US Politics

Post Reply
Guest
Reactions:

Re: US Politics

#3451

Post by Guest »

This is in the bill. The 2nd option does supersede the former so that would be every grade.
prohibiting classroom instruction on sexual orientation or gender identity in kindergarten through grade
3 or in a manner that is not age-appropriate or developmentally appropriate for students in accordance
with state standards
; and
So the bill is to destroy lesbian teachers and lesbian students too. The part that teachers cannot out lesbian students too is really sick. The Republicans are evil. But also shame on not just the Republican troll here but the media who did not bother to read the bill. This is typical right-wing evil spun to play down their evil.

Guest
Reactions:

Re: US Politics

#3452

Post by Guest »

Who even is obsessed with wanting a teacher to know your sexuality or wanting to know a student's sexuality? Did your teacher know or care about who you date? That's fucking creepy. Thank God for that bill, things are getting weird at schools.
You believe teachers should be obligated to out students. So if a teacher sees two girls holding hands in the hallway, you are in favor of a law that forces that teacher to out them.

I think you got lost on the way to some lesbophobic site.

Guest
Reactions:

Re: US Politics

#3453

Post by Guest »

Meant to say:
The part that teachers can out lesbian students too is really sick
This reminds me of the late 70's when the Republicans were pushing the law that all lesbian and gay male teachers should be fired. Only in this case the language is designed to cloak the intent. It seems as if the right is using hostility towards the transgender community to again go after lesbians and gay men.

Guest
Reactions:

Re: US Politics

#3454

Post by Guest »

"Republican troll" who has never voted for a republican and voted for Biden.

I read the bill and I agree with it. There's no reason why kids as young as 8 or 9 should be discussing gender identity or sexuality at all, they are children. "destroy lesbian teachers and lesbian students" unless they're teaching that homosexuality is a sin, they cannot "destroy" anyone you freak. People learn what they like or don't like as they grow up, naturally. All this hiding things from parents, making kids resent or separate from their families, wanting teachers to talk about things and not tell their parents, sounds and opens up possibilities for sexual abuse.
The bill does not say "sexuality". It says "sexual orientation". Sexual orientation would include lesbian. Also it has now been pointed out to you multiple times that the clause concerning "age-appropriate" or "developmentally appropriate" trumps the first section of the clause so it would be any grade. Therefore a homophobic teacher can sue based on the very existence of a lesbian teacher. If a female teacher is married to another woman and a student is aware of that, that student's parent can file a complaint.

Also that bill clearly says teachers not only can out students but are obligated under penalty of a lawsuit to do so.

The bill is ambiguous but it is not that ambiguous. This bill attacks all members of the LGBT community not just the transgendered people you have some crazed hatred of.

Guest
Reactions:

Re: US Politics

#3455

Post by Guest »

Guest wrote:
05 May 2022, 02:06
Meant to say:
The part that teachers can out lesbian students too is really sick
This reminds me of the late 70's when the Republicans were pushing the law that all lesbian and gay male teachers should be fired. Only in this case the language is designed to cloak the intent. It seems as if the right is using hostility towards the transgender community to again go after lesbians and gay men.
Nah, what's clear is that lesbians and gay men being lumped with transgender people was a huge mistake and we're being dragged with and because of them.

Guest
Reactions:

Re: US Politics

#3456

Post by Guest »

One of the things that gives conservatism and it's anti-equality agenda so much power is all it needs to gain a member is someone's hatred of any minority. As that hatred of that one minority will close that person's eyes to the attacks on other minorities. Hatred is the great destroyer.
This deluge of laws concerned with the “protection” of children is continuous with the time-tested culture war strategies of the religious right. In the past seventy-five years—since the end of World War II—waves of progressive reform have profoundly changed the U.S. cultural and political landscape with regard to civil rights, women’s feminism, immigration reform, environmentalism, social justice, and LGBTQ equality. All of these have been met with resistance. The frantic backlash to these changes from conservatives and traditionalists always seeks to reinstate a blinkered vision of an idealized past.

Don’t Say Gay bills are consistent with this pattern and follow, in many ways, the template of similar laws over the past century. Indeed, they directly copy some: in the 1980s, religious conservatives sought, in some cases successfully, to pass identical law following post-Stonewall gains in gay rights. By understanding how Don’t Say Gay laws fit into this recent history of backlashes against progressive gains, we can then place them in a longer history of obsessions with childhood innocence, purity, and social control. In significant ways, “Don’t Say Gay” laws—and obsessions with “grooming” more broadly—are old Christian fears about sin and danger given a new face, and express this by recycling medieval anti-Semitic tropes of the blood libel, simply substituting LGBTQ people for Jews as the supposed threat to children.
https://bostonreview.net/articles/groom ... innocence/

Guest
Reactions:

Re: US Politics

#3457

Post by Guest »

Nah, what's clear is that lesbians and gay men being lumped with transgender people was a huge mistake and we're being dragged with and because of them.
If you think the bigoted right is only coming after you because of transgender people existing, you are clueless. You are talking a party that has fought against every right for lesbians for decades. That your hatred of a minority is so strong you support anti-lesbian crap like that bill in Florida may make it easier for them to push their hate of lesbians. It does not change they hate us as much as they hate other minorities.

