White House condemns Florida's 'Don't Say Gay' bill

[j brown's body]

I get the idea from supporters of the bill that they think teachers talk of nothing but sex, or would if they could.

 

[Paradoxical]

White House condemns Florida's 'Don't Say Gay' bill

The White House also slammed South Dakota’s trans athlete ban as an increasing number of states consider similar bills.

www.nbcnews.com

Righties continue the very cancel culture and identity politics that they accuse liberals of. They couldn't care less about LGBTQ+ kids; they just want to throw more red meat to their base.

And dear righties who are offended by the pushback to your Don't Say Gay bills, if your child is old enough to watch or read literally anything about men who love women and vice versa, then they're old enough to learn about men who love each other.

I'm sure society is traumatized by this bill and kids the world over won't be able to sleep.

 

[AGENT J]

You're not getting it. I'm going by your specific example. You did not include conduct in your example which you would allege constitutes the school ecouraging classroom discussion of sexual orientation or gender identity.

To rephrase, my inquiry is for you to expand on your example - what, exactly, in your example, did the teacher do to encourage a classroom discussion, and what, exactly, was discussed? Did the teacher sit the kids in a circle, for example, and talk about the sexuality and gender identity of this couple? In any litigation, the facts matter.

You simply would not be successful under the literal language of this statute if all you said was "my kid learned aabout a couple and there was mention of gender/sex." And that is what you said you could claim. Sure, claim it all you want, but unless there actually was a classroom discussion about their sexual orientation or gender identity, then the literal language of the statute wassn't violated. If, however, your example is more involved than that, with something the school did to encourage a classroom discussion of sexual orientation or gender identity, then by all means describe it.

LMAO you keep trying and its cute but nothing you are saying matters to the fact I pointed out and why many people feel the bill is shit
your opinion is noted and it's meaningless, you trying to change the story to fit YOUR need is the retarded strawman part and why you post keeps failing, stomp your feet, hold your breath, YOUR made up scenarios dont matter no matter how much you want them too LMAO go ahead though make another post about scenarios YOU are making up


so here we are int he same spot
fact remains the shit way the bill is written I could file a complaint and bring action against the school if my kid learns about ANY couple whatsoever or ANY mention of gender/sex during lessons, I very easily could claim that is the school "encouraging" talk about sexual orientation and gender identity that is not age and developmentally appropriate since the bill is written so poorly.

Like i said there's nothing to debate, this isnt an argument . . .
its the reality and facts of how the bill is written and this is why the bill is nonsense

 

[MrNiceGuy]

What would you think about your kid's teacher having a discussion about different types of families, how some kids have two same sex parents?

To me, it would depend on the subject. I don't see why that would come up in detail in math class, art, science, reading, or writing, which are the main classes in first through 3rd grade.

Now, if an issue came up in class, where one kid was teasing someone, or a kid had a specific question about a social issue like that, I think it's best to address it one on one with the child and notify the parents that the child had a question. Certainly a teacher could say to the kid "there are all kinds of households, single parent, no parent, dual parent, to moms, two dads, extended families with grandparents around, etc," but other than that I have no idea what the point of the exercise would be.

 

[MrNiceGuy]

LMAO you keep trying and its cute but nothing you are saying matters to the fact I pointed out and why many people feel the bill is shit
your opinion is noted and it's meaningless, you trying to change the story to fit YOUR need is the retarded strawman part and why you post keeps failing, stomp your feet, hold your breath, YOUR made up scenarios dont matter no matter how much you want them too LMAO go ahead though make another post about scenarios YOU are making up


so here we are int he same spot
fact remains the shit way the bill is written I could file a complaint and bring action against the school if my kid learns about ANY couple whatsoever or ANY mention of gender/sex during lessons, I very easily could claim that is the school "encouraging" talk about sexual orientation and gender identity that is not age and developmentally appropriate since the bill is written so poorly.

Like i said there's nothing to debate, this isnt an argument . . .
its the reality and facts of how the bill is written and this is why the bill is nonsense

That isn't a fact. Your example is absurd, and unless you just ignore the literal language of the law, your hypothetical would be a frivolous lawsuit. You certainly can make the frivolous claim all you want, but if your claim in court was "my kid learned about some couple and somebody mentioned gender/sex during a lesson," the case would be dismissed. It would be like if you brought a negligence claim against me, claiming you were injured through my negligence because your feelings were hurt and you were offended. You can make the claim all you want, you could even file a lawsuit tomorrow against me making that absurd claim, but the court would dismiss it, because even if I hurt hour feelings and you were offended, I would not be legally liable to you.

