Florida Bans Most Public School Instruction on Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity
What happened to the claim that this was just about protecting young children?

The Florida Board of Education voted today to approve proposed regulations that will prohibit teachers from providing instruction on sexual orientation and gender identity in most classes in any grade of its public schools, expanding censorship of LGBT issues far beyond the stated goals of conservative politicians that they wanted only to protect very young children from overly sexualized discussions.
When Republican Florida lawmakers introduced and passed H.B. 1557, opponents quickly started calling it a "Don't Say Gay" law. Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis shot back that the law was only for kindergarten through third grade, even sparring with a reporter at a press conference about the text of the law. He subsequently used a clip of that response in a self-promoting video.
DeSantis' response now looks like misleading nonsense. The law not only banned discussion of sexual orientation and gender through third grade, but it also contained an additional prohibition on any such instruction in a grade where it "is not age-appropriate or developmentally appropriate for students." The law did not define these terms, leaving it to the state's Board of Education. That board has decided that almost all discussion of these issues is inappropriate in public schools.
The Miami Herald reports that the board voted today to approve a proposed rule that states that teachers "shall not intentionally provide classroom instruction to students in grades 4 through 12 on sexual orientation or gender identity unless such instruction is either expressly required by state academic standards … or is part of a reproductive health course or health lesson for which a student's parent has the option to have his or her student not attend."
If "Don't Say Gay" wasn't accurate when it was passed last year the state has worked to make it accurate after the fact. Reason noted in March when this rule was proposed that the state's social studies benchmarks call for teaching about homosexuality only in connection with the Holocaust and in psychology classes. That omits a lot of potential instruction. In addition, the state has forwarded a proposal to the Board of Education requesting the removal of four education benchmarks connected to H.B. 1557. The state's Department of Education never responded to Reason's phone or email request asking which benchmarks regulators planned to remove.
The Miami Herald notes that an LGBT activist who attended hearings on this rule asked if teachers could teach 11th-graders about the Supreme Court decision that mandated legal recognition of same-sex marriages. Education Commissioner Manny Diaz responded that teachers would be able to talk about the case itself but would not be able to discuss "something else that is subjective and trying to expand on that."
There's a problem with Diaz's response. The contents of a Supreme Court decision are themselves not "subjective." There's a reason the decisions themselves are referred to as "opinions." Does discussing the text of the decision itself go beyond the rules? Does encouraging students to debate a Supreme Court decision violate the rules? Debate is an essential part of any self-respecting liberal arts education. But teachers can be punished and lose their license to teach if they make the wrong decision here, so an intelligent teacher will probably avoid these topics as much as possible. And that's the point.
The usual libertarian response to this kind of centralized meddling in public education would be to encourage dissenting parents to seek out charter schools that are friendly to their interests. However, Florida's conservative lawmakers are now trying to amend H.B. 1557 to apply to charter schools.
As for the old insistence that this was only about protecting kids up through third grade from overly sexualized content, DeSantis press secretary Bryan Griffin gave up the game when asked about the new proposed rule: "There is no reason for instruction on sexual orientation or gender identity to be part of K-12 education. Full stop."
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
Scott, question, what role do you see the school playing in instruction on sexual orientations and genders? Outside of strictly sexual reproduction, why exactly should schools be providing this educational role? Also, be aware this covers all sexual orientations, including heterosexuality and all genders, including traditional, so why do you only speak about it's impacts on the LGBTQ+++++ community? Do you get off playing the martyr?
Also note, as Scott even quotes, if it is pertinent, i.e. the Obergfell decision, than it is allowed.
He's just butthurt that they can no longer talk about transitioning or cocksucking in math class.
My question exactly.
Scott can't answer that. He has no idea what role the school system should play in this type pf education. His concerns are primarily with the "free speech" rights of LGBT people in the classroom, and only tangentially with the educational value of it.
No one has free speech when they are at work. A lot businesses don’t even want oriole discussing their sexuality in the workplace with other adults. So why the hell would anyone think it’s acceptable to do so with children?
He's not concerned about free speech rights, he's concerned homosexual indoctrination of young children is finally running into pushback.
He's a shameless, vile groomer. At best.
Scott can't answer a lot of things. He desperately tried to deny that Monkeypox's primary transmission factor was buttfucking and oral sex after buttfucking, and that the gay male community was almost exclusively responsible for it's transmission.