Guest
Reactions:

Re: US Politics

#3458

Post by Guest »

Guest wrote:
05 May 2022, 02:34
Nah, what's clear is that lesbians and gay men being lumped with transgender people was a huge mistake and we're being dragged with and because of them.
If you think the bigoted right is only coming after you because of transgender people existing, you are clueless. You are talking a party that has fought against every right for lesbians for decades. That your hatred of a minority is so strong you support anti-lesbian crap like that bill in Florida may make it easier for them to push their hate of lesbians. It does not change they hate us as much as they hate other minorities.
When did I say republicans care about lesbians? I didn't defend any party, I'm saying I don't see anything wrong with that bill. I'm a lesbian and I don't want anything related to any sexuality being taught to kindergartens. Stop with the hyperbole and trying shift blame to lesbians for the fucked up shit your so-called "minority" is doing to kids and women. :yawn:

Guest
Reactions:

Re: US Politics

#3459

Post by Guest »

Guest wrote:
05 May 2022, 02:29
One of the things that gives conservatism and it's anti-equality agenda so much power is all it needs to gain a member is someone's hatred of any minority. As that hatred of that one minority will close that person's eyes to the attacks on other minorities. Hatred is the great destroyer.
This deluge of laws concerned with the “protection” of children is continuous with the time-tested culture war strategies of the religious right. In the past seventy-five years—since the end of World War II—waves of progressive reform have profoundly changed the U.S. cultural and political landscape with regard to civil rights, women’s feminism, immigration reform, environmentalism, social justice, and LGBTQ equality. All of these have been met with resistance. The frantic backlash to these changes from conservatives and traditionalists always seeks to reinstate a blinkered vision of an idealized past.

Don’t Say Gay bills are consistent with this pattern and follow, in many ways, the template of similar laws over the past century. Indeed, they directly copy some: in the 1980s, religious conservatives sought, in some cases successfully, to pass identical law following post-Stonewall gains in gay rights. By understanding how Don’t Say Gay laws fit into this recent history of backlashes against progressive gains, we can then place them in a longer history of obsessions with childhood innocence, purity, and social control. In significant ways, “Don’t Say Gay” laws—and obsessions with “grooming” more broadly—are old Christian fears about sin and danger given a new face, and express this by recycling medieval anti-Semitic tropes of the blood libel, simply substituting LGBTQ people for Jews as the supposed threat to children.
https://bostonreview.net/articles/groom ... innocence/
What's reminiscent of religion is trying to convince kids they have a "gendered soul" that's separated from their bodies.

Guest
Reactions:

Re: US Politics

#3460

Post by Guest »

Can you get through your thick creepy skull that normal, decent people, do not want lesbianism or any other sexual orientation being taught to kids??? I didn't need to learn about sexual orientations at school to be an out and proud lesbian as an adult. It's something that's private and people need to figure it out for themselves. No it does not "trump" anything, students have "sex education" classes at the appropriate age and all subjects pertaining to sexuality should be taught at that. Why are you so adamant that children younger than 10 should learn about gender/sex orientations? And no, a teacher will not be sued of fired if a student knows she's married to another women because she isn't discussing sexual orientation in class, she simply said she has a spouse. I have hatred for anyone who wants to mess with kids, nice try though.
A parent of a student of any age can sue due to the 2nd part of that clause which says "developmentally appropriate".* And instruction refers to any knowledge that comes about in a classroom. So yes if a teacher is a lesbian in any grade and that is found out, a complaint can be filed. Same goes for if any teaching of work by a lesbian is taught in any grade. Also a teacher can be sued if they do not out students that they find out are lesbian.

You can keep acting outraged and keep lying. The bill's language gives away clear intent.

You are pulling typical right-wing garbage. That is you are acting outraged and appalled on behalf of children when it is about your hatred. The question is are you pretending to be a lesbian on a lesbian site or has your transphobia completely blinded you to a bill that is just as harmful to lesbian teachers and students as it is transgender teachers and students?

By the way, do you not know what the word "or" means as you keep going back to age when there is a 2nd option in the clause concerning age that overrides the whole K to 3rd grade thing? Either you are trolling or you don't seem to understand what "or" means.

