement that itemizes what it will do, and discusses how many members it will have, and whether tryouts are required. It mandates that any student joining any club needs a parent’s signature — though most public schools in Utah require that already — and specifically bans any discussion by any club of “human sexuality.”
yet the Federal Equal Access Act of 1984 states "Students are free to organize Bible study and other religious special interest clubs if any other secular clubs are allowed."
- this states that such Gay-Straight alliances are protected under this act (ironic)
-
what bugs me the mostwhat bugs me the most is simple. why do these people think that these clubs meet to have sex! when these clubs are not about sex. they are about meeting people who are like you and welcome you for being you and as a safe place to be.66% Voted for by iamlost, Kazrith, Weydon, Kahliya, pozo. (6 total)
-
clubs are places, not eventsyou go to meet people at a place at a time for dating and friendships with people you have something in common with. the issue is a gay rights thing, if you can't see it, by the way. the morality note rings clear. the politician doesn't want *gay* dating encouraged with *gay* clubs, although religious ones are fine. it's ridiculous.22% Voted for by Door on the Left, ScorpioBlood.
itemized lists of things you are allowed to talk about are unamerican. government is not a place to wield authority for a personal cause, it's a place where the politicians should be doing exactly what we tell them to, because we pay their checks, not vice versa. it doesn't matter if you agree with the personal agenda of the politician, no personal agenda should be voiced in office, and should certainly not be openly voted for.
they need to start doing what we say, instead of telling us how to live our lives. our country is all about rights, not laws. or at least, it was. -
Safe guardingWell, it's not like I say it's not wrong, but there might be a good amount of reason to do that.Voted for by Mary Lillian Johnson.
1 to ensure safety, and they are not a revenge group or a group to do stuff that will hurt others.
2 To keep the envornment peaceful and clean. If they parents approve and it's planed out what they do no one is going to worry about safety and it could be peaceful.
I agree it could be a little unreasonable and a process that is unneeded.
Adding your reply:
Registration is required because of issues with spam. It is fast and free! This author would LOVE to get a comment from you, please join!
bob2314
March 21, 2007
Edit | Reply
still wating on my toster oven
what is most interesting to me is that the state of Utah finds it necessary to legislate the morality of its teenagers and limit what they can talk about. doesn't this mean that they have already lost the war? i also find it ironic that a state founded by religious nonconformists finds it necessary to force its young people to conform.Applehead
March 21, 2007
Kazrith
March 21, 2007
Applehead
March 23, 2007
Are they meeting to discuss sexuality issues?
Kazrith
March 23, 2007
Edit | Reply
Weydon
March 22, 2007
Edit | Reply
May 24, 2007
Edit | Reply
i know
that's done by starting friendships with people that have similar interests, i was only being honest in that many individuals that join school groups do so to hook up with people in addition to starting friendships, just as religious groups are not started to promote intolerance, but end up doing so much of the time, although they are allowed. an individuals reasons for joining a group are beside the point, though. if a group of homosexuals want to support each other, they should be able to, even if some of them use the club as a way to meet other gays. i was merely pointing out that they can't very well be officially prohibiting gays from congregating for support, so they are painting a picture of perceived individual motives as reason for clubs to be banned, which is essentially misusing authority to serve one's own personal stance on a subject. that's what I was getting at. I went to highschool in Salt Lake City, you see, and my school had a similar problem and used a similar official reason for preventing a gay pride club, but I think that at my school someone argued convincingly enough to allow the club to form. I don't remember the details, but I recall hearing about it from some gay friends.July 13, 2007
Edit | Reply
Please register or login to comment! It's totally free