Teachers outline for parents their respond to the Dont Say Gay bill.

[jaypatriot]

Your kind and understanding comments have been duly noted. I do think there may be an error in your analysis with the term "all" though; the passive-aggressive response will help me in the future as an example of how not to make a point...peace and love!

Old one,

You're smart to not use my responses as a way to make all of your points - just the more concise ones.

And you don't have to patronize me by praising my comments as "kind and understanding".
I know how kind and understanding I really am.

 

[Ug make hammer]

How do I respond to your Progressive baiting?

The teacher's job is to teach children to get along with others along with teaching the basics of reading, writing, and math.
What else are they supposed to do? Lecture the kids on two mommies and daddies?

Stories are an effective way of teaching K-3's. Reading along or just listening. And since some of the kids will in fact have two mommies or two daddies, some of the stories should include that.

As you said, teaching children to get along with each other. Perhaps you'd prefer they go with gut instinct and make fun of the kid they find out has two daddies?

According to estimates from the 2019 Current Population Survey Annual Social and Economic Supplement (CPS ASEC), there are 543,000 same-sex married couple households and 469,000 households with same-sex unmarried partners living together. This compares to 61.4 million opposite-sex married and 8 million opposite-sex unmarried partner households. — Census

So about 50% chance there's a kid with same-sex parents, in any given 30 pupil class.

 

[Ug make hammer]

But should teachers be able to mention that some students have two daddies and two mommies and that's okay without fear of being sued? Absolutely.

No such thing as two many parents. Mom 1 on weekends, Mom 2 on weekdays. Dad 1 and Dad 2 on alternate days. All four of them on birthdays and Thanksgiving. I know that's not what you meant.

 

[Josie]

Stories are an effective way of teaching K-3's. Reading along or just listening. And since some of the kids will in fact have two mommies or two daddies, some of the stories should include that.

As you said, teaching children to get along with each other. Perhaps you'd prefer they go with gut instinct and make fun of the kid they find out has two daddies?

According to estimates from the 2019 Current Population Survey Annual Social and Economic Supplement (CPS ASEC), there are 543,000 same-sex married couple households and 469,000 households with same-sex unmarried partners living together. This compares to 61.4 million opposite-sex married and 8 million opposite-sex unmarried partner households. — Census

So about 50% chance there's a kid with same-sex parents, in any given 30 pupil class.

You sure that math is right there?

 

[Ug make hammer]

You sure that math is right there?

Not all same-sex couples have children, if that's what you mean. If you'd like to give me info on how many do (also how many opposite-sex couples) then I'll incorporate that.

 

[Josie]

Not all same-sex couples have children, if that's what you mean. If you'd like to give me info on how many do (also how many opposite-sex couples) then I'll incorporate that.

According to Google, only 15% of same-sex couples have children. There are about 69 million opposite sex partners compared to 1 million same sex partners. Those numbers show that almost all classrooms would have students from opposite sex parents.

 

[Ug make hammer]

According to Google, only 15% of same-sex couples have children. There are about 69 million opposite sex partners compared to 1 million same sex partners. Those numbers show that almost all classrooms would have students from opposite sex parents.

"Only" suggests it's unusual for married same-sex couples to have children. But it's unusual for any married couple, considering (a) those who plan to have children but don't yet, and (b) those whose children have grown up.

The Census Bureau's count showed that 17.8 percent of the United States' 130 million households featured married parents with children under the age of 18.

But after all that, my first guess was right. It's quite likely someone in the class will have same-sex parents, and even if it wasn't there would still be a kid like that somewhere in the school.

 

[jaypatriot]

Stories are an effective way of teaching K-3's. Reading along or just listening. And since some of the kids will in fact have two mommies or two daddies, some of the stories should include that.

As you said, teaching children to get along with each other. Perhaps you'd prefer they go with gut instinct and make fun of the kid they find out has two daddies?