Just like AIDS. God forbid the homos close down their bathhouses for a month or two.
Pretty much. We know that schools aren't just giving neutral information about this. And whether or not the things they want to teach about these topics are correct or not, public schools should probably stay away from contentious social issues until they are resolved.
public schools should probably stay away from contentious social issues until they are resolved.
Boring, one of my favorite public school classes was Civics. We'd discuss and debate all kinds of hot button issues. But that was before woke and the teacher was neutral, a liberal for sure, but showed no contempt for conservative positions.
Now how you get back to that, I don't really know - lack of trust in institutions has eroded the possibility; namely you know telling kids that to solve their problems they should cut off their body parts and keeping that from their parents.
Neutral? Do you mean true neutral, or lawful neutral?
Chaotic neutral.
As it's school they should probably be correct as well, not pushing gender Lysenkoism or other emotive fads.
The irony is enormous and cruel as one of Lysenko's pet theories was that traits acquired during an organism's lifetime can be passed down genetically. People who think their toddlers are "trans" or "pan" are participating in the exact same pseudo-science.
This isn't like Lysenkoism, it is Lysenkoism. And it is being promoted for the same reason.
Because while on it's face this law bans Beauty and the Beast as much as Heather Has Two Mommies, we all know that instruction related to heterosexuality is never going to be a problem.
These are not, and are not intended to be, neutrally applied laws.
That's a lie. It's only preventing books that promote woke ideology away from children. You can still buy those books elsewhere if you want it so badly.
https://twitter.com/american_wx/status/1648797210870464516?t=t43ui5NeEDTYPK2fBmVcow&s=19
Kids, this is why dinosaurs went extinct
[Link]
Yeah……..
We are at war. It’s time to get rid of all the wokies. Since they have no respect for our rights and threaten our children, I see no reason we should have any concern about restoring their rights,
Just get rid of them all.
sm76, you totally nailed this one. Thank you.
Scott, question, what role do you see the school playing in instruction on sexual orientations and genders? Outside of strictly sexual reproduction
Scott (and Reason writ large) has studiously avoided what… exactly is contained in these school packets and instructional doctrines on LGBTQIA2MAP+ subjects.
I dove into it. So many articles and writers here are quick to add “x person is surely controversial and [I] have a lot of disagreements with [them]” while making arguments in favor of free expression.
Fair enough, Reason. Why do we never read “[We’re] skeptical of these ham-fisted legislative efforts to granularly control the subject matter in public schools which has a danger of sweeping up a lot of good or legitimate information with them, but boy fuckin’ howdy, this LGBTQIA2MAP+ education material sure is full of fucking shit.”
There should be no instruction on genderism in public schools because genderism is bullshit. Bullshit should not be taught in public schools.
Get rid of the bible , then.
We can gloss over Leviticus, but you can still keep it next to your bed.
What public school do you know of that uses the bible at all. For anything.
Aw, don't ruin xer's attempted gotcha. Spoil sport.
It's so edgy!
I took biblical literature in public high school in the 80's. Most popular class at school. I learned more about the bible than 8 years in private Catholic schools.
The only time I can think when it might even be possible that the bible was brought up in my entire school career, and I graduated in 1995, would have been if there was something relevant to Shakespeare, Milton, or Dante. So unless public schools had a wild upswing in teaching the bible, I'm guessing that's already taken care of.
It was brought up lots in mine, but I went to a parochial K-8 and then a private Lutheran High School, so that's not really all that unusual in that situation.
The democrat run government schools banned that book. The Koran is ok though.
"One nation, under God . . . "
Disingenuous, superstitious, bigoted right-wing clingers are among my favorite culture war casualties.
It will be good when the landfill you’re buried in gets paved over.
I -- with the rest of your betters -- will piss on the grave of your bigoted, doomed, on-the-spectrum, superstition-addled right-wing political hopes and preferences, clinger.
You are my inferior. Physically, intellectually, and in any meaningful metric. It’s not like you’re even really human, or have a soul. Just so,e bitter old NPC leftist that is too much a pussy to say the shit you spew here to anyone’s face. As you would receive a well deserved beating for doing so. But keep pushing.
Then we can say we were provoked.
"shall not intentionally provide classroom instruction to students in grades 4 through 12 on sexual orientation or gender identity unless such instruction is either expressly required by state academic standards … or is part of a reproductive health course or health lesson for which a student's parent has the option to have his or her student not attend."
