Florida's "don't say gay" bill passes state house

[OSR stands with Israel]

Apparently I heard though this bill applies only from K-3rd grade and not after that . The main  problem is it only applies to LGBT and imo all sex Ed should be banned from being taught in schools till at least 8th or 9th grade . Kids in 3rd grade shouldn’t hear about straight relationships either

[OSR stands with Israel]

Also what is your opinion of parents who ban their kids from dating before they are 18(vast majority of Indian parents I know did this )

Needlessly controlling and hurting their child's social development.

Didn’t seem like it hurt mine or any of my friends whose parents also had the same rule . I plan to have the same rule as well

Why?

Over 95% of high school relationships don’t work out anyway and kids at that age aren’t mature enough most of the time . They also should be more focused on school too and not get distracted by things like dating .

There are other ways kids can have fun though and believe me I had lots and lots of fun in my high school days . I hung out with friends a lot , and did fun activities with my parents as well .

 A lot to  Unpack here.

Also, if you're so worried about your kids being distracted from school work by dating, I assume you would shut them off from from relationships with other kids that don't involve dating, right? After all, 2 hours at the movies With pals takes just as long as 2 hours at the movies with a boyfriend? Or is it just a sexual/romantic nature of the dating relationship that bothers you.

Well I was told that dating results in people being a lot more emotionally connected with one another , and makes them spend a lot of time trying to impressive each other and that takes more time then simply meeting with friends for a couple hours would. Also it can cause emotional problems to that regular friendships dont have and kids under 18 aren't usually mature enough to deal with it.


Secondly as you know I am someone who is morally opposed to pre marital sex and given how accepted it is in society today , it does make allowing dating much harder than it would have been otherwise. It is a huge reason why my parents along with my friend's parents made the rules they did about dating and I agree with that reason.


Lastly I plan to pass down the values my parents passed down to me to my kids as well and will hope that I can be anywhere good of parents as they were cause I truly believe they are the greatest parents in the world.

 2nd point 1st, dating and premarital sex are not Mutually inclusive. Many many teenagers  Follow this rule just fine.

Secondly that "dating takes more time than than being with friends" is" is Frankly a cop out. A parent ultimately can decide how much time their children can spend with friends Or significant others.There's absolutely nothing stopping you or any other parent from telling their child "you can go out with your friends for 3 hours on Friday night, or you can go with your boyfriend for 3 hours on Saturday night, but you can't do both".

 I guess at the crux of this, I don't know what you've been "told" about dating, comma and whether or not it makes people try to" impress" others more than  They try to impress their regular friends is rather debatable in my experience, but you are absolutely correct that it  Allows Greater emotional connection between people. And how is that wrong,  Or even undesirable?

 Yes, high school romances can bring about heartbreak, and few of them will blossom into marriage, But they also blossom into  Exhilaration, happiness comhappiness, an emotional bond with another person, and above all love. To say that just because said romances, again, rarely blossom into marriage does not mean that kids under 18 are incapable of handling and dealing with those emotions. Frankly, the exact same thing can be said about any romances Post high school as well.

Obviously you are going to raise your children as you deem fit, but in my humble opinion  Seeking to shield them from the joys and experiences, even difficult ones, of teenage romance rather than entrusting them to follow your lessons about avoiding premarital sex, and then letting them try to figure that stuff for that stuff out in college or  After a prearranged marriage has been set up, might be doing them a disservice in the long run.

Maybe that is true and maybe a lot of this is that I want to try to be as similar of a parent as my parents were to me . Maybe a lot of the reason I felt this as normal is none of my family friends went on dates in high school either and all of our parents used the same reasoning that I just used .

Like I’m not gonna lie and say I never had a crush in high school but I never asked that girl out or anything cause I was of the belief just being friends is better .