Guest
Reactions:

Re: US Politics

#3461

Post by Guest »

Guest wrote:
05 May 2022, 02:54
Guest wrote:
05 May 2022, 02:34
Nah, what's clear is that lesbians and gay men being lumped with transgender people was a huge mistake and we're being dragged with and because of them.
If you think the bigoted right is only coming after you because of transgender people existing, you are clueless. You are talking a party that has fought against every right for lesbians for decades. That your hatred of a minority is so strong you support anti-lesbian crap like that bill in Florida may make it easier for them to push their hate of lesbians. It does not change they hate us as much as they hate other minorities.
When did I say republicans care about lesbians? I didn't defend any party, I'm saying I don't see anything wrong with that bill. I'm a lesbian and I don't want anything related to any sexuality being taught to kindergartens. Stop with the hyperbole and trying shift blame to lesbians for the fucked up shit your so-called "minority" is doing to kids and women. :yawn:
If you see nothing wrong with the bill than you see nothing wrong with the persecution of lesbian teachers and lesbian students in all grades. Sections of the bill have been posted for you. You can keep saying "sexuality" when the bill says "sexual orientation" or keep ignoring that, based on the way the clause is written it actually refers to all grades. It is evident you are operating in bad faith. That you are unable to actually debate the actual written words in the bill and are instead doing stuff like using the word "sexuality" instead of "sexual orientation" shows you know your arguments are in bad faith. Shame on you.

Guest
Reactions:

Re: US Politics

#3462

Post by Guest »

Guest wrote:
05 May 2022, 02:59
Can you get through your thick creepy skull that normal, decent people, do not want lesbianism or any other sexual orientation being taught to kids??? I didn't need to learn about sexual orientations at school to be an out and proud lesbian as an adult. It's something that's private and people need to figure it out for themselves. No it does not "trump" anything, students have "sex education" classes at the appropriate age and all subjects pertaining to sexuality should be taught at that. Why are you so adamant that children younger than 10 should learn about gender/sex orientations? And no, a teacher will not be sued of fired if a student knows she's married to another women because she isn't discussing sexual orientation in class, she simply said she has a spouse. I have hatred for anyone who wants to mess with kids, nice try though.
A parent of a student of any age can sue due to the 2nd part of that clause which says "developmentally appropriate".* And instruction refers to any knowledge that comes about in a classroom. So yes if a teacher is a lesbian in any grade and that is found out, a complaint can be filed. Same goes for if any teaching of work by a lesbian is taught in any grade. Also a teacher can be sued if they do not out students that they find out are lesbian.

You can keep acting outraged and keep lying. The bill's language gives away clear intent.

You are pulling typical right-wing garbage. That is you are acting outraged and appalled on behalf of children when it is about your hatred. The question is are you pretending to be a lesbian on a lesbian site or has your transphobia completely blinded you to a bill that is just as harmful to lesbian teachers and students as it is transgender teachers and students?

By the way, do you not know what the word "or" means as you keep going back to age when there is a 2nd option in the clause concerning age that overrides the whole K to 3rd grade thing? Either you are trolling or you don't seem to understand what "or" means.

Guest
Reactions:

Re: US Politics

#3463

Post by Guest »

Guest wrote:
05 May 2022, 03:03
Guest wrote:
05 May 2022, 02:54
Guest wrote:
05 May 2022, 02:34
Nah, what's clear is that lesbians and gay men being lumped with transgender people was a huge mistake and we're being dragged with and because of them.
If you think the bigoted right is only coming after you because of transgender people existing, you are clueless. You are talking a party that has fought against every right for lesbians for decades. That your hatred of a minority is so strong you support anti-lesbian crap like that bill in Florida may make it easier for them to push their hate of lesbians. It does not change they hate us as much as they hate other minorities.
When did I say republicans care about lesbians? I didn't defend any party, I'm saying I don't see anything wrong with that bill. I'm a lesbian and I don't want anything related to any sexuality being taught to kindergartens. Stop with the hyperbole and trying shift blame to lesbians for the fucked up shit your so-called "minority" is doing to kids and women. :yawn:
If you see nothing wrong with the bill than you see nothing wrong with the persecution of lesbian teachers and lesbian students in all grades. Sections of the bill have been posted for you. You can keep saying "sexuality" when the bill says "sexual orientation" or keep ignoring that, based on the way the clause is written it actually refers to all grades. It is evident you are operating in bad faith. That you are unable to actually debate the actual written words in the bill and are instead doing stuff like using the word "sexuality" instead of "sexual orientation" shows you know your arguments are in bad faith. Shame on you.
Sections of the bill you've posted only mean persecution of lesbian teachers and lesbian students in your crazy head. Sexual orientation is part of sexuality so nothing wrong with saying that. You can keep twisting words and repeating your mantras all you want but it won't change the reality that advocating for kindergarten kids to learn about things that are beyond their mental comprehension behind their parents back is a very suspicious tactic, often used by groomers and pedophiles.

Guest
Reactions:

Re: US Politics

#3464

Post by Guest »

You're the troll who keeps making up imaginary scenarios in your head to try to manipulate lesbians into thinking we're gonna get destroyed or sued over this bill when not one of us learned/talked about sexual orientation or lesbianism with teachers at school before this whole gender ideology madness happened, and grew up just fine. The bill says this: "age-appropriate or developmentally appropriate for students in accordance with state standards", so no, parents won't have the ability to sue about anything they want, there are such things as curricular guidelines. Keep deflecting, talking about "hate" :eyeroll: and ignoring the question about why you want kids to learn about gender ideology.
Actually state standards would be open to a judge's discretion based on the parent's argument. The 2nd option in the clause allows the first option to be supplanted so yes it would be all grades. If the parent argues that the student heard something developmentally inappropriate, the Judge can rule what the standard is. So it heavily comes down to if the Judge is conservative or not.

