# Child with SS parents barred from San Diego (private) school. **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [September 30, 2015, 10:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/child-with-ss-parents-barred-from-san-diego-private-school/733088 "2015-09-30T22:57:10Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![TriPolar](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tripolar/32/3008_2.png) [@TriPolar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TriPolar)\ **Post date:** [October 1, 2015, 3:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/child-with-ss-parents-barred-from-san-diego-private-school/733088/61 "2015-10-01T15:43:50Z")
> [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](#): > > What the fuck are you talking about? The school changed its rules _after_ they enrolled her. Unfortunately, most of the best schools are private, and most private schools are religious. Many quality private schools have a religious basis, but that doesn’t mean they are the kind of place that kick out a child based on her parents behavior. Now if there was no way her parents could have seen the potential for this kind of problem then I would have to retract my statement, but I find that unlikely. If I had children with a same sex partner I would look very carefully at any school that called itself ‘Christian’ before I enrolled my child there. I believe that Catholic schools wouldn’t expel a student in that situation, although they may often tell that girl her parents are sinners going to hell. There are a number of other quality religious institutions who would have no problem with the children of same sex parents attending. So unless someone can show me that the parents of that girl exerted a reasonable effort in determining that this school would be accepting of their lifestyle then I will continue to contend that they are idiots… ETA: there’s [already](https://www.gofundme.com/mteriePTO) a GoFundMe. Supposedly it’s just for school activities but it was set up this week and shared on their Facebook page in the middle of discussion of this story. [/QUOTE] … unless of course they were smart enough to see this as a way to raise money based on the manufactured indignation. ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [October 1, 2015, 3:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/child-with-ss-parents-barred-from-san-diego-private-school/733088/62 "2015-10-01T15:54:21Z")
That’s a good point. Shodan wants to know if the parents were “setting up” the school. I want to know if the school was setting up the parents. ---
**Author:** ![Smeghead](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/f1d935/32.png) [@Smeghead](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Smeghead)\ **Post date:** [October 1, 2015, 3:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/child-with-ss-parents-barred-from-san-diego-private-school/733088/63 "2015-10-01T15:58:55Z")
> [@Morgenstern](#): > > Apparently, the reviews are rolling in for thi wonderful school. > > “The director for preschool is unprofessional and unchristian!” > > “…hostile work environment the director facilitates in the Academy Preschool.” > > “I would never allow my son go to the preschool!” > > [Google](https://www.google.com/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF-8#q=mt%20erie%20christian%20school&lrd=0x80d953c571ae47f7:0xb2e2d750ff2a8f0e,1) > > I’m betting the shit is has hit the fan with some admins there. Oh, just wait ten minutes, and someone will set up a kickstarter fund that raises a million bucks, and a new hashtag will pop up, and there will be Facebook memes and all the usual bullshit on both sides. ---
**Author:** ![Bone](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bone/32/407_2.png) [@Bone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bone)\ **Post date:** [October 1, 2015, 4:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/child-with-ss-parents-barred-from-san-diego-private-school/733088/64 "2015-10-01T16:01:00Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > I wonder if the parents are setting up a lawsuit, in hopes of > [list=a][li]Making sexual orientation a protected classification[/li][li]Making the school change its curriculum so they cannot teach that homosexual behavior is a sin.[/list]They don’t even have to win the suit, just bankrupt the school defending itself as a warning to every other private school. [/li] > Regards, > Shodan Sexual orientation is already a protected in CA since 1979, with civil penalties added in 1991. Gender identity gained protection in 2004. ---
**Author:** ![YogSothoth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/8edcca/32.png) [@YogSothoth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/YogSothoth)\ **Post date:** [October 1, 2015, 4:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/child-with-ss-parents-barred-from-san-diego-private-school/733088/65 "2015-10-01T16:02:40Z")
I don’t think the school should be allowed to kick the kid out. I consider sexual orientation to be a protected class, and I think it is in California already, so I’m against even private schools like this to be able to kick out kids for having gay parents. ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [October 1, 2015, 4:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/child-with-ss-parents-barred-from-san-diego-private-school/733088/66 "2015-10-01T16:04:28Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > I wonder if the parents are setting up a lawsuit, in hopes of > [list=a][li]Making sexual orientation a protected classification[/li][li]Making the school change its curriculum so they cannot teach that homosexual behavior is a sin.[/list]They don’t even have to win the suit, just bankrupt the school defending itself as a warning to every other private school. [/li] > Regards, > Shodan But the kid wasn’t rejected because she’s homosexual, she was rejected because of her parents. The protected classification would be “parental sexual orientation” or something like that. ---
**Author:** ![Ambrosio\_Spinola](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/9de0a6/32.png) [@Ambrosio\_Spinola](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ambrosio_Spinola)\ **Post date:** [October 1, 2015, 4:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/child-with-ss-parents-barred-from-san-diego-private-school/733088/67 "2015-10-01T16:10:14Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > I wonder if the parents are setting up a lawsuit, in hopes of > [list=a][li]Making sexual orientation a protected classification[/li][li]Making the school change its curriculum so they cannot teach that homosexual behavior is a sin.[/list]They don’t even have to win the suit, just bankrupt the school defending itself as a warning to every other private school. [/li] > Regards, > Shodan California is in the Ninth Circuit, which [already applies heightened scrutiny](http://www.equalityontrial.com/2014/03/07/smithkline-beecham-v-abbott-labs-ninth-circuit-case-involving-lgbt-juror-discrimination-wont-challenged/) to sexual orientation claims. So this would be a wasted effort. Even assuming that sexual orientation is a protected classification, a purely private religious school can teach whatever they want and exclude whomever they want without justification and without oversight. They can teach that women must be submissive to men or simply refuse to enroll women (such as ultra-orthodox yeshivas). They could teach that one race is superior or refuse to enroll members of certain races. Slippery slope arguments aside, any change to that would require reversal of decades of Supreme Court precedent on this subject which is pretty entrenched. I guess the parents could try to file a lawsuit but it would probably be tossed in short order. As I understand Christian doctrine, refusing to enroll the children of sinners would result in an empty school, but they can do whatever they want. I can conclude they are jerks, but they aren’t likely to care what I think and I wouldn’t want anything to do with them either, which I guess is the whole point of having rules like that in the first place. ---
**Author:** ![Drunky\_Smurf](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/drunky_smurf/32/449_2.png) [@Drunky\_Smurf](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Drunky_Smurf)\ **Post date:** [October 1, 2015, 4:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/child-with-ss-parents-barred-from-san-diego-private-school/733088/68 "2015-10-01T16:29:39Z")
> [@YogSosoth](#): > > I consider sexual orientation to be a protected class, Ah, good for you. I too have an opinion. ---
**Author:** ![BubbaDog](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bubbadog/32/333_2.png) [@BubbaDog](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BubbaDog)\ **Post date:** [October 1, 2015, 4:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/child-with-ss-parents-barred-from-san-diego-private-school/733088/69 "2015-10-01T16:30:35Z")
> [@VinylTurnip](#): > > Tell me I’m not the only person who clicked this thread to find out how the hell a kid could have 55 parents. Well, when the 27.5 daddies love the 27.5 mommies very much they do a special hug… ---
**Author:** ![Mikeisskeptical](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/c0e974/32.png) [@Mikeisskeptical](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mikeisskeptical)\ **Post date:** [October 1, 2015, 4:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/child-with-ss-parents-barred-from-san-diego-private-school/733088/70 "2015-10-01T16:43:34Z")
> [@BubbaDog](#): > > Well, when the 27.5 daddies love the 27.5 mommies very much they do a special hug… Yeah, I’ve seen that website. Graphic. ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [October 1, 2015, 4:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/child-with-ss-parents-barred-from-san-diego-private-school/733088/71 "2015-10-01T16:54:34Z")
> [@Bone](#): > > Sexual orientation is already a protected in CA since 1979, with civil penalties added in 1991. Gender identity gained protection in 2004. I assume that the school can still kick the kid out, providing the school doesn’t receive public funds or exceed a certain size. Is that correct? Maybe that’s what the parents want to overturn. I have no idea, of course, so it is no more than speculation. Regards, Shodan ---