 

[Saint Milei]

Apparently I heard though this bill applies only from K-3rd grade and not after that . The main  problem is it only applies to LGBT and imo all sex Ed should be banned from being taught in schools till at least 8th or 9th grade . Kids in 3rd grade shouldn’t hear about straight relationships either

It doesn't just apply to LGBTs

[T'Chenka]

Apparently I heard though this bill applies only from K-3rd grade and not after that . The main  problem is it only applies to LGBT and imo all sex Ed should be banned from being taught in schools till at least 8th or 9th grade . Kids in 3rd grade shouldn’t hear about straight relationships either

LOL... if they watch Disney, they know about straight relationships. Or if they watch anything. Kids don't live under a rock...

[OSR stands with Israel]

Apparently I heard though this bill applies only from K-3rd grade and not after that . The main  problem is it only applies to LGBT and imo all sex Ed should be banned from being taught in schools till at least 8th or 9th grade . Kids in 3rd grade shouldn’t hear about straight relationships either

LOL... if they watch Disney, they know about straight relationships. Or if they watch anything. Kids don't live under a rock...

That’s fiction not real life 

[soundchaser]

Apparently I heard though this bill applies only from K-3rd grade and not after that . The main  problem is it only applies to LGBT and imo all sex Ed should be banned from being taught in schools till at least 8th or 9th grade . Kids in 3rd grade shouldn’t hear about straight relationships either

LOL... if they watch Disney, they know about straight relationships. Or if they watch anything. Kids don't live under a rock...

That’s fiction not real life 

Movies exist inside of real life.

[jojoju1998]

My sister when Frozen first premiered in 2013, asked if Anna and Elsa were dating.

And she was 6.

[John Dule]

My sister when Frozen first premiered in 2013, asked if Anna and Elsa were dating.

And she was 6.

Your sister has been reading my fanfiction.

[Badger]

Apparently I heard though this bill applies only from K-3rd grade and not after that . The main  problem is it only applies to LGBT and imo all sex Ed should be banned from being taught in schools till at least 8th or 9th grade . Kids in 3rd grade shouldn’t hear about straight relationships either

 Not sure I agree, and certainly not all the way to 8th grade, but I'll give you points for consistency.

[Brittain33]

Apparently I heard though this bill applies only from K-3rd grade and not after that . The main  problem is it only applies to LGBT and imo all sex Ed should be banned from being taught in schools till at least 8th or 9th grade . Kids in 3rd grade shouldn’t hear about straight relationships either

Families are a core part of early grades learning. No one seriously believes teachers can’t talk about moms and dads because they’re “straight relationships.”

[Badger]

Also what is your opinion of parents who ban their kids from dating before they are 18(vast majority of Indian parents I know did this )

Needlessly controlling and hurting their child's social development.

Didn’t seem like it hurt mine or any of my friends whose parents also had the same rule . I plan to have the same rule as well

Why?

Over 95% of high school relationships don’t work out anyway and kids at that age aren’t mature enough most of the time . They also should be more focused on school too and not get distracted by things like dating .

There are other ways kids can have fun though and believe me I had lots and lots of fun in my high school days . I hung out with friends a lot , and did fun activities with my parents as well .

 A lot to  Unpack here.

Also, if you're so worried about your kids being distracted from school work by dating, I assume you would shut them off from from relationships with other kids that don't involve dating, right? After all, 2 hours at the movies With pals takes just as long as 2 hours at the movies with a boyfriend? Or is it just a sexual/romantic nature of the dating relationship that bothers you.

Well I was told that dating results in people being a lot more emotionally connected with one another , and makes them spend a lot of time trying to impressive each other and that takes more time then simply meeting with friends for a couple hours would. Also it can cause emotional problems to that regular friendships dont have and kids under 18 aren't usually mature enough to deal with it.


Secondly as you know I am someone who is morally opposed to pre marital sex and given how accepted it is in society today , it does make allowing dating much harder than it would have been otherwise. It is a huge reason why my parents along with my friend's parents made the rules they did about dating and I agree with that reason.