What other legitimate educational context is there to provide instruction on gender and sexuality?
The Obergefell example is just more stupid hyperventilating over things that won't happen.
>What other legitimate educational context is there to provide instruction on gender and sexuality?
None.
There is no other legitimate reason for this to be taught in school.
That definition actually seems like it allows plenty of leeway to provide health courses or lessons at appropriate times, respecting parental rights. Entirely reasonable, in fact.
There are so many completely legitimate and uncontroversial things that should be taught in school yet aren't (or aren't successfully, based on current evaluations and test scores), and it would be really good if they could focus on those first.
You mean like literacy, mathematics, basic science, etc.? That sort of thing? A bunch of democrats declared those things to be ‘racist’ and substituted the teaching of racial hatred and class division, with pepperings of nonsense based on gender related mental disorders.
Literacy is for suckers.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6tBGP7V8CuI
Seems like it guarantees the liberty of parents to opt out of curriculum that they don't agree with. I guess libertarians have a problem with that.
DON'T TALK ABOUT DESANTIS!
Go hide you weak drunken little pussy.
Welp, there go the ancient Greek classics.
Poor pedo never read any of the classics
Florida teachers certainly won't be assigning them to their students. The Iliad? Better not. Plato's Republic or Symposium? God no.
Keep 'em dumb enough to go to FAMU. It's the Florida way.
Ok groomer. At least try to be sensible with your lies and propaganda.
When you read Oedipus Rex, do you think you were being groomed to have sex with your mother, or did that just happen naturally?
Ha - silly me, thinking you'd read.
I know basically no one who ever read Oedipus Rex in high school. If anyone read ANY classic Greek plays, it was “The Trial and Death of Socrates.”
But the truth is that there’s literally no time to put into reading that if you’re doing a world history unit. You’ve got like 2 weeks, 3 max, to cover ALL of Greco-Roman classicalism in high school. Your world Lit class might do The Odyssey, and then MAYBE they’ll do the Aeneid to cover the classics. But they’re doing “selections from” as opposed to the whole thing.
So this idea that the curriculum is being restricted is kind of bogus. Nobody would have the time to actually cover those texts given the current state of high school education.
Now, in a hypothetical, idealized system, where we could just throw common core in the trash and spend a bit more time on enduring texts rather than the flavor of the month? That might be a question to ask. But even then, if you had an academic standard for teaching these materials, then they wouldn’t be banned. If Romeo and Juliet is part of the standard, you absolutely can have classroom discussion about Shakespeare’s sexual references within it.
It’s much harder to groom near adults than it is to groom younger children.
I'm actually embarrassed for you.
I love how you morons (and I include the teachers who will be stupid enough to make this argument) conflate ancient literature being assigned at the appropriate age with Mr. Garrison not being able to wax poetic about his gay relationships.
Can someone explain to me why it is so damn important to teach "gender studies" in public school?
And if Florida decides to ban it in public schools, how is it censorship?
I have little problem calling something censorship, if it's censored. But the idea that the public schools should be entirely without censorship is ridiculous, and no one believes it.
I have asked repeatedly why it would be inappropriate to teach Nazi ideology in the classroom, and never gotten a clear answer.
Things we used to know that we pretend we've forgotten, things we're not really quite so sure about that we pretend are settled science.
They were just raging a week ago about teaching confederate history in Florida.
I've seen them rage about in Eddie Eagle programs for years.
Isn't that just the NRA's campaign to keep kids from playing with guns, if they happen to ever see one?
Can't even imagine why people on the left would get upset at telling kids not to treat guns as a toy.
Probably because “Confederate history” isn’t a thing.
From 1861 to 1865, Southerners tried to destroy the United States to protect slavery. They caused over 500,000 deaths in defense of beating, raping, killing, and selling other humans. They lost.
There you go. Three sentences covers the whole, evil, oathbreaking group.
It is a thing. Understanding the reality and not the leftist narratives is important. Understanding the restructuring post war is important. The work done to reintegrate the states is important.
But please, go burn down the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier. 50% he is a racist who deserves to be burned.
Stop this.
The Democrats are managing to have the right defend one of their greatest crimes against humanity.
The Confederates were Democrats, doing Democrat things and working towards Democrat aims.
And those aims always lead to 'democratic socialism', mile marker on the road to communism.
