This is nonsensical. Assuming your take is accurate and showing a sex act is not covered by the law, to say every other despicable act must be included in the bill or the bill is bad is inane.
Disney
- Thread starter LowerLevelSeatA
- Start date
- Status
The Bill States:
3. Classroom instruction by school personnel or third parties on sexual orientation or gender identity may not occur in kindergarten through grade 3 or in a manner that is not age-appropriate or developmentally appropriate for students in accordance with state standards.
It does not address sex education at all. It prohibits a teacher from admitting and/or discussing that people have a gender and/or a sexual orientation. That is the extent of it. It has nothing to do with sex or reducing the amount of sexualization that children may be exposed to. That can continue to proceed at any current levels or even escalated. So, if that was the concern of parents, it has not been addressed at all.
3. Classroom instruction by school personnel or third parties on sexual orientation or gender identity may not occur in kindergarten through grade 3 or in a manner that is not age-appropriate or developmentally appropriate for students in accordance with state standards.
It does not address sex education at all. It prohibits a teacher from admitting and/or discussing that people have a gender and/or a sexual orientation. That is the extent of it. It has nothing to do with sex or reducing the amount of sexualization that children may be exposed to. That can continue to proceed at any current levels or even escalated. So, if that was the concern of parents, it has not been addressed at all.
We're literally seeing an explosion of trans students... most of them are teen girls with a mom who's mentally ill. And it happens quickly in the teen years as opposed to what traditionally was something noticed early on in a child's development. Also, like 20% of Gen Z identifies as LGQT now, whereas for older generations it's like 4%.
If grooming K-3 kids is not a problem in our schools then why are liberals so opposed to legislation to keep it out of the Florida curriculum. Why would the press secretary break out in tears over the issue. Is she putting her kids in Florida schools? And if you deny it was aimed at grooming and gender change then again, so what? It should not be a problem to concern yourself with.
For the rest of the 49 states please understand something. This is a Florida law and has nothing to do with New Jersey or California or Sioux City. If you have a problem with it don't put your kid in public schools in Florida. I think it is amazing the countries libs get so upset every time the Florida state legislature meets and passes conservative law.
Just wait until you see what the Florida legislature is going to do with Disney World. You can really get your panties in a wad over what is coming to them. You ain't seen nothing bro.
I watch discovery channel a little bit, not much Naked and Afraid, but occasionally do. I don't lock my son out of where I stay. With my son we usually like battle bots, lego/domino shows on Fox...but anyways.....
I was captivated by this transgenders 21 day journey - this show highlighting the struggles...and for you to call it trash, well I can only assume you are a transphobic bigot. It's disgusting people like you would knock a show of diversity, struggle and teamwork.
Be better - open your mind.
First I would have to see the data on that. Second, these are teenagers, not K-3. If it is truly a problem, then this bill is not addressing it.
FYP In my experiences.
Also being LGBTQ these days is like being emo or grunge back in the day. It's less about sexuality and more about finding a sense of belonging and community. Most when they actually start becoming sexually active or finish school they move on to more "normal" gender roles.
This law does not address "grooming". Grooming isn't discussed in the bill, is not mentioned as a problem, and even if it were there is nothing in this bill that would take any steps to slow or prohibit it. Grooming has a specific definition used by psychologist, psychiatrists and those who handle Child Abuse cases. Nothing about any of this fits that criteria.
Fixed Your Post it's in italics what I changed.
If we're really concerned about grooming I think we should teach all K-5 graders about what it actually is. The vast majority of transgender teens will have been sexually assaulted while they are in grade school. Maybe if they weren't so naive about sexuality they wouldn't be taken advantage of. Because once they start talking about sex with their friends in middle school it's too late.
Also in my experience it's a position of privilege to assume parents should be the only people sex is taught by because at least 30% of students nationwide have shite parents who won't do this or worse are teaching extremely destructuve sexuality through their own example.
Also in my experience it's a position of privilege to assume parents should be the only people sex is taught by because at least 30% of students nationwide have shite parents who won't do this or worse are teaching extremely destructuve sexuality through their own example.
If the vast majority of transgender teens were sexually abused, then why would anybody ever celebrate being transgender? Seems to me that would be like having a month to celebrate the wonders of PTSD from being in a war. PTSD is something you treat; not celebrate.
OK fine. No argument from me. So why is LIBERAL and homosexual America so afraid of and against this bill. If you do not live in Florida what is it to you? Floridians do not concern one another with bills passed up North in State Legislatures. But all hell breaks loose when DeSantis and the very conservative state legislature down here passes laws. Why does America care if a school teacher in K-3 can not groom kids in Florida. It is still OK in New Jersey.
The law says what is says but if a K teacher tells a student they have an option of being a boy or girl, that K teacher is toast. Their job is to shut up and teach 1 plus 1. Or better yet teach the kid to say Yes Sir and No Sir or Yes Mam' and No Mam'. And if they have time to teach the little boy or girl to chew their food with their mouth closed. Many kids never learn this from home.