**Author:** ![Bone](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bone/32/407_2.png) [@Bone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bone)\ **Post date:** [October 1, 2015, 5:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/child-with-ss-parents-barred-from-san-diego-private-school/733088/72 "2015-10-01T17:55:25Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > I assume that the school can still kick the kid out, providing the school doesn’t receive public funds or exceed a certain size. Is that correct? > > Maybe that’s what the parents want to overturn. > > I have no idea, of course, so it is no more than speculation. > > Regards, > Shodan Yes, that is correct. The only area that private schools must adhere to with regards to discrimination is race. Even wholly private schools cannot discriminate based on race. SCOTUS in 1976 in [Runyon v. McCrary](http://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-supreme-court/427/160.html) > [@](#): > > 1. Section 1981 prohibits private, commercially operated, nonsectarian schools from denying admission to prospective students because they are Negroes. Pp. 168-175. > (a) Section 1 of the Civil Rights Act of 1866, from which 1981 is derived, prohibits racial discrimination in the making and enforcing of private contracts. See Johnson v. Railway Express Agency, 421 U.S. 454, 459 -460; Tillman v. Wheaton-Haven Recreation Assn., 410 U.S. 431, 439 -440. Cf. Jones v. Alfred H. Mayer Co., 392 U.S. 409, 441 -443, n. 78. Pp. 168-172. > (b) The racial discrimination practiced by petitioner schools amounts to a classic violation of 1981: Respondents’ parents sought to enter into a contractual relationship with petitioner schools, but neither school offered services on an equal basis to white and nonwhite students. Pp. 172-173. The same protection does not exist for sexual orientation. Here is [a similar event also in CA that was upheld unanimously](http://articles.latimes.com/2009/jan/28/local/me-school28) at the [state appellate leve](http://caselaw.findlaw.com/ca-court-of-appeal/1249024.html)l in 2009. [And in Boston in 2010 - though I don’t know if that was litigated.](http://www.edgeboston.com/index.php?ch=news&sc=&sc2=news&sc3=&id=105895) ---
**Author:** ![Bridget\_Burke](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/7cd45c/32.png) [@Bridget\_Burke](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bridget_Burke)\ **Post date:** [October 1, 2015, 6:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/child-with-ss-parents-barred-from-san-diego-private-school/733088/73 "2015-10-01T18:00:39Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > I assume that the school can still kick the kid out, providing the school doesn’t receive public funds or exceed a certain size. Is that correct? > > Maybe that’s what the parents want to overturn. > > I have no idea, of course, so it is no more than speculation. > > Regards, > Shodan Since the “rules” were rewritten after the kid had already attended the school, the parents didn’t enroll her intending to “overturn” anything. Just another reason to oppose school vouchers! Let the excellent private schools & the crappy ones continue as they wish. Without _any_ public funding. ---
**Author:** ![Ambrosio\_Spinola](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/9de0a6/32.png) [@Ambrosio\_Spinola](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ambrosio_Spinola)\ **Post date:** [October 1, 2015, 6:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/child-with-ss-parents-barred-from-san-diego-private-school/733088/74 "2015-10-01T18:03:01Z")
> [@Bone](#): > > Yes, that is correct. The only area that private schools must adhere to with regards to discrimination is race. Even wholly private schools cannot discriminate based on race. SCOTUS in 1976 in [Runyon v. McCrary](http://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-supreme-court/427/160.html) They probably can if their racial discrimination is based in religious belief, or at least _Runyon_ didn’t decide that question: [QUOTE=From Runyon Decision] It is worth noting at the outset some of the questions that these cases do not present. They do not present any question of the right of a private social organization to limit its membership on racial or any other grounds. They do not present any question of the right of a private school to limit its student body to boys, to girls, or to adherents of a particular religious faith, since 42 U.S.C. 1981 is in no way addressed to such categories of selectivity. They do not even present the application of 1981 to private sectarian schools that practice racial exclusion on religious grounds. [/QUOTE] ---
**Author:** ![Bone](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bone/32/407_2.png) [@Bone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bone)\ **Post date:** [October 1, 2015, 6:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/child-with-ss-parents-barred-from-san-diego-private-school/733088/75 "2015-10-01T18:09:51Z")
> [@Bridget\_Burke](#): > > Since the “rules” were rewritten after the kid had already attended the school, the parents didn’t enroll her intending to “overturn” anything. > > Just another reason to oppose school vouchers! Let the excellent private schools & the crappy ones continue as they wish. Without _any_ public funding. Alternatively, construe school vouchers as a form of federal funding and all of the protections that attach could be enforced. Requiring people to pay for education does not necessarily mean that government be the only provider. ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [October 1, 2015, 6:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/child-with-ss-parents-barred-from-san-diego-private-school/733088/76 "2015-10-01T18:16:54Z")