Lastly I plan to pass down the values my parents passed down to me to my kids as well and will hope that I can be anywhere good of parents as they were cause I truly believe they are the greatest parents in the world.

 2nd point 1st, dating and premarital sex are not Mutually inclusive. Many many teenagers  Follow this rule just fine.

Secondly that "dating takes more time than than being with friends" is" is Frankly a cop out. A parent ultimately can decide how much time their children can spend with friends Or significant others.There's absolutely nothing stopping you or any other parent from telling their child "you can go out with your friends for 3 hours on Friday night, or you can go with your boyfriend for 3 hours on Saturday night, but you can't do both".

 I guess at the crux of this, I don't know what you've been "told" about dating, comma and whether or not it makes people try to" impress" others more than  They try to impress their regular friends is rather debatable in my experience, but you are absolutely correct that it  Allows Greater emotional connection between people. And how is that wrong,  Or even undesirable?

 Yes, high school romances can bring about heartbreak, and few of them will blossom into marriage, But they also blossom into  Exhilaration, happiness comhappiness, an emotional bond with another person, and above all love. To say that just because said romances, again, rarely blossom into marriage does not mean that kids under 18 are incapable of handling and dealing with those emotions. Frankly, the exact same thing can be said about any romances Post high school as well.

Obviously you are going to raise your children as you deem fit, but in my humble opinion  Seeking to shield them from the joys and experiences, even difficult ones, of teenage romance rather than entrusting them to follow your lessons about avoiding premarital sex, and then letting them try to figure that stuff for that stuff out in college or  After a prearranged marriage has been set up, might be doing them a disservice in the long run.

Maybe that is true and maybe a lot of this is that I want to try to be as similar of a parent as my parents were to me . Maybe a lot of the reason I felt this as normal is none of my family friends went on dates in high school either and all of our parents used the same reasoning that I just used .

Like I’m not gonna lie and say I never had a crush in high school but I never asked that girl out or anything cause I was of the belief just being friends is better .



 

 To each their own. Certainly,  Those of us who had good parents bringing us up will seek to raise our kids similarly as to how we were brought up. Nevertheless, No one is perfect at parenting. I'm not, and neither were my parents or my wife's, So we try to do better.

While you made a personal decision to just remain friends with people you had crushes on in high school, perhaps I'm perhaps on suggesting is consider allowing your kids the freedom to make that choice for themselves. That's all.

[OSR stands with Israel]

Also what is your opinion of parents who ban their kids from dating before they are 18(vast majority of Indian parents I know did this )

Needlessly controlling and hurting their child's social development.

Didn’t seem like it hurt mine or any of my friends whose parents also had the same rule . I plan to have the same rule as well

Why?

Over 95% of high school relationships don’t work out anyway and kids at that age aren’t mature enough most of the time . They also should be more focused on school too and not get distracted by things like dating .

There are other ways kids can have fun though and believe me I had lots and lots of fun in my high school days . I hung out with friends a lot , and did fun activities with my parents as well .

 A lot to  Unpack here.

Also, if you're so worried about your kids being distracted from school work by dating, I assume you would shut them off from from relationships with other kids that don't involve dating, right? After all, 2 hours at the movies With pals takes just as long as 2 hours at the movies with a boyfriend? Or is it just a sexual/romantic nature of the dating relationship that bothers you.

Well I was told that dating results in people being a lot more emotionally connected with one another , and makes them spend a lot of time trying to impressive each other and that takes more time then simply meeting with friends for a couple hours would. Also it can cause emotional problems to that regular friendships dont have and kids under 18 aren't usually mature enough to deal with it.


Secondly as you know I am someone who is morally opposed to pre marital sex and given how accepted it is in society today , it does make allowing dating much harder than it would have been otherwise. It is a huge reason why my parents along with my friend's parents made the rules they did about dating and I agree with that reason.