And the Department of Education has to be monitored extremely close. Florida passed a law against CRT so what does the D of E do? They put it in math books. 41% of the math books in Florida were loaded with that junk. And you wonder why public education is ranked lower than Joe Biden.
"Grooming" is the new "socialism" among a certain subset of Conservatives. Strip scary sounding words of their meaning and accuse everyone who disagrees with you of being a pedophile or socialist.
I am neither a liberal nor a homosexual so I do not speak for them. But many of them have specifically stated that they oppose it because 1) it is a poorly written law with obscure language which could result in significant problems down the road for teachers and students. 2) The law appears to be targeted specifically as a tool to make any discussion of homosexuality or transgender appear to be wrong or bad. There are going to be K-3 students who encounter people who are gay and/or transgender. Why would we need to make it illegal to discuss why these classifications of people mean other than to specifically damage those classes. 3) There is no evidence to show harm which points to an unnecessary government overreach. Why is there new legislation to address an issue that is not an issue?
As for why it is an issue outside of Florida, it is because other state's will try to enact the same legislation with the same problems. Also, someone doesn't have to live in Florida to have empathy for the people who live there.
As for why it is an issue outside of Florida, it is because other state's will try to enact the same legislation with the same problems. Also, someone doesn't have to live in Florida to have empathy for the people who live there.
I wanted to separate these out as two answers. When it comes to CRT, we still have no evidence that it was being taught in any school. It is another example of creating a problem when there simply isn't one. When those making decision about the Math Textbooks in Florida to show the passages they had problems with they could not/would not produce it.
My problem with the bill is it has the potential to create a chilling effect on free speech. It is incredibly, incredibly vague about what exactly it is banning. The cynic in me says that is intentional. If you create an environment where even acknowledging that LGBTQ people exist may be illegal, it suppresses speech and forces people back into hiding if you well. The chilling effect on free speech is very well documented. Just the threat of something being illegal due to vagueness within legislation is just as effective as making something outright illegal. That is my concern. And the architects of this bill have done nothing to prove me wrong. They just accuse anyone with valid concerns with it of being a pedophile who wants to groom children.
As for not living in Florida, why should I only be concerned with what's happening in my state? Shouldn't I be concerned for the rights of my fellow Americans? Empathy goes a long way.
Because nobody lives in reality anymore. Conservatives want to stick their head in the sand and act like this stuff is all people behaving like deviants and they need to be punished and liberals want to act like everything no matter what is fine and dandy no questions asked. Those of us living in the real world are again left setting between the 2 sides talking past each other and creating more problems for the rest of us. In other words politics is ******** and most people spend far too much time arguing on message boards and Facebook and far too little time in their communities with the people they live next door to.
So you are concerned with "freedom of speech". Is that what you are saying? Yet your side goes ape because someone may buy Twitter and open it up to all, even conservatives. And you worry about freedom of speech. You people
I don’t give two craps about Twitter. And Twitter is not the government. It’s a private company who can choose who uses its platform.
And yes, freedom of speech as a broad concept is a huge problem with this bill. Being able to be who you are and express yourself is freedom of speech. A teacher putting a picture of their spouse on their desk is expression that falls under freedom of speech. A bill should not be so clumsily written as to be unclear whether or not a gay teacher can do that.
And yet again, legitimate concerns with this bill don't get addressed. You didn't rebut anything I said and instead just brought up a Twitter.
Last edited:
There are multiple meanings of grooming, to groom.
What's occurring in our "schools" today is not predatory sexual grooming, but ideological sexual grooming. The former is already clearly against the law, while the latter needs to be too since it's no less pernicious or potentially devastating to children. Schools have no business whatsoever preemptively usurping the parents' role in teaching kids about the birds and the bees, nor should they deliberately interject their (bunk) sociological theory into every subject, every possible nook and cranny of their corrupted pedagogy.
It's as simple as this: their innocence, and their parents' naviete, are being exploited to further a sociological agenda which all people of good will towards children need to stand strongly against.
What's occurring in our "schools" today is not predatory sexual grooming, but ideological sexual grooming. The former is already clearly against the law, while the latter needs to be too since it's no less pernicious or potentially devastating to children. Schools have no business whatsoever preemptively usurping the parents' role in teaching kids about the birds and the bees, nor should they deliberately interject their (bunk) sociological theory into every subject, every possible nook and cranny of their corrupted pedagogy.
It's as simple as this: their innocence, and their parents' naviete, are being exploited to further a sociological agenda which all people of good will towards children need to stand strongly against.
The majority of Florida democrats support the bill.
They’re always fat chicks aren’t they?
Those people should be fired. Glad one of them did get the axe. That first one needs fired. A day without learning? Fro
Yeah, see, as someone who has been very open-minded on many issues, this is where I draw the line. I would imagine the vast majority of Americans feel the same way.
Yeah, just look over in the climate change thread where solar panels are marxist.