Based on the language, including the term "instruction", the design is broad and does cover a teacher's sexual orientation.

Maybe you should reflect on why you are repeatedly lying and clinging to your lies to protect a bill that hurts lesbians. No amount of your use of the "Think of the children" logical fallacy (aka Lovejoy's Law) changes that. BTW, a fallacy long used against lesbians.

Guest
Reactions:

Re: US Politics

#3465

Post by Guest »

[/quote]
Sections of the bill you've posted only mean persecution of lesbian teachers and lesbian students in your crazy head. Sexual orientation is part of sexuality so nothing wrong with saying that. You can keep twisting words and repeating your mantras all you want but it won't change the reality that advocating for kindergarten kids to learn about things that are beyond their mental comprehension behind their parents back is a very suspicious tactic, often used by groomers and pedophiles.
[/quote]

So now you are using a typical right-wing tactic of calling people against anti-LGBT bills "groomers" and "pedophiles". You are regurtitating the same homophobic lies used for decades against lesbians. You should have read that whole article so you can see what a cliche of homophobia you are.
As a figurehead for a coalition called Save Our Children—membership was a who’s-who of the emergent religious right, including Pat Robertson and Jerry Falwell, Sr.—Bryant garnered national attention portraying homosexuals as child predators. The word “groomer” was not yet in use, but Bryant’s insistence that “homosexuals can’t reproduce so they have to recruit” was potent in galvanizing support. In her 1978 book At Any Cost, she wrote: “What these people really want, hidden behind obscure legal phrases, is the legal right to propose to our children that theirs is an acceptable alternate way of life. . . . I will lead such a crusade to stop it as this country has not seen before.”

Save Our Children was effective, and the Miami-Dade antidiscrimination law was repealed; a law prohibiting gay men and lesbians from adopting was also approved. On the heels of this success, multiple other antidiscrimination laws were challenged around the country, and in some cases repealed. Save Our Children also helped drive California’s 1978 Proposition Six Initiative (also known as the Briggs Initiative, after state senator John Briggs who introduced it). Though the initiative failed, it would have banned lesbians and gays from teaching in the California school system and mandated that schools fire those who were found to have “encouraged” children to become homosexuals—an obvious inspiration for “Don’t Say Gay” laws.
https://bostonreview.net/articles/groom ... innocence/

Guest
Reactions:

Re: US Politics

#3466

Post by Guest »

Guest wrote:
05 May 2022, 03:40
You're the troll who keeps making up imaginary scenarios in your head to try to manipulate lesbians into thinking we're gonna get destroyed or sued over this bill when not one of us learned/talked about sexual orientation or lesbianism with teachers at school before this whole gender ideology madness happened, and grew up just fine. The bill says this: "age-appropriate or developmentally appropriate for students in accordance with state standards", so no, parents won't have the ability to sue about anything they want, there are such things as curricular guidelines. Keep deflecting, talking about "hate" :eyeroll: and ignoring the question about why you want kids to learn about gender ideology.
Actually state standards would be open to a judge's discretion based on the parent's argument. The 2nd option in the clause allows the first option to be supplanted so yes it would be all grades. If the parent argues that the student heard something developmentally inappropriate, the Judge can rule what the standard is. So it heavily comes down to if the Judge is conservative or not.

Based on the language, including the term "instruction", the design is broad and does cover a teacher's sexual orientation.

Maybe you should reflect on why you are repeatedly lying and clinging to your lies to protect a bill that hurts lesbians. No amount of your use of the "Think of the children" logical fallacy (aka Lovejoy's Law) changes that. BTW, a fallacy long used against lesbians.
If the school curriculum states that sexuality/gender is appropriate to be taught at any grade higher than "K to 3rd grade" it won't be questioned. You think the law makers didn't think of that? If they wanted to ban all grades they would've done just that, no need for "ambiguous" anything and if they wanted to ban gender/sexuality from all grades that would be great too. The bill is about children and schools, but "think of the children" is a fallacy and lie, sure lol. When did lesbians advocate for teaching about lesbianism to kids? That never happened, liar.

Guest
Reactions:

Re: US Politics

#3467

Post by Guest »

If the school curriculum states that sexuality/gender is appropriate to be taught at any grade higher than "K to 3rd grade" it won't be questioned. You think the law makers didn't think of that? If they wanted to ban all grades they would've done just that, no need for "ambiguous" anything and if they wanted to ban gender/sexuality from all grades that would be great too. The bill is about children and schools, but "think of the children" is a fallacy and lie, sure lol. When did lesbians advocate for teaching about lesbianism to kids? That never happened, liar.
The bill refers to "sexual orientation" and "gender identity". You have been advised of this repeatedly.