In other words, even if a court accepted as 100% true that your kid learned about a couple, and somebody mentioned gender/sex during a lesson, the claim fails because it does violate the literal language of the statute. The reason I asked for additional facts is exactly for that reason - that your claim on its face - prima facie - fails based on the text of the statute. However, if you had some other conduct that was involved in your example, the facts might change the outcome.

If you think you can win a case like that, based on the stupid allegation you set forth, then do so. The statute provides for costs and attorney fees to be recovered, so you can get an attorney to do it and split the money with him. If you think that's a winning argument, go for it. After all, suing a school district in Florida circuit court can easily get you $50,000 in costs and fees recovered, and the statute provides for recovery of money damages, too, so you can "claim" your child and you suffered emotional trauma and really hit the jackpot.

 

[ALiberalModerate]

To me, it would depend on the subject. I don't see why that would come up in detail in math class, art, science, reading, or writing, which are the main classes in first through 3rd grade.

Now, if an issue came up in class, where one kid was teasing someone, or a kid had a specific question about a social issue like that, I think it's best to address it one on one with the child and notify the parents that the child had a question. Certainly a teacher could say to the kid "there are all kinds of households, single parent, no parent, dual parent, to moms, two dads, extended families with grandparents around, etc," but other than that I have no idea what the point of the exercise would be.

It is perfectly appropriate for a teacher discuss different types of families and it's a given that kids, because they are naturally inquisitive, will ask questions during such a discussion about same sex parents. The only reason why anyone would have a problem would have a problem with that is if they had a problem with same sex relationships.

 

[AGENT J]

That isn't a fact.

LMAO you did it again, awesome

yes, what "I" actually called a fact is indeed one . . .
the meltdowns you are posting and made up retarded scenarios and strawmen are meaningless to that reality but they sure are funny

so here we are in the same spot
fact remains the way the bill is written I could file a complaint and bring action against the school if my kid learns about ANY couple whatsoever or ANY mention of gender/sex during lessons, I very easily could claim that is the school "encouraging" talk about sexual orientation and gender identity that is not age and developmentally appropriate since the bill is written so poorly.

Like i said there's nothing to debate, this isnt an argument . . .
its the reality and facts of how the bill is written and this is why the bill is nonsense

 

[MrNiceGuy]

What **** is wrong with telling kids about gender and hence gender Identity? Honestly?

I do get conservatives when they say: Don't talk about Sex until later....I really do...

What is wrong with telling kids about gender and hence gender identity?

It depends what a teacher is telling them.

What do you propose would be appropriate to tell a first, second or third grader about gender identity and sexual orientation? What's the lesson plan for that?

 

[j brown's body]

This is in the bill:

"A school district may not adopt procedures or student support forms that require school district personnel to withhold from a parent information about his or her student’s mental, emotional, or physical health or well-being, or a change in related services or monitoring, or that encourage or have the effect of encouraging a student to withhold from a parent such information, unless a reasonably prudent person would believe that such disclosure would result in abuse, abandonment, or neglect, as those terms are defined in s. 39.01. School district personnel may not discourage or prohibit parental notification of and involvement in critical decisions affecting a student’s mental, emotional, or physical health or well-being."

"Who is this mythical “reasonably prudent person?” What’s a “critical decision affecting a student’s mental, emotional, or physical health or well-being?” S. 39.01 defines abuse, abandonment, and neglect, but gives no rubric for a school counselor to determine when and what she has to disclose. And if she gets it wrong, the parents can sue."

According to this article, it also includes a provision that forces the lunch ladies to inform a parent if their child orders a vegetarian meal.

"“Am I right to read that this bill would allow a parent to sue a school if their child requests a vegetarian meal for lunch and they are not consulted?” asked Delray Beach Democrat Lori Berman?

Apparently so, agreed Baxley. The proper place for discussions of alternative plant-based lifestyles is in the home. If little Johnny is coming to his teacher and saying that he thinks he might be a vegetarian, parents have a right to know! One day your kid is asking about soy pepperoni, and the next he’s mainlining tempeh behind the gym. Clearly the only solution to this problem is to authorize parents to sue the lunch lady for dealing Boca burgers to their impressionable offspring."