According to estimates from the 2019 Current Population Survey Annual Social and Economic Supplement (CPS ASEC), there are 543,000 same-sex married couple households and 469,000 households with same-sex unmarried partners living together. This compares to 61.4 million opposite-sex married and 8 million opposite-sex unmarried partner households. — Census

So about 50% chance there's a kid with same-sex parents, in any given 30 pupil class.

Ok, you could be right given your published numbers.
So, if there is a "50% chance there's a kid with same-sex parents, in any given 30 pupil class" you believe it is a good thing for a teacher to address stories about same sex parents in a household.
Wow. I never realized how disadvantaged our young society was when I was in grade school decades ago.
I don't agree with you and I think what you wrote above is overkill by the LGBT zealots. And I am glad there is a law that prevents so-called teachers from broaching those subjects that are the purview of the parents - same sex or otherwise.

 

[Josie]

"Only" suggests it's unusual for married same-sex couples to have children. But it's unusual for any married couple, considering (a) those who plan to have children but don't yet, and (b) those whose children have grown up.

The Census Bureau's count showed that 17.8 percent of the United States' 130 million households featured married parents with children under the age of 18.

But after all that, my first guess was right. It's quite likely someone in the class will have same-sex parents, and even if it wasn't there would still be a kid like that somewhere in the school.

It’s most likely no one in the class will have same-sex parents and maybe only one or two in the whole school….or none. Depends on the area where the school is too.

 

[Ug make hammer]

Ok, you could be right given your published numbers.
So, if there is a "50% chance there's a kid with same-sex parents, in any given 30 pupil class" you believe it is a good thing for a teacher to address stories about same sex parents in a household.
Wow. I never realized how disadvantaged our young society was when I was in grade school decades ago.
I don't agree with you and I think what you wrote above is overkill by the LGBT zealots. And I am glad there is a law that prevents so-called teachers from broaching those subjects that are the purview of the parents - same sex or otherwise.

Whether the law actually does prevent teachers from reading stories where the child protagonist has two daddies (or two mommies) remains to be seen. I suspect it doesn't: my own read through though not a lawyer, got that the law empowers school boards to ban gay-friendly content but doesn't actually do it from the state level.

Why supposed libertarians turn around and support censorship, just because children are involved, really puzzles me. You were all children once, weren't you? You never had wrong beliefs about things that parents or teachers refused to talk about yet? How can you be in favor of children being the only source of information for other children?

 

[jaypatriot]

You were all children once, weren't you?

We were children once, and young.

You never had wrong beliefs about things that parents or teachers refused to talk about yet?

Can't remember that far back. How would I know back then if any of my beliefs were wrong and whether my parents or teachers refused to talk about them.
My education came from other kids on the streets of New York City.

How can you be in favor of children being the only source of information for other children?

I am in favor of children asking their parents private and personal questions. I expect teachers to teach a child how to get along with others as well as learning how to read, write, and do math - just like I learned since Kindergarten.
Other children are not the only source of information for young children.

 

[Ug make hammer]

We were children once, and young.


Can't remember that far back. How would I know back then if any of my beliefs were wrong and whether my parents or teachers refused to talk about them.
My education came from other kids on the streets of New York City.


I am in favor of children asking their parents private and personal questions. I expect teachers to teach a child how to get along with others as well as learning how to read, write, and do math - just like I learned since Kindergarten.
Other children are not the only source of information for young children.

Ideally parents would give informed and age-appropriate answers, but in practice they don't always.

Suppose a 5 year old finds out that another student has two dads. They ask their parents about that, fine, but do you think they will "get along" with that kid if the answer they get is an incoherent rant about sinners and the devil?

An education system which assumes optimal parenting in every case, is simply inadequate.

I suppose there's a case for school counsellors in the early years, to answer questions the child may find too personal to ask in class. What limits there may be on corporal punishment by parents, for instance. Or what it means if they hate the opposite sex more than the others do. If teachers aren't allowed to talk about those things, there has to be someone for when a child is specifically curious and their parents are no help, or worse.

