Lesbian's law suit against Christian school tossed
Pastor Dale Morgan
Lesbian's law suit against Christian school tossed*
'No triable issues': Academy's right to expel 2 girls in 'relationship'
confirmed
Posted: January 25, 2008
North County Times
A California judge has ruled that Christian schools can set standards
for behavior for their students, and impose penalties if they are not met.
The decision comes from Riverside County Superior Court Judge Gloria
Trask, who found "no triable issues" on claims that a Christian school
discriminated against two girls because of their perceived sexual
orientation, according to a report in the North County Times.
Trask recently dismissed the claims made against California Lutheran
High School in Wildomar by the two girls and their parents.
The case developed in 2005 when the girls, members of the junior class,
were expelled after school officials noticed behavior by the two that
may have indicated a lesbian relationship.
The lawsuit filed by the girls and the parents then alleged the
California Lutheran High School Association – which oversees operation
of the Wildomar school – engaged in discrimination, invasion of privacy
and unfair business practices in its handling and ultimate dismissal of
two juniors.
The students were summoned into the office of Principal Gregory Bork,
the lawsuit claimed, where Bork "individually and separately
interrogated the (students) in a closed room, without the parents'
knowledge or consent ... and asked (them) inappropriate and personal
questions such as whether they loved one another and were lesbians."
"In such a manner, Bork coerced one of the (students) to admit that she
'loves' the other," a court document stated.
The next day, the parents received a phone call from Bork informing them
the board had decided to expel the students. One day later, the parents
confronted the principal in person and by phone and were told the two
girls could not remain at school "with those feelings."
Bork also wrote a letter to the parents stating "while there is no open
physical contact between the two girls, there is still a bond of
intimacy ... characteristic of a lesbian (relationship). ... Such a
relationship is unchristian. To allow the girls to attend (Cal Lutheran)
... would send a message to students and parents that we either condone
this situation and/or will not do anything about it. That message would
not reflect our beliefs and principles."
The students, identified in the lawsuit as Jane Doe and Mary Roe, were
expelled in September 2005 for "engaging in homosexual conduct in
violation of the Christian Code of Conduct, including but not limited
to, posing for pictures in suggestive sexual positions."
Lawyers for the students argued the school is not a religious
institution but a fee-taking organization.
But they were opposed by other lawyers, from the Christian Legal Society
and the Alliance Defense Fund who argued on behalf of the school,
because the decision could affect members of the Association of
Faith-Based Organizations.
"Christian schools have the right to make admissions and disciplinary
decisions consistent with their Christian beliefs," said Timothy J.
Tracey, a litigation counsel for the CLS. "To subject Christian schools
to liability under the California anti-discrimination laws for expelling
students who engage in homosexual conduct flatly violates this right."
"The 14th Amendment protects the right of parents to send their children
to a private religious school that shares their religious beliefs," the
arguments said. "The United States Supreme Court has long recognized the
existence of parents' right to direct their children's education."
"These parents have chosen to send their children to private Christian
schools because of the unique Christian mission and values espoused by
the schools. Compelling the schools to condone extramarital sexual
conduct contrary to their values and beliefs eliminates a primary reason
why parents choose to send their children to these Christian schools in
the first place – having their children educated and mentored from a
distinctly Christian perspective," the court filings said.
The state may govern the "basic requirements" of private schools,
through licensing and reporting requirements, but "it cannot
unreasonably interfere with the teaching and educational philosophies of
such schools," the argument said.
The First Amendment's Religion Clause also prevents state
anti-discrimination laws based on moral behavior from applying, the
attorneys argued.
Attorney Kirk Hanson, representing the students, said he would appeal
the dismissal of the case. He said he'll continue to argue the school is
a business and must abide by state discrimination requirements.
"That's (appeals court) where this case would have ended up regardless,"
Hanson told the newspaper. "Win or lose at the trial level, the case is
going to be in front of a court of appeal."
But John McKay, a lawyer for the school, said, "The First Amendment
gives Christian schools the right to educate children on the (basis) of
Christian beliefs. We're right on the First Amendment (regarding) free
association."
On a forums page at the newspaper's Internet site, "Edward" supported
the decision.
"It's not right to enroll in a school that has certain defined beliefs
and rules, and then decide you don't want to comply," he wrote. "Simply
enroll in a different school that closer matches your idealogy (sic).
Don't sue to try to make the existing school what you want it to be."
"This was obviously an attack by the 'diversity' crowd on another
religious institution," added "Watch out." "They are dead set on
destroying any mention of or exercise of religious freedom."
And Peter added, "Think people think …. If you as a parent sign on a
dotted line accepting the rules of the private school, then disciplinary
action against your son or daughter should be expected when they break
the rules. Face the consequences and move on."