Originally Posted by david H:
I do agree with kernow. I think there are those who are born like it and the ones I had in mind who are "designer gays" - doing it because it is fashionable. If you talk to those who "are on the scene" they will tell you of "perverts" who go to gay bars who are probably married and not exclusively attracted to their own sex.

So a bloke goes into a gay bar seeking gay sex. Is there anything wrong with that? How's that any different to a bloke going out to seek sex with a woman?
[Rep]

You are asking me ordinary commonal garden questions about points I did not make.
In what sense do you think men and women are interchangable? Is it that the minds are identical but the bodies different? Why were men "dominant" in certain things - did they take over pre-existing abstract structures and keep women out?
[Rep]

Obviously the murderer is to blame.
[Rep]

BonnieDundee wrote: "Obviously the murderer is to blame".

REPLY: But the parents are suing education officials, not the murderer

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[Rep]

Wikipedia sheds further light on the matter:

Originally Posted by :
The shooting occurred shortly after King had asked McInerney to be his valentine[4], and prosecutors took this as evidence that the shooting was a hate crime.[citation needed]

And...

Originally Posted by :
Observers have differing speculations about shooter Brandon McInerney's motives. Prosecutors charged McInerney with premeditated murder with enhancements for the use of a firearm and commission of a hate crime, and LGBT organizations, some news outlets, and presidential candidates Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama presented the shooting as anti-gay violence. In contrast, some individuals suggest that McInerney was stalked or harassed by King, leading to a personal motive, or that McInerney's history of family turmoil may have contributed. The trial is ongoing and McInerney has exercised his right to not speak with investigators.

And, intriguingly:

Originally Posted by :
According to a Newsweek article published on July 19, 2008, many allege that the school was at least partly to blame. The article stated that Joy Epstein, an assistant principal, was "openly gay to her colleagues" and "some teachers believe she was encouraging King's flamboyance to help further an 'agenda'." When she was later promoted to principal at another school, King's father described it as a "slap in the face of my family." The superintendent, Jerry Dannenberg, stated that the promotion was given because "she was the most qualified person for the new principal job."

There is an interplay of a great many issues here.

1. Yes, the school should have enforced the dress code.
2. It is possible that Joy Epstein, the assistant principal who was allegedly "openly gay to her colleagues" and "some teachers believe she was encouraging King's flamboyance to help further an 'agenda'." contributed to the situation by not implementing the dress code because of a personal 'agenda', and that in turn contributed to the killing. I suspect that the case will hinge on something like this.
3. If the boy was gay, it is certainly his right to be gay without fear of being shot for it, but it is not the place of a teacher to 'encourage' gay behaviour in a 15 year old boy, in the same way it is not the place of a teacher to 'encourage' sex between 15 year old heterosexuals. It was the place of the teacher, especially one who is gay herself, to educate her student that making unwanted advances on a member of the opposite sex whilst wearing makeup is perhaps not the wisest choice to make.
5. This case highlights the trend towards a litigation happy society which seeks to apportion blame in order to squeeze cash out of hapless institutions. Though in this case I can see a point being made if a teacher was seen to be encouraging certain behaviour in accord with her personal agenda, but the case is not always so clear cut. In this case, I'm assuming that the American taxpayer will foot the bill to the detriment of the education system from whence the money will presumably be take.
6. Certainly, the boy who pulled the trigger should accept responsibility for his actions and be punished to the full extent of the law, but in California, that could mean the death penalty. For a 15 year old?
[Rep]

Originally Posted by kernow:
Both preferred to play with girls when they were children.

I prefer playing with girls too. Nice big bouncy girls.

... ...

Why is this automatically a hate crime? Perhaps the youth was shot because the perp didn't like him for some other reason.
[Rep]

Originally Posted by Tony Bennett:
BonnieDundee wrote: "Obviously the murderer is to blame".

REPLY: But the parents are suing education officials, not the murderer

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I presume because they're American and America is a suing society, they think they ought to have a payout because of the loss of their Son! Personally my rage would be aimed at the murderer not the school!
[Rep]

Originally Posted by John Connor:
I prefer playing with girls too. Nice big bouncy girls.

oh err missus :-)

Originally Posted by :
... ...

Why is this automatically a hate crime? Perhaps the youth was shot because the perp didn't like him for some other reason.

But that does not occur to those with axes to grind and agendas to pursue
[Rep]

After reading this perhaps not such an open and shut case as everyone presumes

Suspected school shooter's childhood marred by violence : Oxnard : Ventura County Star

so many shades of gray
[Rep]

Originally Posted by BonnieDundee:
Obviously the murderer is to blame.

I would tend to agree, I've not time to read all of the links
pertaining to this but, obviously under certain circumstances
for ex. the shooter was wrongly released from psychiatric care etc
he may not be totally responsible. If that's not the case, and it's
as black and white as he was just shot because he was gay, then
it's the shooters fault plain and simple, regardless of what the
school allowed him to wear.
[Rep]