Strollerderby : ACLU

High School Girl Wins! Gets to Wear Her Tux to Prom

SunnyChanel — Tue, 17 Mar 2009 01:12:00 GMT

I don’t know about you, but I love the look of a girl in a suit. And if you make that suit a tux, well then she’d get bonus points in my book. Apparently a high school in Lebanon, Indiana doesn’t feel the same way.

A student at Lebanon High wanted to wear a tuxedo to her high school prom. The principal of the school told the teenage girl that “while the school's dress code does not contain gender-based requirements, there is a special dress code for prom that requires female students to wear a formal dress.” The 17-year-old, a lesbian, doesn’t ‘do’ dresses because “she believes dresses represent a sexual identity she rejects.” So what did she do? She got the ACLU on it and a lawsuit was filed. And it worked.

The school has stated that, "School policy for this year's prom will be that all attendees shall wear appropriate formal attire with no gender-based attire requirements imposed. Female students will be permitted to wear tuxedos if they chose."

It’s surprising that the school would forbid a girl to don a tux if she chooses. It seems that pert near every prom in the land has at least one girl donning a tux. Was the school taking this as a political statement more than a fashion statement? Regardless, it’s just clothes.

Do you think the school was totally out of line with their original ruling?

Court Bans Divorced Mom's Partner from Sleeping Over

JeanneSager — Sun, 28 Dec 2008 17:01:00 GMT

Proving once again that what's good for the gander isn't necessarily going to be allowed by homophobic family court judges for the goose, a divorced mom from Tennessee has been informed she can't allow her lesbian partner to sleep over on the same nights as her kids.

Her ex-husband, meanwhile, has remarried and his wife sleeps over - well, lives - with him every night.

Angel Chandler and Joseph Barker have been divorced for ten years, and shared custody of their two kids (now thirteen and fifteen) that whole time. They've both entered new relationships too, Barker remarrying five years ago while Chandler has maintained a monogamous relationship with a woman since 1999. But when they went to court late last year to modify the custody arrangements, the State of Tennessee sent both parents and both kids for psychological work-ups.

The evaluation determined Chandler's partner was a positive influence on her two kids. The court ignored it. A "paramour" restriction was added to the custody arrangements earlier this year, restricting Chandler's partner from being in their home on the nights when the kids were with Mom. Because after nine years, suddenly a set of teenagers are going to be shocked to find out Mom's a lesbian?

The women are now living in a duplex, side by side, so they can abide by court rules and still be together - sort of. The ACLU has stepped into the fray, filing a brief this week that urges the court to remove the paramour restriction, calling it unconstitutional for interfering with Chandler's abilities to raise her children as she sees fit.

If the court really wants to do what's best for the kids, how about allowing two sets of parents to get on with their lives in loving relationships and letting those kids see examples on both sides of happy, committed, successful couples?

Image: Amazon

Source: ACLU

Teen Has Cancer and Lives in a Car

Man Says Drinking Breastmilk Cured His Cancer

Principal Censors Pro-Gay School Paper

Parents Upset: Transgender Kids Use Different School Bathrooms

Mommy and Mama Now Legal in New York

More Parents Leaving Kids Alone to Save on Daycare

Breaking News: CA Supreme Court Will Hear Prop. 8 Challenges

Hannah Tennant-Moore — Thu, 20 Nov 2008 20:40:00 GMT

In case your post-election elation is starting to wear off, here's some good news in the fight for constitutional protections. The California Supreme Court agreed today to hear the case against Proposition 8 brought by the ACLU, the City of San Francisco, and gay rights organizations. This is the same court that unwittingly brought about the Prop. 8 firestorm after they ruled that banning gay marriage violates both the fundamental right to marry and the equal protection clause of the California Constitution.

The lawsuits against Prop. 8 hinge on two main arguments, namely (according to the San Francisco Chronicle) that "the measure exceeds the legal scope of a ballot initiative by allowing a majority to restrict a minority group's rights, and that it violates the constitutional separation of powers by limiting judicial authority."

The court's decision to review challenges to Prop. 8 is great news, but the fight is far from over. The court also ruled that same-sex marriages will remain illegal until it has considered the constitutionality of Prop. 8. And if it does find the measure to be constitutionally sound, the court will have to decide whether to apply Prop. 8 retroactively, nullifying the 18,000 marriages that took place between the court's legalization of same-sex marriage and the passage of Prop. 8. We'll keep you posted.

Photo: Los Angeles Times

Prop. 8 Protests Spawn Hope and Great Photos

Mom Kicked out of PTA for Prop. 8 Stance

Halloween Not So Festive For Sex Offenders

Kelly Mills — Sun, 19 Oct 2008 14:35:00 GMT

Most of the year we say, "Hey kids, don't take candy from strangers." The exception of course is Halloween, when we have kids actually solicit for candy, and 'aw yeah' for that. Some states are taking measures to prevent registered violent and child sex offenders from participating in the holiday, a thought that made my fears of pumpkin smashing seem a little more trivial.

In Maryland, 1,200 sex offenders received a letter instructing them to stay at home, turn off the porch lights, and not answer the door. They also received a sign with a scared-looking pumpkin on it, that reads "No candy at this residence". The letter begins, "Halloween provides a rare opportunity for you to demonstrate to your neighbors that you are making a sincere effort to change the direction of your life." And as part of that effort, I think your house is gonna get egged this year.

Other states are adopting similar measures, and in Missouri, four offenders and the ACLU are challenging it. Louisiana has banned sex offenders from wearing masks on Halloween and during carnival season. Are the rules a violation of civil liberties, or a necessary measure? Will they effectively protect kids? You tell me.

Most wanted puts deadbeat dads...and one mom online

Scary teen kidnappers going to jail

Spanked! Is Your 3-Year-Old Getting It at Preschool?

Madeline Holler — Wed, 20 Aug 2008 17:25:00 GMT

I'm the first person to giggle/cringe/fume at all the feelings talk and redirection and tolerated annoying behaviors of kids young and old. But that's because I come from a long line of bitter, passive-aggressive control freaks. Lucky for my kids (crossing fingers, crossing fingers), I'm smart enough to know that kid brains are still developing, life is not easy and children's outward actions rarely correlate one-to-one with their inner needs/wants/emotions.

I'm also smart enough to farm my beauties out to the pros when I can. I get a little break. The kids are with other kids. And the pros know what they're doing. Because the pros are gifted in the childcare arts. Because the pros are supervised by other pros. Because the pros re-up their professional credits every summer and go on retreats and role play, role play, role play to collect the necessary "tools" for dealing with conflict and stubborness and the crankies in just the right way that everybody feels good and heard and special about themselves at the end of the day.

Right? Wrong!

According to a new Human Rights Watch and the American Civil Liberties Union study, gobs of kids in the U.S. are getting spanked by their caregivers and teachers every year. Something like 200,000 of them. Some as young as 3! And African-American girls are getting it way more than any other demographic. I never thought to ask whether my youngest's preschool spanks the kids. Certainly not my older one's elementary school. I mean, who knew it was even an option?

From Reuters:

Twenty-one U.S. states still permit the use of corporal punishment in schools. In Texas and Mississippi children as young as 3 are struck for transgressions as minor as gum chewing, the report says.

The punishment often involves hitting a child on the buttocks with a long wooden board, or paddle.

In 13 states in the U.S. South where corporal punishment is the most prevalent, African-American girls are twice as likely to be hit as their white counterparts, according to the 125-page report.

"African-American students are punished at 1.4 times the rate that would be expected given their numbers in the student population," the groups said in a statement.

Texas is the capital for corporal punishment -- a quarter of the cases in the study hail (in my opinion, unsurprisingly) from this state (also winner in the capital punishment category!). Here's an old NY Times story where Texas educators defend the practice.

If your stomach hasn't turned enough, get this: the study found that students with physical or mental disabilities were subjected to a disproportionate rate of corporal punishment.

The study also documented cases of children being seriously injured, of course a rare occurance. But even if the majority of those getting hit at school do not leave school with bruises or red marks, I would lose my mind if a teacher or principal or daycare worker spanked my kid. Or even threatened to spank them. How about some redirection? Talk about feelings? Tolerance and role playing? I promise I'll stop rolling my eyes!

What would you do if you found out your child got spanked at school? Or are you all for corporal punishment (if the answer is yes, do you live in Texas? It's just a question!)

Should You Intervene When Strangers Hit Their Kids?

Photo: nospank.net

Big Brother is Watching You[r Kid] On the School Bus

Karen Murphy — Mon, 08 Oct 2007 11:32:00 GMT

You decide—good idea gone awry, or just good idea? Apparently the new accessory on school buses is a video camera, recording your kid's every nose-picking moment.

The idea is to provide an objective record when there's a bus-related dispute. Hey! Did the bus driver haul off and whack my kid for no reason like my kid says, or does my kid have a bone to pick with the driver because he made him keep his head inside the window and embarrassed him in front of everyone? Who's telling the truth? The camera will know!

And the cameras supposedly deter bullying, too. Which would have saved my daughter's birthday cake from having been consumed by the ~~fat piglike girl~~ evidently very hungry girl who extorted it from her last year, thus providing life-long birthday cake-related scars.

And the ACLU is on board with the idea, too, stating that school buses aren't a place where kids would normally expect privacy.

So how come I don't like it?

Immigration Officials Detain a Six-Year-Old Boy. Real Nice.

