Wow, this is quite a morass of irrational gibberish that you've compiled here. And all because people are scared of a girl in a tux. Interesting. I never really realized what a threat an 18-year-old girl, with dimples, could pose to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.Instead of debating the same points over and over and over again, lets look at the basics.
Is this a violation of her rights as the ACLU is claiming under the 1st Amendment?
No because the first amendment has never once included sexual preference as being under its banner.
Does the school have the right to enforce a dress code? Yes and its well established within the law.
Is there any law in Mississippi or at the federal level that elevates homosexual students to being forcefully accepted by the school?
No. Only 10 states in fact do have laws forcing acceptance of homosexual students and this state is not one of them.
Did this student being in the ACLU for the specific purpose of forcing the school to adapt to her sexual preference and clothing choice?
Yes. They were brought in to force the school to accept her sexual preference and she obviously had every intention of showing up in her tux with her girlfriend.
Did her direct action of bringing in the ACLU force the school to shut down the prom?
Yes. It was and is her sole responsibility since she decided to force the issue by bringing in a socialist organization to plead her case and try to force the school to accept her sexual orientation.
And wielding discrimination around as a hammer is incredibly dishonest since anyone who isn't allowed in from child rapists to 32 year old guys is also being "discriminated" against. Stop behaving like all discrimination is bad unless you are willing to allow everyone in regardless of any rules in place and recognize that you are only using the word discrimination because you personally approve of this particular sexual orientation.
And for those who claim that the comparison to other sexual orientations cannot be made if you force homosexual marriage as acceptable then cite law as your basis for rejecting them are the ultimate hypocrites since the same people wish to change or write new law for homosexuality.
You cannot hide behind law when its a sexual orientation you don't approve of like pedophilia or polygamy while at the same time demand written law banning homosexual marriage in the same breath.
And please do not insult gender or racial bias with bias historical struggles by comparing them to a sexual orientation never once proven to be genetic. Its not only insulting, it doesn't make you look very good when you can't even prove its a genetic trait no matter how many people profess to being "born that way". I'm sure there are many pedos who would make the same claim and I doubt very much anyone here would support it.
And no matter how many people on here scream about how society is "changing" on its views on homosexuality, gay marriage voted on by the people is still 0-31.