There are no state standards in curriculum in Florida when it comes "sexual orientation" nor "gender identity", so "state standards" would ultimately be the Judge's decision. You have been advised multiple times that the term "sexual orientation" is in the bill not "sexuality". You are acting as if a broad, ambiguous clause regarding "age appropriate" and "developmentally appropriate" does not mean anything in relation to a bill - as if the writers of a bill would include it for no reason. You have stated you have no problem with teachers outing students to parents or teachers being forced to out students. You have ignored the term "classroom instruction" which, as anyone who has taught in a school, refers to all knowledge obtained in a classroom and not just knowledge from a teacher's teaching. You are using classic homophobic language to depict the LGBT community as evil.

So it is fair to say you support that vicious anti-gay bill because you really do know the evil intent behind it.

Guest
Reactions:

Re: US Politics

#3468

Post by Guest »

Americans totally deserve this. So sick

Guest
Reactions:

Re: US Politics

#3469

Post by Guest »

Guest wrote:
05 May 2022, 04:08
If the school curriculum states that sexuality/gender is appropriate to be taught at any grade higher than "K to 3rd grade" it won't be questioned. You think the law makers didn't think of that? If they wanted to ban all grades they would've done just that, no need for "ambiguous" anything and if they wanted to ban gender/sexuality from all grades that would be great too. The bill is about children and schools, but "think of the children" is a fallacy and lie, sure lol. When did lesbians advocate for teaching about lesbianism to kids? That never happened, liar.
The bill refers to "sexual orientation" and "gender identity". You have been advised of this repeatedly.

There are no state standards in curriculum in Florida when it comes "sexual orientation" nor "gender identity", so "state standards" would ultimately be the Judge's decision. You have been advised multiple times that the term "sexual orientation" is in the bill not "sexuality". You are acting as if a broad, ambiguous clause regarding "age appropriate" and "developmentally appropriate" does not mean anything in relation to a bill - as if the writers of a bill would include it for no reason. You have stated you have no problem with teachers outing students to parents or teachers being forced to out students. You have ignored the term "classroom instruction" which, as anyone who has taught in a school, refers to all knowledge obtained in a classroom and not just knowledge from a teacher's teaching. You are using classic homophobic language to depict the LGBT community as evil.

So it is fair to say you support that vicious anti-gay bill because you really do know the evil intent behind it.

:rofl: The term sexual orientation is a part of sexuality and sexuality IS appropriate in sex education classes. So shut the fuck up about it not being allowed by some judge lmao, you creepy liar.

"Comprehensive sex education refers to K-12 programs that cover a broad range of topics related to: Human development, including puberty, anatomy, sexual orientation, and gender identity. Relationships, including self, family, friendships, romantic relationships, and health care providers." -Planned Parenthood

I have not stated any of that, must be the voices in your head lmao. There's nothing particularly anti-gay about the bill, it only states that sexuality and gender ideology should not be talked about with kids. Apparently that's bigoted to you but to normal, decent human beings that's just common sense.

Guest
Reactions:

Re: US Politics

#3470

Post by Guest »

:rofl: The term sexual orientation is a part of sexuality and sexuality IS appropriate in sex education classes. So shut the fuck up about it not being allowed by some judge lmao, you creepy liar.

"Comprehensive sex education refers to K-12 programs that cover a broad range of topics related to: Human development, including puberty, anatomy, sexual orientation, and gender identity. Relationships, including self, family, friendships, romantic relationships, and health care providers." -Planned Parenthood

I have not stated any of that, must be the voices in your head lmao. There's nothing particularly anti-gay about the bill, it only states that sexuality and gender ideology should not be talked about with kids. Apparently that's bigoted to you but to normal, decent human beings that's just common sense.
The bill is designed to:

Force LGBT teachers out of schools or to be closeted.
Disallow any teaching of LGBT individuals or movements in history.
Allow teachers to out students and to make sure other teachers out students even if they don't want to.

Your deflections, your repeated use of "sexuality" instead of "sexual orientation", your inability to explain the "age appropriate" or "developmentally appropriate" clause, you defending of forcible outing, your lack of comprehension around terms designed to be broad and ambiguous, etc. proves you are coming from a place of bad faith.

That you also use common homophobic talking points just further underlines your intent. Again the question is are you pretending to be a lesbian on a lesbian site or are you someone so lost in transphobia you are willing to be supportive of a bill that affects lesbian teachers and students.

Guest
Reactions:

Re: US Politics

#3471

Post by Guest »

“One of the things I would have told my students in the fall, when I taught them statutory interpretation, and one of the things that courts certainly do, is to look at the preamble to assess, ‘Well, what’s the scope of that term called ‘instruction?’” Copeland said. “And the preamble seems to have a conception of what is prohibited that is much broader when we might think of a cramped conception of ‘instruction.’”

