Phila Editorial supporting hate as a "religious freedom"

[Patiod]

This editorial in our city's paper has been driving me crazy all day - one of those things where I've been trying to formulate a coherent reply, but I'm too angry (and I'm not even gay myself - just really anti-hate). Anyone here want to take a crack at a reply?

http://www.philly.com/mld/inquirer/news/local/states/pennsylvania/14908767.htm

Notice that all his examples of suppression involve anti-homosexual expression - he's not really supporting free speech or free religious speech in schools. I wonder if he and his idol Scalia would support "religious expression" was freely allowed, and Mormons, Muslims, or Wiccans were actively recruiting his kids, or if gay students wore "Your God Made Me, and He Made Me Gay" t-shirts, or "Catholics support Pedophilia" or some other intentionally provocative messages. Should Muslim students be allowed to harass women who aren't wearing burkas?

There's no one clip that sums up this dreck, but here's on part of it:
"...U.S. Circuit Judge Stephen Reinhardt - an overreaching, result-driven jurist - wrote in his opinion that the messages were demeaning and infringed on homosexual students' rights. But in a brilliant dissent, U.S. Circuit Judge Alex Kozinski said that conclusion was an utter misapplication of the law.

... I have considerable difficulty with giving school authorities the power to decide that only one side of a controversial topic may be discussed in the school environment because the opposing point of view is too extreme or demeaning," Kozinski wrote"

http://www.philly.com/mld/inquirer/news/local/states/pennsylvania/14908767.htm