Lastly I plan to pass down the values my parents passed down to me to my kids as well and will hope that I can be anywhere good of parents as they were cause I truly believe they are the greatest parents in the world.

 2nd point 1st, dating and premarital sex are not Mutually inclusive. Many many teenagers  Follow this rule just fine.

Secondly that "dating takes more time than than being with friends" is" is Frankly a cop out. A parent ultimately can decide how much time their children can spend with friends Or significant others.There's absolutely nothing stopping you or any other parent from telling their child "you can go out with your friends for 3 hours on Friday night, or you can go with your boyfriend for 3 hours on Saturday night, but you can't do both".

 I guess at the crux of this, I don't know what you've been "told" about dating, comma and whether or not it makes people try to" impress" others more than  They try to impress their regular friends is rather debatable in my experience, but you are absolutely correct that it  Allows Greater emotional connection between people. And how is that wrong,  Or even undesirable?

 Yes, high school romances can bring about heartbreak, and few of them will blossom into marriage, But they also blossom into  Exhilaration, happiness comhappiness, an emotional bond with another person, and above all love. To say that just because said romances, again, rarely blossom into marriage does not mean that kids under 18 are incapable of handling and dealing with those emotions. Frankly, the exact same thing can be said about any romances Post high school as well.

Obviously you are going to raise your children as you deem fit, but in my humble opinion  Seeking to shield them from the joys and experiences, even difficult ones, of teenage romance rather than entrusting them to follow your lessons about avoiding premarital sex, and then letting them try to figure that stuff for that stuff out in college or  After a prearranged marriage has been set up, might be doing them a disservice in the long run.

Maybe that is true and maybe a lot of this is that I want to try to be as similar of a parent as my parents were to me . Maybe a lot of the reason I felt this as normal is none of my family friends went on dates in high school either and all of our parents used the same reasoning that I just used .

Like I’m not gonna lie and say I never had a crush in high school but I never asked that girl out or anything cause I was of the belief just being friends is better .



 

 To each their own. Certainly,  Those of us who had good parents bringing us up will seek to raise our kids similarly as to how we were brought up. Nevertheless, No one is perfect at parenting. I'm not, and neither were my parents or my wife's, So we try to do better.

While you made a personal decision to just remain friends with people you had crushes on in high school, perhaps I'm perhaps on suggesting is consider allowing your kids the freedom to make that choice for themselves. That's all.

That’s fair and a lot can change in 20-25 years so who knows what my views on this type of thing will be then . Like I’m sure most people become different type of parents then they thought they would once they actually get kids and that probably will be no different for me and most of my friends I was talking about too .

[Person Man]

Do you know what Youth Protection is? Is that sex Ed?

[Figueira]

It only affects up to 3rd grade.

Yes and that is extremely bad. We shouldn't expose 3rd graders and younger to child abuse.

Failing to teach sex ed =/= child abuse.

Why do you continue to ignore the part of the bill that would out children to their parents? This is like the third or fourth time I've asked you to defend it, and you just ignore me.

3rd graders don't have sexual or romantic attraction and therefore can't be gay (or straight for that matter).

The outing students rule applies to all grades in school, not just the younger ones.

I just want to correct the record on this; I had thought the provision to out students was still in the bill (albeit with an exception) but apparently it's gone entirely.

The bill is still awful though.

[Inmate Trump]

Those in favor of this bill….what do you get out of it? What’s your motivation for supporting it?

[H.E. VOLODYMYR ZELENKSYY]

DeSantis is complaining about “Woke Disney” now. This is what the hysteria about “wokeness” leads to - it only reinforces the worst elements of the cultural right.

[Badger]

It only affects up to 3rd grade.

Yes and that is extremely bad. We shouldn't expose 3rd graders and younger to child abuse.

Failing to teach sex ed =/= child abuse.

