Canadian skater Commits Suicide After Bullying | Page 5 | Golden Skate

Canadian skater Commits Suicide After Bullying

C

callalily

On the Ice
Joined
Dec 11, 2005
Thank you for the links.

I especially like the one from David Pelletier and Tessa Bonhomme. Very articulate and heartfelt. Both have lived a "role reversal" in terms of society's expectations, and as adults now speak very well about how these conventional expectations just don't make sense, and of course the fact that we need to treat each other properly as human beings.

I love David's comment "we should try to be a positive influence in each other's lives, not a destructive one". I also liked Tessa's words about how there aren't "boy skates" or "girl skates", just figure skates and hockey skates.
 
G

gkelly

Record Breaker
Joined
Jul 26, 2003
Serious Business said:
Oh goodness, so much partisan misinformation here. The Anti-Bullying Bill of Rights wasn't "enacted" by the governor. It wasn't something he pushed or campaigned for. It was written by a bipartisan group of state legislatures (with mostly Democrats) who worked on it for over a year. Then, spurred by the Rutgers spycam suicide, it was passed by the state legislature, where both chambers are led by Democrats, with veto-proof margins. The governor rubber stamped it without comment. By the way, the only person who voted against it was a Republican. People who object to this law aren't doing so because a Republican governor didn't make a symbolic gesture to try to stop it.
Click to expand...

Just curious. What is there about the law as passed that would cause left-wing people to object to it?
 
blue dog

blue dog

Trixie Schuba's biggest fan!
Record Breaker
Joined
Dec 16, 2006
gkelly said:
Just curious. What is there about the law as passed that would cause left-wing people to object to it?
Click to expand...

Not to go OT, but i think this had to do with the political climate of the moment, where if you are on the right, you veto anything the left comes up with and vice versa.

However, what the cast of Blades did is remarkable.
 
J

jcoates

Medalist
Joined
Mar 3, 2006
dorispulaski

dorispulaski

Wicked Yankee Girl
Joined
Jul 26, 2003
Country
United-States
So bullying gay kids is OK if you are of an evangelical sect that says that is OK?

Bullying girls is OK if you are an Osama bin Laden style Muslim?

That is disgusting, if I am interpreting it correctly.
 
D

Dragonlady

Final Flight
Joined
Aug 23, 2003
Mathman said:
The Michigan legislature just passed a bill outlawing bullying in schools except in cases where the bully is acting out of "a sincerely held religious belief or moral conviction.”
Click to expand...

So if someone sincerely holds a belief that banks are the tools of the devil and satan should be robbed of his wealth, would it be OK for said person to rob banks? Warren Jeffs was recently convicted of sexual offences against his child-brides. He had sincerely held religious beliefs that said it was OK for him to marry 12 year olds. Why didn't he get off?

If people want to believe that being gay is wrong on religious grounds, that's their right, but it doesn't mean they can act on that belief and attack others. Those they are bullying have rights and beliefs too, one of which is safety and security of person.
 
blue dog

blue dog

Trixie Schuba's biggest fan!
Record Breaker
Joined
Dec 16, 2006
dorispulaski said:
So bullying gay kids is OK if you are of an evangelical sect that says that is OK?

Bullying girls is OK if you are an Osama bin Laden style Muslim?

That is disgusting, if I am interpreting it correctly.
Click to expand...

I am with you, Doris. It gives someone like the WBC license to bully. It gives anyone license to bully against anyone, literally, and will basically create more harm than good. This will also hurt religious groups, since people might make incorrect assumptions about them.
 
Mathman

Mathman

Joined
Jun 21, 2003
The reasoning of the legislators who supported the bill goes like this.

The Religious Right is a persecuted minority in the United States. There are all sorts of individuals and groups that are trying to suppress the rights of Christian conservatives to exercise their religion. These foes include the Devil, liberals, the gay rights movement, etc.

If we were to pass an anti-bullying law without incorporating due protection for Christian fundamentalists, then something like the following could happen. The principal of the school or the president of the PTA might get up in an assembly and say, “The Bible condemns homosexuality.” Then a student could bring charges that this exercise in religious freedom constitutes bullying.

By the way, there was such a hew and cry about this bill that the legislature has already been forced to call it back for reconsideration.

This same legislature passed a law that if a public college or university offers health insurance benefits to same-sex spouses, then the amount of these benefits will be deducted from the money that the state gives the university for its operating budget.

This happened after the Assistant Attorney General of the State of Michigan was banned from the University of Michigan campus for stalking and harassing the president of the U.M. student body (an openly gay male student).
 
Tonichelle

Tonichelle

Idita-Rock-n-Roll
Record Breaker
Joined
Jun 27, 2003
blue dog said:
I am with you, Doris. It gives someone like the WBC license to bully. It gives anyone license to bully against anyone, literally, and will basically create more harm than good. This will also hurt religious groups, since people might make incorrect assumptions about them.
Click to expand...

they already do! but, we just bring it on ourselves so it's allowed to bully us into being quiet.
 
Mathman

Mathman

Joined
Jun 21, 2003
^ What Toni just said is the debate in a nutshell.

