131–140 of 220 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Everything you say is likely correct, but for full context, these actions are a response to an initial political action that most likely can also be described in identical terms. From a less polarized position, this is fire fighting fire.
This is a pretty big escalation. There are definitely examples of both sides being the aggressor in the broader "culture wars", but IMO the absurdity of this particular issue is pretty much entirely on the right.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Quoted post unavailable.
Is there no distinction between teaching children about "sex" and teaching children about families and relationships? Because a casual reading of the bill certainly appears to threaten the latter, where the "this is reasonable" proponents seem to be pushing for the former interpretation. Classic "disingenuous use of partisanship to talk past each other", but it's funny how the ostensibly "limited government" people a…
Show me where the Florida law says anything about "families and relationships?" Young kids don't view parental relationships as inherently sexual, and therefore talking about different kinds of families doesn't require talking about sexuality.
That is, in fact, pretty much the point of the law--to prevent teachers from using discussions of families as a vehicle to talk about sexuality and sexual attraction to third graders.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Thanks for citing a Washington Examiner opinion piece as evidence of your assertion. Sometimes teaching kids about sexuality is meant to educate them so they don't grow up ignorant an can make informed decisions. Some people are against that.
Quoted post unavailable.
All of Disney's troubles are coming from retaliation to their direct political donations. and this is why you donate anonymously. everyone likes to imagine Russians and Saudi's swaying US politics - the boogeyman du jour - but this is the more realistic outcome: retaliation by the incumbent party. Just form the LLC, donate, shut it down before that state's reporting requirements come into effect. for coders: an LLC i…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Everything you say is likely correct, but for full context, these actions are a response to an initial political action that most likely can also be described in identical terms. From a less polarized position, this is fire fighting fire.
This is a pretty big escalation. There are definitely examples of both sides being the aggressor in the broader "culture wars", but IMO the absurdity of this particular issue is pretty much entirely on the right.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That’s not exactly it. Disney publicly criticized the new Florida “Don’t say gay” bill. And then said they’d no longer donate to FL legislature. They’d made a 50k donation to governor DeSantis in the past so it’s more about them NOT making donations. This act by Disney had to be public or it wouldn’t have had any weight. Making those donations privately probably would defeat the purpose of showing support to the legi…
And just to make sure this is clear: they aren't making donations to anyone in Florida, Republicans or Democrats alike. The Republican response to this was to punish Disney. We can't know what the Democratic response would have been since Democrats aren't in charge of anything in Florida. "Keep donating or we'll punish you" is an interesting stance.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This rule is addressing other actions by government, such as the choice of government funded schools to adopt an ideology that a majority views as dangerous to their children — and represents a limit on government power. Why would this constitute overreach?
If the rule is meant to address actions by state government agencies and educational organizations (as your other comment implies), why is the execution of the bill only actionable at and/or below the school district level?
There’s many mechanisms by which a school can be influenced and covering them all at a high level is difficult. In trying to set specific process controls, you merely encourage gamesmanship: “this wasn’t done by the board — we voted to outsource our decision to a NGO!”
A more effective mechanism is to define the standard (ie, don’t talk to kids below 9 about sex in schools) — but give enforcement powers when that standard is breached to the people actually impacted by that breach. This law gives people a tool to hold government accountable when it breaches the norms expected by the community, eg when they groom children.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why do children have to be taught about relationships in school? They have home and families, even extended ones, for that.
Teaching happens the entire time kids are at school even when just talking to their teachers so a teacher mentioning their family, their kids, their spouse, changing their last name because they got married, changing from Miss to Mrs, wearing a wedding ring are all expressions of human sexuality. Sexuality \Sex`u al"i ty\, n. The quality or state of being distinguished by sex. --Lindley. [1913 Webster] They wrote the…
But that's exactly the problem. Parents want to insulate their young children from discussions of "human sexuality." We have strong social conventions to be able to talk about things kids are exposed to--weddings, etc.--without expressly talking about sexuality. Many parents, however, no longer trust teachers to adhere to these social conventions.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What conservatives want (and can't say) is to prevent schools from telling young children that families without two opposite-sex parents are normal, when their parents disagree with that. That's fundamentally a value-judgment that doesn't have a black-and-white answer, but if it's interfering with math class, they have a point.
A same sex teacher having a wedding ring on or mentioning their spouse during math class would be teaching the kids about same sex relationships. It it was interfering with classes they would be showing examples of it but, to my knowledge and research, they haven't shown this.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That’s not exactly it. Disney publicly criticized the new Florida “Don’t say gay” bill. And then said they’d no longer donate to FL legislature. They’d made a 50k donation to governor DeSantis in the past so it’s more about them NOT making donations. This act by Disney had to be public or it wouldn’t have had any weight. Making those donations privately probably would defeat the purpose of showing support to the legi…
Willing to bet you didn't read what the actual bill says or does. It does not say "don't say gay", it says sexual education to kids should not happen before a certain grade (3rd grade IIRC) and be age appropriate, which should be non controversial unless you have some weird notion that a 7 year old needs to be taught about sex.
The other important distinction is that it is not just primary grade levels impacted, it is all levels (note the "or"s).
https://www.flsenate.gov/Session/Bill/2022/1557/?Tab=BillTex...