The Democrats were OF COURSE fighting to maintain control of a permanent prole class. The 'state's right's line of bullshit is designed to slap a layer of shiny paint over that leftist turd so stupid right wingers will stand up for slavery
Stop it.
I suppose it is to a someone with a tiny, stunted mind, such as yourself, that thinks in such limited terms. But this is why you became a democrat. You simply lack the cognition and creativity to be anything else.
"But this is why you became a democrat."
Except I'm not a Democrat. Never have been and never will be.
"You simply lack the cognition and creativity to be anything else."
Since I have had a highly successful life and retired at 45 after co-founding, building, and selling my stake in a business, I obviously excelled at cognition and creativity as well as capitalism and confidence. All you seem to have is anger and hate.
The South invaded the North and tried to destroy it? Cite?
I didn't say invaded. They were too incompetent to actually invade the North. I said, "tried to destroy". And for over half a million Americans, they succeeded.
Can someone explain to me why it is so damn important to teach “gender studies” in public school?
Anything to wedge the kids from the parents. It's Bolshevism 101.
Depending on the size of the school; its quite possible that there will be gay students in it. Especially high school. It will come up repeatedly throughout the State its a mathematical certainty. Watch everybody twist themselves in knots when the gay guy wins homecoming king but nobody can talk about it.
Parents will show up to school board meetings demanding answers but there will be none to give. "Who taught that boy to be gay? We banned it!!"
Florida Bans Most Public School Instruction on Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity
I received zero "instruction" on Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity when I was in school. If I read this article, word-for-word, am I going to get a clear definition of what this 'banned instruction' entailed, or do I need to go elsewhere to find it?
"There is no reason for instruction on sexual orientation or gender identity to be part of K-12 education. Full stop."
So I read it word-for-word, and there wasn't one thing in there about what, exactly this desperately-needed LGBTQIA2MAP+ education entailed.
They teach so much other diversity crap that the 3Rs get left out.
Instead of arguing over what they don't teach, they should just get back to the basics. What good is Gender Identity education to someone who can't do multiplication?
Math culture is racist.
LGBT instruction is like the definition of "woman." It can't be defined, it's a SPECTRUM, and it's whatever they decide it is today.
it's not instruction, it's indoctrination
"shall not intentionally provide classroom instruction to students in grades 4 through 12 on sexual orientation or gender identity unless such instruction is either expressly required by state academic standards … or is part of a reproductive health course or health lesson for which a student's parent has the option to have his or her student not attend."
- if required by state academic standards
- in health class
Seems good to me.
I don't know, it might be good, it might be bad. This article is the platonic ideal of "McGuffin Journalism"
The bad guys are trying to get this thing, the good guys are trying to keep the bad guys from getting it.
"What is the thing?"
"The orb of McGrogg! Don't worry about it! The fun and excitement is in the character development and tension-building... the Orb of McGrogg is little more than a literary device!"
"Seems good to me."
As long as it isn't discussed in history, psychology, sociology, biology, english lit, or any other subject where it's relevant, right? Because banning something makes it cease to exist in the real world?
Did you see your comment above about confederate history? Lol.
It's American history, not Confederate history. A slavery-defending, America-hating, mass-murdering club that only lasted a month longer than a Presidential term doesn't have a history.
It's like saying Trump history is different than American history.
That board has decided that almost all discussion of these issues is inappropriate in public schools.
Because it is. Why is it so important for teachers to be discussing gay sex with our kids? What is the goal here?
You know damn well that "sexual orientation" is an umbrella term for all issues related to romantic attraction and relationships and doesn't necessarily mean discussing sex. Telling kids that marriage exists at all, without mentioning sex is "discussing sexual orientation." Asking kids to do an art project where they fingerpaint a picture of their families is "discussing sexual orientation." Even if none of the kids have gay parents, heterosexuality is a sexual orientation, so talking about parents or family at all is "discussing sexual orientation." Telling kids that there is a school dance that they can bring dates to is "discussing sexual orientation."
Oh, and if you think that government bureaucrats will interpret the law in a much more restrained manner and not interpret as widely as I just did, let me know. I have a bridge in Brooklynn that I've love to sell you!
forget it jake, it's public school.
so talking about parents or family at all is “discussing sexual orientation.”
haha dont care. who cares? we all know that this is just a trojan horse for tranny indoctrination and grooming little kids. Are you seriously worried that the schools wont be able to indoctrinate kids about the importance of the nuclear family and the importance of a stable mother and father for kids? Please.