He added, “A good lawyer in a local school district, a good lawyer in the state department of education is going to do exactly that.”

Regardless, it remains unclear what the “instruction” of sexual orientation or gender identity entails. A definition of that type of lesson is not in the bill’s text.

Without a clearer description, Calvert said, “teachers may legitimately fear being sued” for a wide variety of classroom instruction, including lessons concerning same-sex marriage or the history of the AIDS epidemic.
So the usage of the term "instruction" can pretty much be anything in the classroom.
“Vagueness is deployed for certain purposes. People aren’t vague just because they’re ignorant; they’re not vague because they’re sloppy; they’re not vague because they’re lazy,” Copeland said. “Sometimes they’re intentionally vague to move the site of where the political fight is going to take place.”

Which age groups the bill would apply to has also sparked fierce debate in recent weeks.

The text states that teachings on sexual orientation or gender identity would be banned “in kindergarten through grade 3 or in a manner that is not age appropriate or developmentally appropriate for students in accordance with state standards.”

Critics have said the language of this provision could open districts and educators to lawsuits from parents who believe any conversation about LGBTQ people or issues to be inappropriate, regardless of their child’s age.

Legal experts agree, but dispute that a parent’s interpretation of what is or isn’t “age appropriate” would hold up in court.
So it is definitely all grades but comes down to the Judge. Attorneys disagree on what Judges will do. Of course we know what conservative Judges would do.

https://www.nbcnews.com/nbc-out/out-pol ... -rcna19929

Guest
Reactions:

Re: US Politics

#3472

Post by Guest »

State standards regarding sexual orientation and gender identity won't be put into effect until 2023. Watching a news report yesterday and it is believed it could be all the way through high school.
The bill, which passed the Florida House in late February and the state Senate last week, imposes several vague restrictions on classroom instruction. The most notable part of the bill provides that “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.”

The bill, however, does not define key terms like “age appropriate” or “developmentally appropriate.” It doesn’t even define the term “classroom instruction.”

Suppose, for example, that Ms. Smith is a second grade teacher married to a woman. One evening, while Smith and her wife are shopping at the mall, she runs into one of her students and they say hello to each other. The next day, the student asks Ms. Smith who the woman she was shopping with is, and Smith responds, “Oh, that’s my wife.”

If this conversation with the student occurs in a classroom, does it constitute “classroom instruction”?

The insidiousness of Florida’s law is that teachers who won’t understand how to comply with the new law are likely to overcensor their speech in order to protect themselves from being accused of violating the law.
https://www.vox.com/2022/3/15/22976868/ ... ls-parents

Guest25
Member
Reactions: 59
Posts: 885
Joined: 06 Jan 2019, 10:14

Re: US Politics

#3473

Post by Guest25 »

I just don't know if it's an arbitrary male troll here or Ron DeTrumpis himself.
But it's no surprise that comedy shows have special segments just for Floridians.

Guest
Reactions:

Re: US Politics

#3474

Post by Guest »

Guest25 wrote:
05 May 2022, 06:19
I just don't know if it's an arbitrary male troll here or Ron DeTrumpis himself.
But it's no surprise that comedy shows have special segments just for Floridians.
It is amazing. That troll kept defending that anti-gay law in Florida over and over. They kept lying and lying. They had parts of it explained to them in depth. Still kept lying and lying. Then they began pushing that "groomer" crap. Finally articles advising attorneys have stated how the bill is designed to go after teachers and I am surprised they did not start calling the attorneys all "groomers". That was one creepy troll.

Guest
Reactions:

Re: US Politics

#3475

Post by Guest »




Guest
Reactions:

Re: US Politics

#3476

Post by Guest »

I completely believe the draft of the Florida law has more than enough intentional ambiguity to cause a chilling effect among normal lgb teachers (who maybe want to bring their spouse to the school play) and the insane genderbread crowd showcased on libs of tiktok who are actually trying to indoctrinate kids. If you don’t have any elementary age kids in your family maybe you don’t know how far some teachers are going and what kids are talking about at recess. I’ve heard more than a few things that make me sick to my stomach. How did we get to a point that 6 yr old kids are learning about trans and nb? I disagree with the unstated intention of the law, but I agree that k-3 should not be taught genderbread, sexuality, etc.

There is also no doubt that the language used in the Supreme Court draft for overturning Roe lays the foundation to roll back even more rights for women, lesbians and gays. Much of the RW is insane and they push extreme laws bc the sane republicans sold their souls. We on the left need to be better about pushing back on the far left, especially TRA ideology. If you don’t think we have a significant problem you’re kidding yourself. Most people don’t want to see Lia Thomas beating female athletes, Rachel Levine lauded as the first female whatever, males in female prisons or K-3 being taught sex or gender.

TRA’s have squandered the goodwill lgb’s have built over decades, and created a huge opportunity for republicans to push their extreme agenda.