Religious conservatives feel that they are the ones who are being bullied. They need the protection of the law so that gay rights groups and others cannot persecute them.

Others see it the other way around.
 
Tonichelle

Tonichelle

Idita-Rock-n-Roll
Record Breaker
Joined
Jun 27, 2003
Mathman said:
^ What Toni just said is the debate in a nutshell.

Religious conservatives feel that they are the ones who are being bullied. They need the protection of the law so that gay rights groups and others cannot persecute them.

Others see it the other way around.
Click to expand...

no, you're wrong. I don't see myself as the one being bullied and they aren't. I may not "agree" with homosexuality - but I don't go around "bashing" the people that do. But, just my statement of "I am a Christian" and I get sarcastic comments here on the board (like yours up above my last comment) or we get hit with lawsuits for being bullies/hate speech/etc. This also comes into play in other controversial topics - a woman who decides to be pro-life for ANY reason is insulted by the women that are. We are less than they are - I was beaten down many times in college - singled out - by professors because they knew where I practiced my relgion - and I never offered up that information.

THAT'S what I'm getting at. Free speech is not allowed to all, just the majority, and yes I am in an ever decreasing portion of society. Many would applaud that.
 
Mathman

Mathman

Joined
Jun 21, 2003
There is no sarcasm in my post 91 above. This (the first three paragraphs of post 91) is exactly the rationale that the state legislators gave in explaining the bill to the public.

Many Michiganders found this argument both illogical and abhorrent. That is why the legislature reconvened yesterday to come up with better language.
 
dorispulaski

dorispulaski

Wicked Yankee Girl
Joined
Jul 26, 2003
Country
United-States
And in fact, the religious argument cuts both way. I am a member of the United Church of Christ, which supports gay marriage, although any member congregation is allowed to leave the church if they do not agree. (In the American Episcopal church, this is not that simple-the local Bishop Seabury Episcopal Church got sued by the main denomination when they left the denomination over the appointment of a gay bishop for the diocese. The main denomination obtained ownership of their church.

http://www.anglicansunited.com/?p=6551
)

In any case, I believe, as a matter of religious conviction, that we are all, gay and straight, equally worthy of respect. Would I be justified in bullying some member of a church who felt they had a moral duty to bully gay children, because that conflicts with my religion?

I don't think so.

I don't think any group should get a free pass to bully any other group, particularly over things that are part of a person's identity, like gender, sexual preference, race, ethnicity, or religion.

So no, it's not OK for me to bully evangelicals because they believe God made gays, but does not approve of them.

But it's not OK for them to bully gay students, either. This is not a free speech issue. It's an assault and abuse issue, with horrible consequences, like the death of the skater that was the original topic of this thread.
 
J

jcoates

Medalist
Joined
Mar 3, 2006
Getting back to the actual Michigan legislation, here is a clip by state Sen. Whitmer during the floor debate where she called out the leadership and bill sponsors for trying to pass the bill off as real protection against bullies. I find it encouraging to see an elected official taking such a clear stand regardless of the consequences. (I'm sure this will bring a serious electoral challenge from her opponents who will try to twist her words.)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=zDK-ja8PLgg

On another point, I'm as liberal as they come, but still have several very conservative friends. There are many issues on which we don't agree, but we respect each other's differences and try not to make broad judgments against each other. I was raised in a very religious home. In fact, my mother like lots of Catholic girls at the time (pre Vatican II) was a nun briefly in the early 60s after she finished high school. So was my best friend's mother. But as an adult, I've found that organized religion does not work for me. Despite reaching that conclusion, I understand that religion works very well for many people, my mother included. We should all be free to pursue the path that makes the most sense for us individually, rather than toeing some expected line. And we should not hold an alternate choice in life against anyone else. We really have to learn to get along and realize that we are not and will never be completely the same on the surface, but we are all accorded the same rights under the law. We have to accept that and move on as a society. (Toni I'm sorry you've been treated so poorly for holding your beliefs. That's inexcusable. I hope you don't hold that treatment against all liberal or non-religious people. You'd certainly be welcome among my friends.)
 
Tonichelle

Tonichelle

Idita-Rock-n-Roll
Record Breaker
Joined
Jun 27, 2003
jcoates said:
(Toni I'm sorry you've been treated so poorly for holding your beliefs. That's inexcusable. I hope you don't hold that treatment against all liberal or non-religious people. You'd certainly be welcome among my friends.)
Click to expand...

The vast majority of which I've encountered sours my opinion to the point where I think you're one of the very few who would. :laugh: but I thank you. I know I sound jaded, but that's why I love living in Alaska - we may all be extremely opinionated, but at the end of the day we really couldn't care less what one does or is so long as there's a mutual respect and "friendship"... ignoring Anchorage in this description, of course... that city is so unAlaskan!
 
S

skatinginbc

Medalist
Joined
Aug 26, 2010
Mathman said:
The Michigan legislature just passed a bill outlawing bullying in schools except in cases where the bully is acting out of "a sincerely held religious belief or moral conviction.”
Click to expand...
It sounds like a bill legalizing bullying rather than outlawing it. I am scared. I will never go to Michigan again (Yes, I went there once).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top