Ms. Keeton, The KKK, And All That Jazz............

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

ABM

Happily Married In Music City, USA!
Joined
Sep 12, 2008
Messages
31,865
Likes
5,785
Points
113
(you may, or may not believe this, but....) It's not my intention to start another big debate on the subject. However, I had to laugh (sadly) when I read that the KKK is getting involved in all this. Also had to laugh when I read one of the comments on this link whereas someone suggested that Ms. Keeton attend this rally/protest (or the counter-protest) as part of her remedial exercises. :lol:

http://chronicle.augusta.com/latest...-supporting-keeton-draws-counter-protest-plan
 
If Ms. Keeton has any sense about her or awareness of her current predicament, she'd come out with a strong statement asking the KKK to stay way the hell out of this situation. That could be a bigger remediation exercise than any pride parade she could find.

Its also is worth noting that the Klan was no where to be found during a similar case at Eastern Michigan...oh wait...the student was black so she shouldn't have any rights to begin with.

Also ABM, you're really not doing your argument favors with this post. While I realize that I'm about to oversimplify the situation (as I think you did with the subject of your original thread on the subject), you're essentially pointing out that the Klan is on your side in this argument.
 
Oh, we know you just want to have another thread about this. You can't fool us.

So I did a little more research on this case, and for those of you who were certain that she'd prevail in court: it seems one judge has already dismissed the lawsuit. Keeton has appealed, the school has petitioned to have the case thrown out again, and current status is that Keeton has until 11/2 to provide additional evidence for why it shouldn't be tossed.

Here's the news story about the judge tossing the case in August:

Augusta State University's requirement that a graduate student read material about counseling gays and increase her exposure to that community after she objected to counseling homosexual clients was "academically legitimate," a federal court judge ruled Friday.

U.S. District Judge Randal Hall's decision enables university officials to expel Jennifer Keeton if she does not follow the remediation plan, which professors designed to "address issues of multicultural competence and develop understanding and empathy."

Hall said the case is not about "pitting Christianity against homosexuality," but rather the constitutionality of the school's requirement.

Professors asked Keeton to complete the remediation plan after she said she opposed homosexuality and would tell gay clients "their behavior is morally wrong and then help the client change that behavior," according to an affidavit filed in the case.

Keeton filed a lawsuit against the school in July, alleging the requirement was viewpoint discrimination and a violation of her First Amendment rights.

Hall ruled that Keeton "failed to clearly establish her high burden of persuasion of a 'substantial likelihood' of success of the merits of her case."

She provided no evidence that ASU faculty imposed the remediation plan because they personally disagreed with her views, Hall said.

In an Aug. 11 hearing, ASU professors testified that the plan was not a punishment for voicing her beliefs, but a tool to teach Keeton how to counsel clients while not imposing her views.

"All three professors testified that they never told (Keeton) that she was required to change her religious beliefs in order to stay in the counseling program," Hall wrote.

He noted that Keeton did not testify at the hearing nor present any witnesses in support of her motion.

Hall said Keeton's unwillingness to adhere to the school's viewpoint-neutral code of ethics set by the American Counseling Association constitutes a refusal to complete the curriculum.

Without completing the remediation plan, Keeton was unable to begin classes at the college as part of a practicum. A filing by her lawyers earlier this week said she had begun the work at Augusta Christian School.

Hall ruled the plan was simply a way to teach Keeton how to counsel all demographics of clients.

"It was not (Keeton's) personal beliefs that were their concern, but rather only her inability to separate her personal beliefs in the judgment-free zone of a professional counseling situation," Hall said.

barfo
 
Sorry, I was legally imprecise. The judge in August (and in Augusta) dismissed her motion for a preliminary injunction. Then the state filed to have the case dismissed. The 11/2 deadline is for her response to the state's motion.

barfo
 
Here's the news story about the judge tossing the case in August:

Must be an infidel communist judge.

Here is a picture of a Lobster phone. Just because I can. Like Ms. Keeton can (sue).

dali45.JPG
 
Like I posted in the other thread, if seeing and properly dealing with certain classes of cases is something she refuses to do, they don't have to hire her. If she's a student and refuses to do the course work, they can expel her. I don't see the issue here, really.
 
On the other hand, isn't it perhaps an issue for some religious student to go see a counselor they can't believe in because they deal with gay people?

Sorta smacks of ramming the gay thing down peoples' throats who are really resistant to it, and have a right to be resistant to it IMO.
 
On the other hand, isn't it perhaps an issue for some religious student to go see a counselor they can't believe in because they deal with gay people?

Sorta smacks of ramming the gay thing down peoples' throats who are really resistant to it, and have a right to be resistant to it IMO.

Isn't ramming the gay thing down peoples' throats one of the things she's kind of against?

Or...

ramming the gay thing down peoples' throats? Boy, that's a mouthful!
 
On the other hand, isn't it perhaps an issue for some religious student to go see a counselor they can't believe in because they deal with gay people?

What, the counselor catches gay cooties from talking to a gay student, and the bigoted student can see those gay cooties crawling around on the counselor? Is that what you mean?

Sorta smacks of ramming the gay thing down peoples' throats who are really resistant to it, and have a right to be resistant to it IMO.

Yes, giving gay kids access to counseling is really ramming "the gay thing" down straight people's throats. Mm-hmm.

barfo
 
On the other hand, isn't it perhaps an issue for some religious student to go see a counselor they can't believe in because they deal with gay people?

Sorta smacks of ramming the gay thing down peoples' throats who are really resistant to it, and have a right to be resistant to it IMO.

What religion would have a problem with a counselor who "deals with" gay people?

And WTF is "the gay thing"?
 
Above all else, she needs a better stock photo than the single one she has supplied to all media outlets.

She looks anorexic, emotionally disturbed, and just plain spooky in that one.
 
And can we get this merged with the other identical thread ABM also started?
 
What, the counselor catches gay cooties from talking to a gay student, and the bigoted student can see those gay cooties crawling around on the counselor? Is that what you mean?



Yes, giving gay kids access to counseling is really ramming "the gay thing" down straight people's throats. Mm-hmm.

barfo

Not my point. Do the religious students have rights or should they get the benefits the school offers (likely at taxpayer dollar)?

I don't condone the bigotry, but there's a twisted logic that the religious students are partly "condoning the lifestyle" ...
 
What religion would have a problem with a counselor who "deals with" gay people?

And WTF is "the gay thing"?

We're here, we're queer, and we're in your face. That thing.
 
We're here, we're queer, and we're in your face. That thing.

I've never heard that part of it. I've heard 'we're here, we're queer, get use to it'.
 
Not my point. Do the religious students have rights or should they get the benefits the school offers (likely at taxpayer dollar)?

I don't condone the bigotry, but there's a twisted logic that the religious students are partly "condoning the lifestyle" ...

I still don't get your point. Are you saying that bigoted students could be considered to be denied counseling services because they won't use a counselor who also counsels gays? If not what is your point?

barfo
 
I still don't get your point. Are you saying that bigoted students could be considered to be denied counseling services because they won't use a counselor who also counsels gays? If not what is your point?

barfo

You call it "bigoted" while they consider it religious conviction.

In fact, it might be ideal for a female to counsel a female, a hispanic a hispanic, and so on.
 
You call it "bigoted" while they consider it religious conviction.

That's correct. And not so many years ago, they considered it a religious conviction that the sun revolved around the earth. Just because it is a religious conviction doesn't mean it isn't completely stupid.

In fact, it might be ideal for a female to counsel a female, a hispanic a hispanic, and so on.

Is that your point? That it would be ideal to have a separate counselor for every student, ideally matched to their particular needs? Well, sure, but don't you think that would cost a lot?

barfo
 
Religious "conviction" does not change that it's bigotry.
 
You call it "bigoted" while they consider it religious conviction.

I would argue that if said counselor tried to convince them that their religion is the problem and they should go gay - they would have the same kind of argument made against Ms. Keeton's qualifications. If said counselor does actually address their needs per protocol and ethical standards - it should be a non-issue, just as gay students should have no problems with Christian individuals counseling them and not trying to push dogma on them.

If someone is unwilling to accept help because of an unrelated attribute of the help-giver, it's bigotry, plain and simple.
 
That's correct. And not so many years ago, they considered it a religious conviction that the sun revolved around the earth. Just because it is a religious conviction doesn't mean it isn't completely stupid.

Nor does it mean it is. It was the ancient greeks, at least one of the early civilizations, that placed the earth at the center of the universe. Lots of people believed it of all faiths (or no faith).

Is that your point? That it would be ideal to have a separate counselor for every student, ideally matched to their particular needs? Well, sure, but don't you think that would cost a lot?

barfo

That they should be tailoring the counselling/counsellors to best suit the likely people who'd come to then in need, sure.
 
I would argue that if said counselor tried to convince them that their religion is the problem and they should go gay - they would have the same kind of argument made against Ms. Keeton's qualifications. If said counselor does actually address their needs per protocol and ethical standards - it should be a non-issue, just as gay students should have no problems with Christian individuals counseling them and not trying to push dogma on them.

If someone is unwilling to accept help because of an unrelated attribute of the help-giver, it's bigotry, plain and simple.

What's the point of this counselling anyway? And why shouldn't the person who needs counselling feel most free to talk about his or her issues?
 
That they should be tailoring the counselling/counsellors to best suit the likely people who'd come to then in need, sure.

I'm too tired to look back (and I think you've been on the same side I was on), but that's a pretty succinct way to say what I think is what is the case.
 
I'm too tired to look back (and I think you've been on the same side I was on), but that's a pretty succinct way to say what I think is what is the case.

All I'm saying is there is a case to be made on the other side/POV. It seems a little prejudiced against the religious types who need counselling.
 
Nor does it mean it is. It was the ancient greeks, at least one of the early civilizations, that placed the earth at the center of the universe. Lots of people believed it of all faiths (or no faith).

But it was only the religious who continued to believe it after it was scientifically disproven.

That they should be tailoring the counselling/counsellors to best suit the likely people who'd come to then in need, sure.

So you are in favor of not providing services to gays because they are a minority of the population? Interesting.

barfo
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top