Guest
Reactions:

Re: US Politics

#3477

Post by Guest »



Guest
Reactions:

Re: US Politics

#3478

Post by Guest »



Guest
Reactions:

Re: US Politics

#3479

Post by Guest »


Guest
Reactions:

Re: US Politics

#3480

Post by Guest »

"Don't Say Gay" for TV.

Kansas senator demands TV rating update so parents can shield kids from LGBTQ characters
https://www.kansascity.com/news/politic ... 84877.html
Kansas U.S. Sen. Roger Marshall waded into the culture wars on Wednesday and demanded changes to television ratings so parents could shield their children from LGBTQ representation in shows.

Marshall was the lead author on a letter to the TV Parental Guidelines Advisory Board asking them to update its ratings to inform parents whether a show contains content related to sexual orientation or gender identity.

“To the detriment of children, gender dysphoria has become sensationalized in the popular media and television with radical activists and entertainment companies,” the letter says. “This radical and sexual sensation not only harms children, but also destabilizes and damages parental rights.”

In a follow-up email, Marshall’s office emphasized that he is especially concerned about gender dysphoria, “the promotion of cosmetic treatments.”

The letter suggests that adults are harming and exploiting young audiences by showing LGBTQ characters, a trope that has been employed in opposition to the LGBTQ community since the 1970s, when Florida singer Anita Bryant led a campaign called “Save our Children” in an attempt to repeal local LGBTQ nondiscrimination laws. [...]

Guest
Reactions:

Re: US Politics

#3481

Post by Guest »

I'm really horrified and saddened to hear about the possible repealing of Roe v Wade along with the threat of losing hard won rights for gays, the banning of contraception and other dreadful religious right poison infecting the USA. What happens in the US affects the rest of the Western world, so we all have to be alert and vigilant.

However, for years, right wing American preachers have had huge successes in spreading their toxic, twisted views in African countries with significant Christian populations: Ghana, Nigeria, Uganda, Kenya, Zimbabwe - have seen new regressive social change, growing homophobia, in most cases new anti-lgbt laws, even the death penalty, introduced.
Poland is another success story for American preachers with new anti gay and other legislation. This is spreading.

Maybe the Christian Republican right felt emboldened by this success abroad, ready to impose it in the USA itself. Maybe if moderates, liberals and the left in the US had been attentive and cared what the US preachers did in Africa and elsewhere, then you might not be facing this nightmare now. Or you might have seen it coming. These preachers are expert at this. The religious right knows how to achieve it.
https://www.theatlantic.com/internation ... nt/356365/
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-euro ... SKBN27C2MA
This has been in the news for years.

Guest
Reactions:

Re: US Politics

#3482

Post by Guest »

I'm not an American but I'm lurking at this thread often since what happen's in USA usually has an effect on the rest of the world, plus I care about people from other countries too, and I wanted to warn that it's obvious there's conservative propagandists operating here, as well as on other social media, pushing the same narrative meant to divide and conquer.

They know that the public, even LGBT community, is divided by the trans issue, and by obsessively bringing it up they try to provoke infighting and to take away the attention from the fact that their misogynistic judges are going to sentence many women to death and jail, and made it clear that LGBT rights are next in line.

Guest25
Member
Reactions: 59
Posts: 885
Joined: 06 Jan 2019, 10:14

Re: US Politics

#3483

Post by Guest25 »

Guest wrote:
07 May 2022, 09:26
I'm not an American but I'm lurking at this thread often since what happen's in USA usually has an effect on the rest of the world, plus I care about people from other countries too, and I wanted to warn that it's obvious there's conservative propagandists operating here, as well as on other social media, pushing the same narrative meant to divide and conquer.

They know that the public, even LGBT community, is divided by the trans issue, and by obsessively bringing it up they try to provoke infighting and to take away the attention from the fact that their misogynistic judges are going to sentence many women to death and jail, and made it clear that LGBT rights are next in line.
x1000

Guest
Reactions:

Re: US Politics

#3484

Post by Guest »

The fact abortion is banned in some states just shows women have fewer rights than their grandmothers.
Instead of creating female scholarships, colleges are teaching girls to be sex workers. I pity all this girls who create Only fans to pay for their studies. Companies are vetting them for any promotion.

The socialist champagne left keeps hating on so-called girl bosses and promoting sex work. The right wants to ban abortion because they believe the birthing rate has declined.

Hope Finland stays progressive.

Guest
Reactions:

Re: US Politics

#3485

Post by Guest »

So much for state rights



Guest
Reactions:

Re: US Politics

#3486

Post by Guest »

Dems thinking Psaki going to MSNBC is going to turn the tide for them in November when I think it'll be the opposite.

Guest
Reactions:

Re: US Politics

#3487

Post by Guest »

Guest wrote:
08 May 2022, 12:06
So much for state rights


I guess with Roe gone which was the main thing that kept their fundamentalist base motivated, the next thing to keep them in line during elections is the promise of country-wide war on women.