Just seems odd that people are okay with teachers teaching k-4 kids about sexual orientation and gender. So much talk about what is not in the law, but the implication is that teachers should be permitted to include sexual orientation and gender into a curriculum for small children. And, if you think this never happened, then the law is moot so what is your problem? But, if you oppose the law, you want teachers to have the option to squeeze a little sexual orientation and gender lesson into the math and/or spelling. Very odd. You prove the law is needed. Thanks.
Not Marxist. Just damaging to the precious environment people claim they want to save. They're still inefficient in terms of power generation. Oh, and mining those elements are destructive as well.
Mining for solar metals often requires heavy machinery that's powered by diesel engines. Drilling for oil and gas also requires machinery and sometimes releases methane into the atmosphere as well. More often, methane is flared onsite and the combustion releases even more carbon dioxide into the atmosphere.
The Florida State Senate has spoken and soon Disney will be just another corporation in Florida and its special status removed. It is about 50 years past due.
https://www.dailywire.com/news/breaking-floridas-senate-passes-bill-to-end-disneys-self-governance??utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=dwtwitter
https://www.dailywire.com/news/breaking-floridas-senate-passes-bill-to-end-disneys-self-governance??utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=dwtwitter
Florida’s Senate Passes Bill To End Disney’s Self Governance
I don't think anyone is opposed to the law in general. It is an issue with the way this law was written allowing it to be interpreted differently by different people. It is too vague. What constitutes including sexual orientation and gender in the curriculum? If Suzie asks her teacher why she is in a picture with another woman and the teacher says that's my wife, does that bring sexual orientation into the curriculum? Many would say of course not. However, based on the way this law is written, there are some who would say the teacher is guilty of doing just that even though the only thing she said is that is a picture of my wife. You are leaving it up interpretation which could possibly destroy a person's life simply for saying someone in a picture was her wife.
The only thing I have seen from anyone who is "opposed" to this law is for it to be more specific and not vague. People keep asking "liberals" why they think the law is wrong. My question for those on the right, why do you have a problem with letting the law outline more specifically what constitutes bringing sexual orientation and gender into the curriculum? What constitutes trying to teach those things? Why is it wrong to want the law to provide clarification on those things?
If there are examples then show them.
CRT is only taught at a handful of Graduate and Law schools in the country. Anyone who would be qualified to teach it wouldn't be working at some public K-12, and even if they did, none of their students would understand it. I can also guarantee that 99% of the people who talk about CRT have no actual idea what it is. It is one more buzz word that has been used to generate outrage for political purposes.
This makes no sense. Republicans are traditionally against regulation and big government. The definition of big government is passing laws that are not needed.
Speaking of CRT, another bill that the Florida legislature passed this past term is colloquially called the "anti-woke act". It expands the state's employment discrimination statutes to prohibit employers from instructing employees on topics that might be labeled "critical race theory". For example, an employer would not be able to do the type of DE&I or implicit bias training that many employers have been doing in recent years, that talks about "white privilege" or the like. Desantis is expected to sign this bill into law soon.
I'm an employment lawyer in Florida who represents businesses. I'm also a republican. Florida has long been attractive to employers because there is little regulation here. There are very few employment laws that expand on federal law.
I'm no fan of "critical race theory" but this bill provides an avenue for employees to sue employers and I'm definitely no fan of that. It is another example of the legislature (and Desantis) taking the side of so-called "personal freedom" at the expense of business. I think that is bad for the state, and bad for business, but it may be good for Desantis' short term political aspirations.
If we start from the proposition that little kids don’t need formal instruction about gender or sexual orientation from teachers, and if we were drawing up the law as Florida legislators, I would certainly entertain a discussion about clarity. As it is, the law says teachers are not to engage in instruction about those things. I don’t think a short contextually correct discussion instigated by a student such as “why don’t you have a husband?” is going to be construed as instruction. That said, I prefer people to err on the side of caution. It is not as if a single woman has to answer that very question by giving a history of all the selfish men she dated to give a child a short answer and redirect them to the agenda.
The counter is to define things into a corner so that there are a lot of arguments why behavior did not fit the language of the statute. The objective should be to be precise enough to have the law make the desired impact and not so precise to create definitional loopholes. We will see if the courts take issue with the word “instruction” as so vague that it could include a nondescript discussion generated by a simple question.
It’s kind of like the old joke about the small boy who asks his mother where we came from and she engages in a birds and bees answer to only have her son say, “that’s weird, Billy says his family came from New Jersey.” Teachers should engage kids with wisdom and respect for the parents’ rights to teach certain subjects how they wish.
No Republican I know said the law was not needed. But, some liberals said the law was not needed because the activity addressed was not occurring. My comment was clearly addressing the liberals. Conservatives are for protecting the vulnerable in our culture and parental rights. If you want to teach your 7 year-old child about the many various genders that you believe exist in the universe, I think most conservatives would want to protect your right to do that.
You don't think a short conversation will be construed as instruction but you aren't everyone and therein lies the problem. What you view as instruction may not be what Sally Jones down the street views as instruction which is different that what Bob Smith views as instruction. The problem is that 3 different people may have 3 different definitions of instruction so the legislature needs to define what constitutes instruction and this law doesn't do that.
- Status