Link

 

[MrNiceGuy]

LMAO you did it again, awesome

yes, what "I" actually called a fact is indeed one . . .
the meltdowns you are posting and made up retarded scenarios and strawmen are meaningless to that reality but they sure are funny

so here we are in the same spot
fact remains the way the bill is written I could file a complaint and bring action against the school if my kid learns about ANY couple whatsoever or ANY mention of gender/sex during lessons, I very easily could claim that is the school "encouraging" talk about sexual orientation and gender identity that is not age and developmentally appropriate since the bill is written so poorly.

Like i said there's nothing to debate, this isnt an argument . . .
its the reality and facts of how the bill is written and this is why the bill is nonsense

Nope. Wrong. What you actually called a fact is your imagined hypothetical situation which by its own terms does not violate the literal text of the law.

I didn't make up a retarded scenario at all. I didn't make up any scenario. YOU made up a scenario - your scenario was that you could sue a school district because your kid learned of a couple and heard mention of sex and gender. That's the dopey scenario you came up with, which is patently and plainly not a violation of the law.

The fact does remain that you can "file a complaint." Sure. The reality is that filing a civil complaint in Florida can be done by anyone at any time for anything, no matter how stupid. You just need to pay the filing fee.

The fact also remains that your fact pattern -- as enunciated by you -- would be dismissed on the school's motion to dismiss, based on the pleadings alone, under Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.140(b)(6), which allows the court to dismiss a case immediately because it fails to state a cause of action under the law. Even if your hypothetical were assumed true, it is not a violation of the statute. Period. So you will be dismissed.

I know there is nothing to debate. You don't know what you're talking about. Your hypothetical is silly. As badly worded as the bill may be, it still has words that mean things, and you can ignore them all you want, and you can pretend all you want that the law allows you to get a declaratory judgment and injunction against the school for your kid learning about a couple and hearing mention of gender/sex during a lesson, then you can believe it all you want, but you're flat wrong.

 

[j brown's body]

What is wrong with telling kids about gender and hence gender identity?

It depends what a teacher is telling them.

What do you propose would be appropriate to tell a first, second or third grader about gender identity and sexual orientation? What's the lesson plan for that?

Yall's minds are in the gutter.

 

[AGENT J]

I didn't make up a retarded scenario at all. I didn't make up any scenario.

this is where i stopped reading because its more of the same.
unhinged triggered melting down and posting more lies
posting lies like the one quoted above only makes your posts look more dishonest and stupid
maybe in your next post get really angry and make up more lies see it works then LMAO

so here we are in the same spot
fact remains the way the bill is written I could file a complaint and bring action against the school if my kid learns about ANY couple whatsoever or ANY mention of gender/sex during lessons, I very easily could claim that is the school "encouraging" talk about sexual orientation and gender identity that is not age and developmentally appropriate since the bill is written so poorly.

Like i said there's nothing to debate, this isnt an argument . . .
its the reality and facts of how the bill is written and this is why the bill is nonsense

 

[ProgressPlease]

For the purposes of clarity around what constitutes "encouraging discussion in the classroom", here are some standard lesson plans. Where I live these are in most schools. Perhaps the bill is in reaction to these being introduced in Florida? (admittedly, I have not read the bill yet)

Welcoming Schools offers comprehensive, teacher-friendly lesson plans to help educators do the important work of building welcoming, affirming LGBTQ+ and gender inclusive schools that create a sense of belonging for all students, families and staff.

Lessons

Welcoming Schools offers comprehensive, teacher-friendly lesson plans to help educators do the important work of building welcoming, affirming LGBTQ+ and gender inclusive schools that create a sense of belonging for…

welcomingschools.org

Lesson Plans to Create Gender Expansive Classrooms and Support…

Welcoming Schools teacher-friendly lesson plans were designed to help educators create classrooms and schools that are free of gender stereotypes and…

welcomingschools.org

 

[Phys251]

I don’t think he has any clue what age appropriate is

Says the person who wants kids to be sheltered from even age-appropriate discussions about sexuality.

 

[BirdinHand]

Says the person who wants kids to be sheltered from even age-appropriate discussions about sexuality.

From the person that wants to give pre-pubescent children hormone blockers so they can "transition"

 

[ALiberalModerate]

What is wrong with telling kids about gender and hence gender identity?

It depends what a teacher is telling them.

What do you propose would be appropriate to tell a first, second or third grader about gender identity and sexual orientation? What's the lesson plan for that?

We have traditionally left this up to local school districts and school boards.