Guest
Reactions:

Re: US Politics

#3488

Post by Guest »


Guest
Reactions:

Re: US Politics

#3489

Post by Guest »


Guest
Reactions:

Re: US Politics

#3490

Post by Guest »


Guest25
Member
Reactions: 59
Posts: 885
Joined: 06 Jan 2019, 10:14

Re: US Politics

#3491

Post by Guest25 »


Guest
Reactions:

Re: US Politics

#3492

Post by Guest »

The Link Between Congressional Stock Trading And Corporate Lobbying | May 5, 2022

https://markets.businessinsider.com/new ... 1031427235

A popular Twitter account that offers insight into the trades made by members of Congress has released a new report that might increase calls to ban the practice.

What Happened: A newly released report from Unusual Whales called “Lobbying’s influence on Congress and Congressional trading” shares a look at the top lobbying companies in 2021 and the members of Congress who actively traded off companies that lobbied at the Capitol.

“I just analyzed how lobbying influences Congressional trading. Congress is more likely to trade if companies lobbied to them,” UnusualWhales tweeted.

The report says lobbying in U.S. politics topped $2 billion in 2021. The report also showed that lobbying companies were more likely to be invested in by members of Congress than nonlobbying companies.

Among the biggest issues that saw heavy lobbying in 2021 were taxes, budget, health care, trade, transportation, labor issues, copyright, environmental, financial institutions, telecoms, homeland security and energy.

Congress Trading On Lobbying: In 2021, members of Congress made over 4,000 trades across more than 900 publicly traded companies.

Over 400 of the companies that were bought and sold by members of Congress in 2021 actively lobbied Congress during the year.

A total of 92 members of Congress had shares of companies that lobbied Congress in their portfolios in 2021, broken down as 46 Republicans, 45 Democrats and 1 independent.

Some of the largest lobbying amounts in 2021 came from Meta Platforms (NASDAQ:FB), Amazon.com Inc (NASDAQ:AMZN), Raytheon Technologies (NYSE:RTX), Lockheed Martin (NYSE:LMT), Boeing Inc (NYSE:BA), Comcast Corp (NASDAQ:CMCSA), Microsoft Corporation (NASDAQ:MSFT), Alphabet Inc (NASDAQ:GOOG)(NASDAQ:GOOGL) and Apple Inc (NASDAQ:AAPL).


One key example given for how lobbying could impact Congress was FuelCell Energy Inc (NASDAQ:FCEL). The company spent $120,000 lobbying Congress to get tax credits. Rep. Austin Scott bought shares in October 2020 at $2 and sold them in 2021 for $17.60.

Scott tops the leaderboard for top returns by members of Congress on stock trades from companies that lobbied Congress in 2021. Here were the top 10 trades in 2021:
  • Austin Scott: FuelCell, +780%
  • Alan Lowenthal: DraftKings Inc (NASDAQ:DKNG), +253%
  • Don Beyer: Block Inc (NYSE:SQ): +242%
  • Alan Lowenthal: Virgin Galactic Inc (NYSE:SPCE): +234%
  • Thomas Suozzi: Block Inc, +205%
  • John Curtis: Applie Materials (NASDAQ:AMAT), +200%
  • Katherine Clark: Alphabet, +163%
  • John Curtis: Lam Research Corporation (NASDAQ:LRCX), +162%
  • John Curtis: Deere & Company (NYSE:DE), +158%
  • Nancy Pelosi: Apple (options), +157%
Lowenthal appeared on the list twice and Curtis appeared three times, ranking as the possible biggest benefactors of trading off of companies that lobbied Congress.

Pelosi also ranked 11th, with her Tesla Inc (NASDAQ:TSLA) options gaining 154%.

The report from UnusualWhales could strengthen the argument that members of Congress should not be allowed to buy and sell stocks while in office as they are privy to information that may not be public. UnusualWhales recently highlighted members of Congress buying defense stocks prior to the invasion of Ukraine by Russia.

No need for Gun Control
Reactions:

Re: US Politics

#3493

Post by No need for Gun Control »



Image

Guest25
Member
Reactions: 59
Posts: 885
Joined: 06 Jan 2019, 10:14

Re: US Politics

#3494

Post by Guest25 »

Things like this ^ are extremely strange looking from Europe. Somewhat on the scale of Putin's war against Ukraine, crazy and totally without sense. And still talking against the 2nd Amendment is a sacrilege because boys like their toys much more than their children or fellow citizens. Batshit crazy.

Guest
Reactions:

Re: US Politics

#3495

Post by Guest »


Guest
Reactions:

Re: US Politics

#3496

Post by Guest »


Guest25
Member
Reactions: 59
Posts: 885
Joined: 06 Jan 2019, 10:14

Re: US Politics

#3497

Post by Guest25 »


Guest
Reactions:

Re: US Politics

#3498

Post by Guest »


Bought and Paid For
Reactions:

Re: US Politics

#3499

Post by Bought and Paid For »



Guest
Reactions:

Re: US Politics

#3500

Post by Guest »


Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: diotima1, Google [Bot], Trust-me and 610 guests