Andrew C
You know what's funny?
Yep. Understood.And that sexual education covers a lot more ground than it used to.
Yep. Understood.And that sexual education covers a lot more ground than it used to.
No.
I bet there are plenty of incidents throughout history similar to this, with even worse outcomes.
Nothing new.
No. It's a parents' rights bill. Not a perfect one -- but I support the intent.Also...it's "hiding" as being a parental rights bill. It isn't really...because those rights are already there. It's a direct attack on the LGBTQ+ community. The part of the bill about lawsuits is to enable it to be weaponized.
The answer to that depends on whether we're talking about sex, sexuality, or gender identity.As it should. Kids are talking about this stuff amongst themselves - without adult guidance. Is that better than giving them the information they need to make good choices?
And that these are future lawyers/lawmakers.The point is that in academia today there is a growing movement to suppress free speech, like these Yale students just tried to do. It's weird and seems anti-education, but somehow in their little minds it makes sense that they not be exposed to differing opinions or thoughts in college. How a place like Yale allowed itself to devolve to that is just bizarre.
Bingo.The answer to that depends on whether we're talking about sex, sexuality, or gender identity.
What intent? Parents have already had the ability to opt their children out of specific instruction for years.No. It's a parents' rights bill. Not a perfect one -- but I support the intent.
You originally said that 21st century folks invented banning people from society and limiting free speech in the case of disagreeing with others, which I countered.The point is that in academia today there is a growing movement to suppress free speech, like these Yale students just tried to do. It's weird and seems anti-education, but somehow in their little minds it makes sense that they not be exposed to differing opinions or thoughts in college. How a place like Yale allowed itself to devolve to that is just bizarre.
Future experts that circumvent, twist, manipulate the laws as only they can do.And that these are future lawyers/lawmakers.
That discussion on sexuality/gender for 5-8 year olds should be had at home. With parents.What intent? Parents have already had the ability to opt their children out of specific instruction for years.
I’m not taking any of your advice, based on your posts in this thread.Look no further then @libsoftiktok
You just said the quiet part out loud. The faux outrage from Disney employees isn't about this legislation, it's a temper tantrum because they don't want to relocate.Disney wants to put meaning behind posts. Work out a way to either delay shift to Lake Nona campus or come up with a plan so employees can stay in CA and keep their jobs
DeSantis can't be that blind to know that the #1 industry in his state is tourism and WDW plays a huge draw to the the millions of guests to spend their time and money and investing in the Sunshine State.
If the other side runs on "sex ed for first graders," he's going to win 60-40.
So what are your thoughts about children who draw a family tree with 2 dads? Or mention their 2 moms while the class is discussing what everyone's families did over the weekend? Because a large number of lessons in grades k-3 are about the individual child and what makes them who they are, including their family and the people who love them.That discussion on sexuality/gender for 5-8 year olds should be had at home. With parents.
Don't know about that. I don't watch Fox News. Nor am I a Conservative/Republican. I just believe in protecting 5-8 year olds and their parents' rights to teach them about sexuality/gender in the way they see fit. Crazy stuff.Ugh, this whole "grooming" talking point is so damn boring. Did it get uploaded into the Fox News hivemind? I'm hearing it literally everywhere. WORD FOR WORD.
Like... it doesn't even make sense. How does not talking about gender stop grooming? All I've heard from the usual suspects in my (garbage) political community is that it stops Trans / Gay from grooming kids. How?
And yes, there has always been an assumption from [REDACTED] political group that the LGBT grooms kids. Does anyone not remember the San Francisco Gay Choir song which was literally just sarcasm, made to make fun of those who would attack it?
The main problem I have with laws like this is that sex can be an "icky" topic (especially for those terminally religious), but educating even young kids (I don't know, 4th grade? Simpler explanations earlier?) has the effect of reducing pregnancy. This bill does the opposite...
Actually, I take that back. This bill is literally bait, for those who believe all of the above.
There's a reason TikTok will never be installed on any devices in our house. Or SnapChat.I’m not taking any of your advice, based on your posts in this thread.
And, again - parents have always been able to opt their students out of these classes. The curriculum, as you can clearly see, is available to all. And the opportunity to opt your child out has always been there. No one is argiung against that.View attachment 628225
So, I came across this slide in all the hysteria around the Florida bill. And this type of thing is why the majority of parents support the bill. And this is only the official state curriculum. Individual schools and teachers teach other things that are simply inappropriate for children. Parents, while watching school on zoom are now aware of these things. I mean, do 10 year olds really need to be taught about masturbation by a teacher?
You originally said that 21st century folks invented banning people from society and limiting free speech in the case of disagreeing with others, which I countered.
I’m sure I could find some example of this happening before the 20th century as well.
Register on WDWMAGIC. This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.