 

[bomberfox]

The only example I can provide is the quotation of the bill. Here: https://www.myfloridahouse.gov/Sect...ocumentType=Bill&BillNumber=1557&Session=2022 Section 3 states "a school district may not encourage classroom discussion about sexual orientation or gender identity in primary grade levels or in a manner that is not age-appropriate or developmentally appropriate for students."

So, classroom discussion about sexual orientation is prohibited - heterosexuality, homosexuality, asexuality, bisexuality, etc. are all sexual orientations. So, a school district may not encourage classroom discussion of any such sexual orientations. Similarly, gender identity includes cisgender, agender, transgender man, transgender woman, gender fluid, pangender, etc etc etc. So, the prohibition includes all such genders, including cisgender and transgender.

Neutrally worded.

Psst literacy tests for voting were neutrally worded too.

 

[Phys251]

From the person that wants to give pre-pubescent children hormone blockers so they can "transition"

Another lie by you. I am not a doctor nor pharmacist, so I can't give adolescents hormone blockers.

But if you want to derail this thread into your bigoted views against trans kids, on top of your bigoted views against gay kids, I can't stop you.

 

[bomberfox]

‘Murica

 

[BirdinHand]

Another lie by you. I am not a doctor nor pharmacist, so I can't give adolescents hormone blockers.

But if you want to derail this thread into your bigoted views against trans kids, on top of your bigoted views against gay kids, I can't stop you.

No need.

FL is making this nonsense against the law in their classrooms.

Thankfully

 

[Phys251]

You think 1st graders should taught by schoolteachers in reading, writing, history, math and art class about the manner and reasons for giving consent to sexual activity? Is that what you're referring to when you say "learn about consent?" Consent to what?

I mean, kids learn about consent all the time in general school discipline and rule situations. No hitting, no bullying, no touching other kids unless they say it's ok, etc. Parental consent is needed to get in a car at car line. That kind of thing - consent applies to many human behavioral situations. If you're talking about my kid's third grade reading and math teacher telling my kid her view of how to give consent during sexual activity, whether it has to be verbal, the definition of rape, whether consent to sex has to be every discrete sexual activity, etc., then I'm pretty sure 1st through 3rd grade is a tad early for those concepts.

Interesting. You say that consent is a bad thing for young kids then give good examples of it.

Here's the thing. Age-appropriate discussions of consent don't have to include sex. Learning to negotiate how to interact with each other assertively is a life skill. Once someone is old enough, those skills apply in and out of the bedroom. Far better to learn them in an age-appropriate manner while they are young than to wait until it is too late.

Look at it this way: A first grader is way too young to drive, but that doesn't mean they can't learn about driving.

 

[Phys251]

No need.

FL is making this nonsense against the law in their classrooms.

Thankfully

Yes, "don't say gay." You and other righties want censorship in the classroom.

Why are children not able to handle age-appropriate discussions about men who love other men? Why is it OK for them to instead learn about men who love women and vice versa?

 

[BirdinHand]

Yes, "don't say gay." You and other righties want censorship in the classroom.

Why are children not able to handle age-appropriate discussions about men who love other men? Why is it OK for them to instead learn about men who love women and vice versa?

The numbers show that only about 8% of the American population are LGBTQ+.

There are much more important things for children to learn in primary grades.

 

[Phys251]

The numbers show that only about 8% of the American population are LGBTQ+.

There are much more important things for children to learn in primary grades.

Oh, I get it! Because LGBTQ+ kids are a small minority, they don't deserve equality!

And yet again, you didn't answer my question. Why are children not able to handle age-appropriate discussions about men who love other men?

 

[BrotherFease]

Thanks for the response. I am assuming nothing. I am 100% certain that there are many who would not agree with you (and me in this case) on whether or not that can be discussed.


A stretch for sure...

My belief here is that society needs more discussion, and less division. If children have questions about their fellow students or events they see in the news, teachers shouldn't be walking on egg shells all the time. Florida has already censored discussions about racism within the classroom. "Don't say gay or trans" is yet another attempt to muff discussions we all should be having.

Children are not being taught about scissoring or pegging in schools. They are not being taught about what two-spirit or pans-sexual means. Any discussion about sexuality or gender identity would be limited to the make up of the student body. As in, a student reveals that he/she has two moms/dads. The student reveals that his father is transitioning into a woman. The student reveals their same-sex attraction to another. And so forth.

I am not that naive of a person. We should be aware that this type of crackpot legisation is designed to throw red meat at the anti-LGBTQ crowd. And quite frankly, it is almost as dumb as a California law requiring gender neutral toy aisles.