Girl Power Part Two California Lutheran School Gets Sued!

We first reported on this some time ago. Many of you contributed by signing letters to the Lutheran school which were mailed and are still being mailed. Check out our news page to sign and send your letter to this school.

For many years now we have been advocating that students and their parents need to sue the religious schools that discriminate against them even if it seems impossible to win.

As most of you know, one student in Florida, recently had his case heard by the Florida supreme court. There is a link to the hearings here.

We'll let you know how this progresses. Keep signing and sending those letters to us!

Thanks,
Marc Adams

Teen Girls Sue Christian School Over Expulsion For Improper Behavior

A Riverside Superior Court Judge has granted two girls the right to sue the California Lutheran High School Association for allegedly discriminating against them because of their sexual attractions to each other.

Superior Court Judge Gloria Connor Trask has agreed to let this case go to trial instead of dismissing it as a frivolous lawsuit directly attacking the right of Christian schools to enforce a Code of Conduct upon the students who voluntarily attend. A hearing on this case is scheduled for July 9, 2006.

This case is a serious one and deserves to be watched closely.

The lawsuit, Mother Doe v. California Lutheran High School Association resulted from the expulsion of two girls from a California Lutheran High School who admitted they had strong feelings for each other. The girls’ lawyers refuse to say if they are practicing homosexuals.

The school, located in Wildomar, California, is operated by the California Lutheran High School Association and is part of the Wisconsin Evangelical Lutheran Synod.

In September 2005, School Principal Gregory Bork interviewed both girls separately and determined that they could not remain in the school if they pursued a homosexual relationship.

On September 15, Bork wrote a letter to the parents of the girls saying that “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 un-Christian. 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 lawsuit was filed against the high school association and Mr. Bork. It alleges that Bork’s expulsion of the girls violates California’s Unruh Civil Rights Act, which forbids businesses operating in the state to engage in discrimination against any person’s sexual orientation.

Girls’ Lawyers Claim Principal ‘Imprisoned’ Them During Interview
Lawyers suing for the girls claim that California Lutheran is a business
and should be covered under Unruh.

Lawyers for the girls are also claiming that Bork violated their “right to privacy” by briefing school staff on the situation and by sending a letter to the girls’ parents explaining why they were expelled.

In addition, the lawsuit alleges that Bork “falsely imprisoned” the girls by interviewing each one of them to determine the facts about their relationship.

Attorney John McKay, who represents Principal Bork and the California Lutheran High School Association, has filed several legal briefs in this case over the past several months in response to the lawsuit.

In a brief filed on December 15, 2005, Mr. McKay points out that the California Lutheran High School (CLHS) is a “non-profit, educational institution owned and operated by an association of Lutheran congregations in California.”

McKay points out that even if the CLHS is considered a “business establishment” under California law, any sexual orientation law could not be applied to the school without violating the “expressive association rights granted to CLHS and its members. The U.S. and California Constitutions provide individuals the right to associate with others in
the pursuit of certain religious ideals. ... Government actions which force a group to accept members it does not desire constitutes an unconstitutional burden on this freedom of association.”

McKay cites the case of Boys Scouts v. Dale (2000). In this case, the Supreme Court ruled that the Boy Scouts had the right to establish membership qualifications for its organization. It could reasonably exclude homosexuals from the Scouts as a violation of its standards.

Likewise, a religiously-affiliated group has the right to establish moral standards for its members and can expel individuals who violate those standards. If this standard applies to the Boy Scouts and other private organizations, it must apply to a Christian school, which will base its code of conduct upon the Bible.

According to McKay, “CLHS’ official position is that homosexuality is immoral conduct, and that principle is provided First Amendment protection. In addition, a court order requiring defendants [the school] to suppress their own religious beliefs in order to accommodate plaintiff’s request to continue as students at CLHS would constitute a
violation of the Establishment Clause.”

McKay also responded to the allegation that the girls had been subjected to false imprisonment by being interviewed by Principal Bork. McKay noted: “... plaintiffs cannot assert a claim against him [Bork] for false imprisonment or impute liability for his acts upon CLHS. ... courts have acknowledged that the detention and questioning of a student by a school official during school hours is justified when such questioning is
necessary to ‘maintain order, prevent disruption of other students’ educational experience and impose discipline.’ Defendant Bork’s alleged detention of the plaintiffs fulfilled these authorized goals.”

Religious Institutions Are Exempt From Sexual Orientation Laws California Education Code section 220 forbids educational institutions to discriminate on the basis of sexual orientation. Section 220.5, however, says this: “This article shall not apply to an educational institution which is controlled by a religious organization if the application would not be consistent with the religious tenets of that organization.”