Why do you continue to ignore the part of the bill that would out children to their parents? This is like the third or fourth time I've asked you to defend it, and you just ignore me.

3rd graders don't have sexual or romantic attraction and therefore can't be gay (or straight for that matter).

The outing students rule applies to all grades in school, not just the younger ones.

I just want to correct the record on this; I had thought the provision to out students was still in the bill (albeit with an exception) but apparently it's gone entirely.

The bill is still awful though.

Yes nd no, but mostly no. The bill's sponsor said they're said he amended the bill to remove such provision, but as previously pointed out one of my prior threads the remaining language quoted by Mr. Reactionary makes it quite clear that there would be a great deal of pressure on teachers 2 outstudents or face firing/litigation under this bill.

It truly remains a travesty.

[T'Chenka]

DeSantis is complaining about “Woke Disney” now. This is what the hysteria about “wokeness” leads to - it only reinforces the worst elements of the cultural right.

There are some serious grievances about wokeness that shouldn't be ignored because Republicans hate it. I HATE siding with Republicans but they are SOMEWHAT right on this (and somewhat wrong). They call anything and everything woke though, which is stupid.

[Absentee Voting Ghost of Ruin]

Those in favor of this bill….what do you get out of it? What’s your motivation for supporting it?

It leverages a culture war issue that most people don't understand (and that touches on taboo subjects for public discussion) to drive GOP turnout from fear/anger. There is nothing else to it, it's just that the GOP has nothing positive to offer so stuff like this is one of the few cards they can play.

In a way, Reagan's political success was their undoing. In the decades since Reagan, it's become obvious that the GOP's ideology on things like employment, taxation, public works, health, the military and the environment are morally and practically bankrupt, offering no benefit to most Americans. Fear- and hate-mongering, plus pointing and screaming nonsense at anything and everything Democrats do, is all they have left. 

[Sestak]

“Third graders don’t experience sexual or romantic attraction.” “Actually, many do experience romantic attraction.” “That’s not sexual attraction.”

Again, if by "romantic" you just mean "caring deeply about a person and wanting to spend time with them and be affectionate to them," then there is literally no correlation between that type of attraction and sexual attraction. Therefore there is no reason to infer "homosexuality" or "heterosexuality" in a literal child who shows this type of affection for members of either gender.

A lot of that seems to be part of the attempts to shoehorn new categories under the broader "LGBT" label to artificially boost numbers. Ive seen where gigilos who want random hookups claim they are "aromantic" or "demiromantic" meaning they want to smash but not form a relationship. I think its silly to claim this is like some disfavored minority warranting a label under the "+". Just like "demisexual" which basically just means u arent a sl ut. These all seem like specious and unhelpful labels to the underlying issue. Just like the whole "kink pride" labels.

 Yes, step 47 of the well known  Gay agenda. Seeking to normalize breakdown of tradition traditional binary generals for the goal of increasing numbers who identify LGBTQ in public opinion polls.

I can't speak for Mr. Reactionary, but I actually think it's mostly straight people that are trying to do it in order to claim some kind of marginalized status without actually living anything resembling the gay experience. "Demisexual" (meaning that you prefer to only have sex with people you respect and care about) literally just means you're a normal and typical person, lol.

I will just note that surveys generally indicate that ~2/3 of Americans have had one-night stands at least once. Also, generally most people will have some celebrities or something/people they don't know directly who they think are hot. 'Celebrity crushes' have long been considered a fairly normal thing, after all.

But (at least if I'm reading the definition correctly, which I'm pretty sure I am), none of these things are things demisexual people do or can do.

[Figueira]

It only affects up to 3rd grade.

Yes and that is extremely bad. We shouldn't expose 3rd graders and younger to child abuse.

Failing to teach sex ed =/= child abuse.

Why do you continue to ignore the part of the bill that would out children to their parents? This is like the third or fourth time I've asked you to defend it, and you just ignore me.