 

[bluesmoke]

The problem is that identity is NOT subjective, it is objective.

What if you saw a White man beating a puppy with a club and you needed to all 911. When the 911 operator asked you to describe the attacker would you hem and haw or say them/they--- or some other weasel speak so as not to commit to describing the obvious RACE AND GENDER of the criminal? No, you would say, "a white MAN beating a dog". You would not take some neutral position on calling out his gender or race.

Why do some people insist on playing along with the mental illness of other people just to be woke? Just because somebody thinks they are a unicorn, it doesn't mean they are a unicorn.

So, LGBTQ are mentally ill, because they don't behave as you believe should be that of their assigned sex at birth, or just trans?

It sounds like you would send a child of yours who professed their sexuality for treatment of mental illness.

The identity of trans has to do with sexuality. "Sexuality is about who you’re attracted to. Gender is about who you are."

(See 2nd para):

Understanding Gender Identity

There’s so much diversity in how we identify ourselves and the way we express love for one another. Understanding gender identity can only aid us in our journey to better know ourselves, and others.

health.clevelandclinic.org

Trans are attracted to the gender of those from the perspective of their trans identity. A Female may be attracted to F, but ID as a M. They don't ID as homosexual, but as heterosexual. They have every right to fulfill their innate identity by surgery.

Your mental illness assumption is false and unsupported by any science you can provide. That's some real witch-burning thought process you've got going there.
Your unicorn analogy is inept unless you've evidence of people who think themselves wanting to have surgery to become something that doesn't exist by any evidence ever produced.

 

[Deuce]

Ok, you could be right given your published numbers.
So, if there is a "50% chance there's a kid with same-sex parents, in any given 30 pupil class" you believe it is a good thing for a teacher to address stories about same sex parents in a household.
Wow. I never realized how disadvantaged our young society was when I was in grade school decades ago.
I don't agree with you and I think what you wrote above is overkill by the LGBT zealots. And I am glad there is a law that prevents so-called teachers from broaching those subjects that are the purview of the parents - same sex or otherwise.

The part in bold is a flat out lie, you've never once in your life objected to children being told a story with a heterosexual couple in it. You never lost your shit when a man and a woman held hands in a Disney film.

You literally want a law that censors teachers.

 

[Court Jester]

So, LGBTQ are mentally ill,

Not specifically L and G, but the T&Q are mentally ill.

because they don't behave as you believe should be that of their assigned sex at birth, or just trans?

LOL.

Sex is assigned by xx or xy. It objective, not subjective. Nature is objective.

It sounds like you would send a child of yours who professed their sexuality for treatment of mental illness.

You see this is the problem with you on the left. You believe sex and gender is subjective, and so you groom young people at their most vulnerable points in life when they are going through hormonal changes and often feeling a lot of emotions to actually believe that they can reassign their sex/gender. YOU make them confused, which then leads them to mental illness.

MY children were not raised with some anything goes mentality. They were taught very early what is right, and what is wrong.

The identity of trans has to do with sexuality. "Sexuality is about who you’re attracted to. Gender is about who you are."

What if a person is attracted to sheep? There are people like that. Should we accept their sexual attractions in that way as normal too?

Your mental illness assumption is false and unsupported by any science you can provide.

"Science" used to say the world is flat.

NATURE dictates what is normal and what is less than normal.

That's some real witch-burning thought process you've got going there.
Your unicorn analogy is inept unless you've evidence of people who think themselves wanting to have surgery to become something that doesn't exist by any evidence ever produced.

Transsexuals don't exist. Not if it requires surgery and hormone replacement, or LOL--- uterus transplants to create them. Some doctor might be able to attach a horn to somebody's head and a tail to their ass and then say they are a unicorn. Is that where your "science" is headed next?