Survival of the Tolerant

“Gay” is the number-one insult among schoolchildren, reports the BBC, although most use it to mean “lame,” without any intended reference to sexual orientation. The article charts how the meaning of the word has changed over the years (remember when it used to mean “happy” or “festive”?), and notes “This mutation of the word is one reason why using ‘gay’ as in a pejorative sense often goes unchallenged.” Still, they say, it does get used to insult those who are gay or perceived to be. A good article on why anti-bullying measures in schools must still discourage use of the term in a pejorative sense, and an interesting read for language geeks as well. (Thanks to Box Turtle Bulletin for the link.)

Box Turtle Bulletin also reports this morning on a bill just passed by the Arizona House, “designed to ensure students expressing their religious beliefs are treated the same as those taking more secular positions.” I’m all for religious freedom, but the bill’s author, Rep. Doug Clark (R-Anthem) is specific about what this might mean: “Clark said if students are allowed to wear T-shirts about their sexual orientation, then other students should be permitted to have their own shirts which express a religious viewpoint about such activities.”

Rep. David Schapira (D-Tempe), on the other hand, “fears the bill would give license to some students to bully or harass others, such as those who might wear T-shirts demeaning homosexual students, which he described as ‘harassing.'”

Timothy Kincaid of Box Turtle wisely notes, however, that the federal law that was passed to protect Bible study classes in public schools also protects the formation of gay-straight alliances. He foresees some enterprising student turning this new legislation to good use (should it become law) and selling t-shirts of a more tolerant religious nature. He optimistically thinks these will outsell the homophobic t-shirts. I say it’s survival of the tolerant.

I’ll also point out that even if it did pass, the legislation would avoid the silliness that could happen in Oklahoma, where a pending bill would allow students to receive credit for religiously based answers to questions in science class about the age of the earth and the like. In Arizona, Rep. Clark says “students asked to detail the theory of evolution could not avoid the assignment by simply saying they believe in the biblical story of creation.” I suppose that’s a small comfort. Still, let’s hope the Arizona bill dies in the final House vote or the Senate, another step in the evolution of tolerance.