School voucher systems operate at the state level. But given California’s stronger-than-federal sexual orientation protection, that would work fine. > [@Bone](#): > > Yes, that is correct. The only area that private schools must adhere to with regards to discrimination is race. Even wholly private schools cannot discriminate based on race. SCOTUS in 1976 in [Runyon v. McCrary](http://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-supreme-court/427/160.html) Note the “nonsectarian” part. Private _religious_ schools may exclude black students. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [October 1, 2015, 6:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/child-with-ss-parents-barred-from-san-diego-private-school/733088/77 "2015-10-01T18:17:50Z")
> [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](#): > > That’s a good point. Shodan wants to know if the parents were “setting up” the school. I want to know if the school was setting up the parents. Maybe the kid was setting up the school AND the parents! ---
**Author:** ![Bone](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bone/32/407_2.png) [@Bone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bone)\ **Post date:** [October 1, 2015, 6:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/child-with-ss-parents-barred-from-san-diego-private-school/733088/78 "2015-10-01T18:23:40Z")
> [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](#): > > School voucher systems operate at the state level. But given California’s stronger-than-federal sexual orientation protection, that would work fine. > > Note the “nonsectarian” part. Private _religious_ schools may exclude black students. Yes, I didn’t highlight that part but did note it in the quote. For some reason I thought I wrote it out but apparently I missed it. ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [October 1, 2015, 7:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/child-with-ss-parents-barred-from-san-diego-private-school/733088/79 "2015-10-01T19:04:15Z")
> [@Bone](#): > > Yes, that is correct. The only area that private schools must adhere to with regards to discrimination is race. Even wholly private schools cannot discriminate based on race. SCOTUS in 1976 in [Runyon v. McCrary](http://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-supreme-court/427/160.html) > The same protection does not exist for sexual orientation. Here is [a similar event also in CA that was upheld unanimously](http://articles.latimes.com/2009/jan/28/local/me-school28) at the [state appellate leve](http://caselaw.findlaw.com/ca-court-of-appeal/1249024.html)l in 2009. [And in Boston in 2010 - though I don’t know if that was litigated.](http://www.edgeboston.com/index.php?ch=news&sc=&sc2=news&sc3=&id=105895) Thanks. [QUOTE=Really Not All That Bright] That’s a good point. Shodan wants to know if the parents were “setting up” the school. I want to know if the school was setting up the parents. [/QUOTE] Setting up the parents by rejecting the daughter so that other people would GoFundME for their tuition somewhere else? That seems a little far-fetched, but I suppose it is possible. It would surprise me that a fundamentalist school would go to the trouble for a lesbian couple. But no doubt it could happen. Regards, Shodan ---
**Author:** ![Merneith](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/57b2e6/32.png) [@Merneith](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Merneith)\ **Post date:** [October 1, 2015, 7:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/child-with-ss-parents-barred-from-san-diego-private-school/733088/80 "2015-10-01T19:09:42Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > Maybe that’s what the parents want to overturn. > > I have no idea, of course, so it is no more than speculation. > > Regards, > Shodan You need to read this article: > **[Kindergarten Student Kicked Out Of Mt. Erie Christian Academy Because She Has...](https://www.inquisitr.com/2456838/kindergarten-student-kicked-out-of-mt-erie-christian-academy-because-she-has-two-moms)** > > A California kindergarten student was kicked out of the Mt. Erie Christian Academy because she has two moms. The 5-year-old girl attended both preschool and summer school offerings at the academy, but was reportedly denied permission to enroll in... The parents are not at fault here. The child attended the school’s pre-school and pre-K programs. Then the school rewrote the rules over the summer. The school changed the rules. If anyone’s plotting something, it’s the school. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/child-with-ss-parents-barred-from-san-diego-private-school/733088.md?page=3) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/child-with-ss-parents-barred-from-san-diego-private-school/733088.md?page=5)