3rd graders don't have sexual or romantic attraction and therefore can't be gay (or straight for that matter).

The outing students rule applies to all grades in school, not just the younger ones.

I just want to correct the record on this; I had thought the provision to out students was still in the bill (albeit with an exception) but apparently it's gone entirely.

The bill is still awful though.

Yes nd no, but mostly no. The bill's sponsor said they're said he amended the bill to remove such provision, but as previously pointed out one of my prior threads the remaining language quoted by Mr. Reactionary makes it quite clear that there would be a great deal of pressure on teachers 2 outstudents or face firing/litigation under this bill.

It truly remains a travesty.

Fair enough. Same with the "age-inappropriate" language that extends all the way up to high school.

[DaleCooper]

“Third graders don’t experience sexual or romantic attraction.” “Actually, many do experience romantic attraction.” “That’s not sexual attraction.”

Again, if by "romantic" you just mean "caring deeply about a person and wanting to spend time with them and be affectionate to them," then there is literally no correlation between that type of attraction and sexual attraction. Therefore there is no reason to infer "homosexuality" or "heterosexuality" in a literal child who shows this type of affection for members of either gender.

A lot of that seems to be part of the attempts to shoehorn new categories under the broader "LGBT" label to artificially boost numbers. Ive seen where gigilos who want random hookups claim they are "aromantic" or "demiromantic" meaning they want to smash but not form a relationship. I think its silly to claim this is like some disfavored minority warranting a label under the "+". Just like "demisexual" which basically just means u arent a sl ut. These all seem like specious and unhelpful labels to the underlying issue. Just like the whole "kink pride" labels.

 Yes, step 47 of the well known  Gay agenda. Seeking to normalize breakdown of tradition traditional binary generals for the goal of increasing numbers who identify LGBTQ in public opinion polls.

I can't speak for Mr. Reactionary, but I actually think it's mostly straight people that are trying to do it in order to claim some kind of marginalized status without actually living anything resembling the gay experience. "Demisexual" (meaning that you prefer to only have sex with people you respect and care about) literally just means you're a normal and typical person, lol.

I will just note that surveys generally indicate that ~2/3 of Americans have had one-night stands at least once. Also, generally most people will have some celebrities or something/people they don't know directly who they think are hot. 'Celebrity crushes' have long been considered a fairly normal thing, after all.

But (at least if I'm reading the definition correctly, which I'm pretty sure I am), none of these things are things demisexual people do or can do.

I don't believe that two thirds of Americans have had one-night stands with people they have no emotional relationship with. And celebrity crushes are almost always based on parasocial interaction, where the viewer feels like they do have an emotional connection to the person even though they have never met them before. Having sex with someone you appreciate beyond their physical appearance has broadly been seen as better and more fulfilling for a long time. Pretending "demisexuality" is a unique or out-of-the-ordinary sexual orientation, and a marginalized one at that, is silly.

[7,052,770]

Pretending "demisexuality" is a unique or out-of-the-ordinary sexual orientation, and a marginalized one at that, is silly.

That statement is true, but I've never met nor even heard of anyone who does that.

Are you getting hot and bothered over some #online social media thing again?

[DaleCooper]

Pretending "demisexuality" is a unique or out-of-the-ordinary sexual orientation, and a marginalized one at that, is silly.

That statement is true, but I've never met nor even heard of anyone who does that.

Are you getting hot and bothered over some #online social media thing again?

I'm participating in a conversation with other people. I really wish Democrats would stop trying to gaslight everybody into thinking that every weird thing on the left doesn't exist. It's a big part of why your party is so intolerable.

[John Dule]

Pretending "demisexuality" is a unique or out-of-the-ordinary sexual orientation, and a marginalized one at that, is silly.

That statement is true, but I've never met nor even heard of anyone who does that.

Are you getting hot and bothered over some #online social media thing again?

As a general rule, people who exist on the internet also tend to exist in real life.