Kelly Mills — Mon, 30 Apr 2007 18:28:00 GMT

The ACLU and Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights are suing the federal government for taking a six-year-old boy, Kebin Reynes, into custody for 12 hours when they arrested his father as an illegal immigrant. When immigration officials took father Noe Reynes into custody, they refused to allow him to call anyone to take Kebin, and instead held him until an uncle heard about the arrest. Sound familiar? An immigration agency spokesperson said, "He went with his dad so he wouldn't be left home alone."

I will now try not to be physically ill at the thought of a six-year-old being taken into custody because he wanted to be with his dad. The story goes on to say that "mental health experts say the [immigration] raids are traumatizing children." Wow, you think?

The story details possible constitutional violations made by officials as they conduct raids. Part of the problem seems to be changes in immigration laws that allow officials to interrogate anyone "believed to be an alien," even if they just happen to live in the home of someone else suspected of illegal status. Reynes was detained during a series of raids known as "Operation Return to Sender". Hey, don't think of the immigrants as people, just imagine they are packages. Really, UPS should be handling this one.

But here's my favorite quote:

"'It's unfortunate that families become detached,' said Kurt Bardella, spokesman for Rep. Brian Bilbray, R-Carlsbad (San Diego County), who chairs the House Immigration Reform Caucus. 'But when someone enters this country illegally, and they have a child here, they have made conscious decisions while their status in this country is uncertain. They are subjecting themselves and their families to the risk that the law might be enforced.'"

Unfortunate. Right. As a parent, I know I'd gladly crawl through barbed wire or cross an ocean on a tiny raft and live in uncertainty if I believed I could win a better life for my child that way. And I don't care where you stand on immigration, describing families as becoming "detached" is just gross. These families are being ripped apart. Time for Bilbray to grow some humanity. I hope he sleeps better at night, knowing that agents are trying to keep us safe from kindergarteners.

FLA Bill to Require DNA Tests on All Pregnant Minors

Rachael Brownell (Redsy) — Thu, 08 Mar 2007 11:38:00 GMT

A Florida State Senator has proposed a bill which would require health care workers and abortion clinics to take DNA samples from pregnant girls under 16 and submit them to law enforcement within 24 hours. The samples would then be forwarded to the state Department of Law Enforcement, and then kept on file should they ever be needed in a sexual crime case.

The bill does not yet have any sponsors, and woe betide any fool who signs on. I appreciate the inclination to protect the young-uns from predators, but the right to privacy is what's at stake in cases such as these. We cannot force people to offer up DNA samples in the name of safety, no matter how compelling the argument. Not surprisingly, the bill has not yet been referred to a committee. And let's hope for the sake of this misdirected bill proponent that it never does.

Parents Steal Objectionable Books from School Library

Rachael Brownell (Redsy) — Fri, 23 Feb 2007 21:04:00 GMT

Cuban parents in Miami-Dade County have good reason to dislike the book "Vamos a Cuba." According to Dalila Rodriguez, she took it from her son's school library because the book glamorizes life in Cuba and promotes inaccurate information about her home country. At one point, the school district banned the book, but was challenged by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) who eventually got the book reinstated.

Of course the problem with civil liberties and freedom of expression is that it only works if you adhere to the principle even when it's inconvenient. While many people feel the ACLU goes overboard defending the rights of the KKK and other undesirables.

Book banning parents are certainly nothing new. However, this case presents the perfect conundrum for the pro-ACLU sort. What if misinformation that is destructive (culturally and racially) is communicated through books? Do parents have a right to keep those books from being read by their schoolchildren?

Why I am Going to Start Forcing My Kids to Watch Sucker Free Sundays

Sarah, Goon Squad Sarah — Tue, 02 Jan 2007 22:42:00 GMT

I was thinking of having my children classically trained on the piano. I remember back when I was in college the kids who could accompany the other music students made a ton of money on the side. A lot of the piano majors were paying for school that way. Then I read this article by Paula Reed Ward in the Post-Gazette.com about a high school kid who won $90,000 by suing his school district.

Anthony Latour writes and records his own rap records. In April of 2005, while he was still in middle school, he was arrested at school and taken away in handcuffs. They expelled the boy due to complaints from the parents of other students who saw his lyrics online and found them threatening.

A lawsuit was filed on his behalf by the ACLU. Latour's attorney, Francis Moore, says that if Anthony had lived in a more urban area this would have never even been an issue. $25,000 will be put into an account that Anthony Latour will not have access to until he turns 18. Moore says that he hopes the high schooler decides to use the money from the settlement for college.

Instead of those piano lessons I am just going to by the kids some nice Eminem cds. Hell, the entire Snoop Dogg catalogue, a nice drum machine and a mixing board has got to be cheaper than four years even at a state college, right?