Started By
Message

re: Judge forces high-schoolers to share showers with opposite sex

Posted on 7/30/18 at 12:04 pm to
Posted by teke184
Zachary, LA
Member since Jan 2007
99007 posts
Posted on 7/30/18 at 12:04 pm to
I agree with the lack of a right to privacy... because it’s not in the goddamn constitution and was only thought up as part of Griswold v Connecticut, over birth control laws.


Still doesn’t make this decision any less stupid.

Especially since that first quote essentially says that choosing to attend school pretty much eliminates the parent’s right to complain.
Posted by HeyHeyHogsAllTheWay
Member since Feb 2017
12458 posts
Posted on 7/30/18 at 12:14 pm to
quote:

I agree with the lack of a right to privacy... because it’s not in the goddamn constitution and was only thought up as part of Griswold v Connecticut, over birth control laws.


Still doesn’t make this decision any less stupid.

Especially since that first quote essentially says that choosing to attend school pretty much eliminates the parent’s right to complain.


This is what kind of stupid logic that is a result of having to use pretzel logic to justify a ruling.

"Parents of freaks who want to use the opposite sex shower have the right to complain , and their children ahve have the right to use whichever shower they want, but parents who disagree have no such right and other kids just have to shower with the opposite sex and deal with it"

first pageprev pagePage 1 of 1Next pagelast page
refresh

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookTwitterInstagram