West VA girl goes to court against Principal


#1

"High School Student Katelyn Campbell Protests ‘Slut-Shaming’ Abstinence Crusader Pam Stenzel"
West Virginia High School Student Katelyn Campbell Protests ‘Slut-Shaming’ Abstinence Crusader Pam Stenzel | Moral Low Ground

The Charleston Gazette reports that Katelyn Campbell, a senior and student body vice president at George Washington High School in Charleston, has asked for an injunction in Kanawha Circuit Court against Principal George Aulenbacher. Campbell wants Aulenbacher to resign and apologize for allegedly threatening to contact Wellesley College, the prestigious Massachusetts women’s university where she will attend after graduating, and defame her by accusing her of having “bad character.”

The injunction seeks to bar Aulenbacher from retaliating against Campbell for exercising her constitutional right to free speech.
Aulenbacher’s alleged threat was made after Campbell** protested a mandatory school assembly** at which the guest speaker was Pam Stenzel, a conservative Christian abstinence crusader who gets paid between $4,000 and $6,000 per appearance to lecture teens about “God’s plan for sexual purity” and “the consequences, both physical and emotional, of sex outside of marriage.”

More at the link. The key for me is that attendance was MANDATORY AND during regular school hours rather than an after school event that one could opt out of. The principal clearly violated the rights of the students and prior court decisions IMO.
The rest of the story is at the link.


#2

Yeah. Principal is wrong


#3

Abuse of power.


#4

Bllshit! During school she should have just attended the assembly. Jeez, you three liberals afraid morality is contagious or something?
And if she’s a slut it should be included in the Principal’s report to Wellesley College, they do have moral standards.


#5

Wow, bro, calling a girl a slut for refusing to go to an assembly. Shocking.

The problem is the school is being used as a church, with students being required to attend basically religious services. Since it is a public school, and thus an extension of the government, forcing children to go to religious service violates their freedom of religion.

What if the government was mandating that you had to attend a certain religious service? That’d be just as bad.


#6

Your comments MIGHT make sense if you actually READ the article…but I doubt it. Meanwhile the Principal just got a big IN YOUR FACE from Wellesley:
"Campbell’s principal wasn’t pleased — in fact, she says he threatened to call Wellesley College, where she has been accepted to study in the fall, to tell them that Campbell is a “backstabber” who has “bad character.” That threat ended up badly backfiring. Here’s what has unfolded over the past several days:

Wellesley College released public statements welcoming Campbell to campus in the fall. After news broke that Katelyn’s principal allegedly suggested he planned to call Wellesley to complain about Katelyn, a spokesperson for the college provided the following statement to ThinkProgress: **“Wellesley College is delighted to welcome Katelyn Campbell as a member of the Class of 2017 this fall. The Wellesley community fosters a living and learning environment where diverse opinions, ideas, and perspectives are not only welcomed, they are encouraged.”** The academic institution also welcomed Katelyn with supportive messages on Twitter and Facebook.

** A Wellesley College alumni group started a petition to applaud Campbell**. A group called the Wellesley Sisters began a petition on Change.org to let Campbell know she’ll fit right on in campus in the fall. “In reality, your actions prove that the College couldn’t be a better fit,” the petition reads. “At Wellesley you will find students just like you: strong, independent, intelligent women who speak their minds and work to make the world a more just and equitable place.” It currently has over 1,200 signatures.

Fellow students formed a Facebook page called “Friends of Katelyn Campbell.”** The Facebook page has been verifying some of the complaints that Campbell took to the ACLU, including an image of the religious flyer used to promote the event at the public high school. It has since extended beyond West Virginia, as people across the country have flooded the page with messages of solidarity. “Katelyn is an inspiration to anyone who treasures the First Amendment and values honor and courage,” reads one recent post from an ally in Indiana.**

Students attended a local school board meeting this week to advocate on behalf of Campbell. On Thursday night, students took up the issue with the school board. Campbell’s lawyer advised her not to attend, but other advocates represented her point of view on her behalf. According to an update on the “Friends of Katelyn Campbell” page, the meeting was not necessarily productive. “Unfortunately, as was to be expected, Katelyn’s message continued to be chastised this evening,” the update stated. **“Speakers on her behalf were berated to the point of tears, and one board member broke protocol to burst out that there needed to be more god in school and that Pam Stenzel ‘should speak in all schools**.’ ” 

Lulz… Maybe he won’t feel the same once he sees the size of the lawsuit he JUST helped succeed.

As to calling her a slut with ZERO evidence to do so…I only wish I could call YOU what you deserved based on overwhelming evidence.


#7

And lest anyone think this was a “religion free” abstinence talk…here’s the flyer that was handed out in school.
Damn…can’t get it small enough to load here and still be readable. Here’s a link instead.

I’ll instead quote the salient parts:

God created sex. He is not the cosmic kill-joy, but** He did **create sex with boundaries to protect us and our future marriage. He wants sex to be the best it could possibly be! …
In a captivating and inspiring talk Pam tackles the tough issues of sex with candor, insight and humor **while challenging young people to embrace God’s plan for sexual purity. **


#8

Shows me the moral character of some of you on this board, explains much. thank you.


#9

Thump it in church njc…not here where we’re talking about the Constitution and the LAW.


#10

And is it proper moral character to force students to go to a religious sermon in school? To force anyone to go to any religious sermon at any time against their will?


#11

Please reread this part where she was told she MUST attend the lecture:

Aulenbacher’s alleged threat was made after Campbell protested a mandatory school assembly at which the guest speaker was Pam Stenzel, a conservative Christian abstinence crusader who gets paid between $4,000 and $6,000 per appearance to lecture teens about “God’s plan for sexual purity” and “the consequences, both physical and emotional, of sex outside of marriage.”

Still think she should attend a religious based lecture?


#12

I understand the concern about casual sex and such but the school system is not the place for religious teaching since it is a PUBLIC place where people of many faiths and NON religious people attend.It is supposed to be neutral ground for everyone for the purpose of getting a general education to prepare for the future.


#13

They accepted evangelists to come and speak in our public school when I was in the early grades. I think the same group was there twice while I was there. They explained the plan of salvation. That shows you how far our public schools have sunk since those days. Essentially since Mary Madeleine O’Hare.


#14

Guys we are focusing on the wrong thing. The evangelicals have every right to address the students in a public school. Hell, maybe they may be a positive force in the way these kids behave. HOWEVER, forcing a kid to attend such an assembly is not appropriate but I would still back it as it is has to do with being confrontational with the teacher. The teacher gave you an instruction to do so, please don’t make a scene. BUT, to go and send a letter to a college calling the girl a slut because she wouldn’t attend the assembly on personal reasons IS GOD AWEFUL! Who in the world does this principal think he is interfering with the upward mobility of a student who, other than refusing to be indoctrinated one way or another, is a perfect a student. COME ON, GUYS. This is wrong. I applaud the college for basically putting her mind at ease. Education is not indoctrination.

How bout this. Devil’s Advocate. Let’s say a Communist-group of some kind or a Radical Muslim group of some kind came to the school to give an assembly. A student refused to attend and the principal wrote a letter calling that student a racists. How is that different than this poor girl. The principal was in the wrong 100%.


#15

Dr. O’hair through the court system removed COMPULSORY prayers from the school.Prayers are still legal when done voluntarily and discreetly.

If they feel the need to push salvation teachings in the schools which is supposed to be a neutral place then what does that say for the church who apparently couldn’t teach it in their own place of worship? When I studied the bible in my teen years it was through the process for confirmation and it was done at the church in the evening hours.

The Salvation plan is not that complicated and does not require a lot of time to learn the basics so using up valuable time in public schools reduced the opportunity to learn the ABC’s.


#16

Exactly the way I saw it. I’m no more in favor of compulsory attendance for this than I am for compulsory attendance to a Planned Parenthood speaker.

I’m “iffy” on public schools PAYING any speaker; especially one whose agenda is less than academic.
Besides, I thought the schools were broke.


#17

Who said that the schools were supposed to be a “neutral” place? They never were, and they still aren’t.


#18

If you have to go to school, then also having mandatory religious services there is essentially mandatory religious services for all children, by law. Against the first amendment, in that it infringes on one’s right to their own religion if the government is now having mandatory religious services for children.

So yes, schools are supposed to be neutral, in the sense that they can’t have mandatory religious services. Anything else violates the first amendment.


#19

[quote=“Trekky0623, post:18, topic:39149”]
If you have to go to school, then also having mandatory religious services there is essentially mandatory religious services for all children, by law. Against the first amendment, in that it infringes on one’s right to their own religion if the government is now having mandatory religious services for children.

So yes, schools are supposed to be neutral, in the sense that they can’t have mandatory religious services. Anything else violates the first amendment.
[/quote]Bar the doors, Katie, I’m agreeing with Trekky! lol

Teachers and administators were always meant to reinforce the morals of right and wrong taught in the home; not to be the first in line to teach them.

While I don’t think it would mar any student for life to attend this assembly, it’s wrong to make it mandatory. In a public school setting, considering the backdrop of the theme, it should have been presented, if at all, with parental permission.

As Florida Libetarian so clearly pointed out, we’re focusing on the wrong thing. But my focus is on the school taking the place of the parent.
We scream about that on daily basis, calling it “indoctrination” when it comes to schools forcing kids to learn about things we don’t agree with. Well, it works both ways.

Like I told my kids’ principal the day they entered school: "I’ll do everything I can to help uphold the rules, but just remember, you work for me.


#20

Holy dang we agree 2cent

This may be the beginning of a beautiful friendship.