"the importance of the nuclear family"
It isn't important. Most families don't have two heterosexual parents married to each other, raising their biological kids. Most are blended in some way. Over half of adults are either divorced or have never married. The nuclear family of the 1950s isn't relevant to the 21st century.
"a stable mother and father for kids"
Two stable adults are beneficial to children. Heterosexuality and marriage status don't make much difference. For that matter, more than two stable adults is probably even better. The support system a child has is the major factor.
Everything you said is total bullshit. You’ve been lead to believe a lot of stupid things by your Marxist masters. And that’s what it is, bullshit. Tiresome Marxist bullshit.
Great so you probably dont mind these topics being off limits to public school teachers then.
They should be able to talk about all kinds of families in schools.
I'm not an authoritarian trying to ban discussion of families of all types. Cultural conservatives are the ones doing that.
The nuclear family doesn’t HAVE to be heterosexual per se, but it does require two parents in a committed relationship. And it IS important.
There are dozens of studies that show why a two parent household is vital for producing decent, well adjusted future adults. My gay friends would cite them when the topic of gay adoption came up.
"but it does require two parents in a committed relationship"
Do you include second marriages, unmarried partners, or co-parenting by divorced parents (when both are committed to the kids)?
The relationship status between the parents has been shown to be mostly irrelevant. Their commitment to their children is the determining variable.
"And it IS important."
It's important to some people, but often as part of a cultural belief system. I have been in a monogamous, committed relationship with the same woman for 23 years. Does that count?
For many cultural conservatives, it doesn't. It's about marriage. If there is a relationship that is exactly like a marriage in all ways but a piece of paper, it isn't as good. Because apparently registering with the government is required to raise children well.
Marriage and a nuclear family is important on an individual level, but on a societal level it doesn't make a difference. If you, as a party in a relationship, think marriage is important, great.
But like a favorite football team, not everyone agrees. Bears fans don't do a better job of fan-ing than Cowboys fans. As long as they are supporting their team, they are doing it right.
Shorter: the committment to the children is the important part. The committment between the parents isn't, as long as they are committed to the kids.
None of your examples involve discussing sexual orientation, because none of them actually discuss sexual orientation. Discussing a person does not count as discussing that person's orientation.
Isn't this the strange thing about the specious trolling of identity politics?
Like how suddenly people get assigned "cis" gender, a term which people only seemed to use as a pejorative when I was first hearing it. Why do these people care?
Well, that's the thing. I don't define myself as heterosexual. Or "cis" something or other. I don't define myself entirely by my sexuality at all.
If I'm not trying to have sex with someone, why do they need to know my sexual identity any more than they need to know... well, anything? You can talk about me, my family, my pets, my job, the color of my favorite guitar, anything, and never need to know specifics of who I fuck or what's in my pants. I can be a family man whoever I'm married to or dating, a dog lover, an engineer, a fan of music, and somehow the sexual thing never matters. Never. Not one bit.
I'm not "cis" gender. I'm "I don't even think about it and don't care" gender, but the gender/sexuality extremists refuse to let the 99.9% of people who don't care just get on with not caring. Maybe it's because the gay community has gotten to the point where most people just don't care anymore -- fuck who you want -- so they had to up the ante to trans and call me a bigot for not understanding.
I understand. I just don't give a shit.
The left has to attack and vilify the rational and the normal for any of their irrational and abnormal ideas to gain any traction. As their ideas get more ridiculous, the left becomes more desperate and rabid.
And what does one do with a rabid violent animal?
This is true for you.
You have a deformed sexuality. Because of this, sexuality occupies a much larger part of your mind. Because it occupies a larger part of your mind you seek out other in whom this is also true. Many, if not most of them share the deformed sexuality that plagues you. Together you assume that, if YOU are thinking like this, EVERYONE must think like this.
Because your deformity is no longer labeled as such.
But it IS a deformity. Either a birth defect or a psychological scar.
You are not normal and how you think is not normal.
Normal is the thought and behavior pattern that aids the continuation of the species. It is not 'societal', it is not 'constructed', it is the default programming.
And you don't have it.
"Why is it so important for teachers to be discussing gay sex with our kids?"
They aren't.
Except the middle school book with the qr code for grindr.
Seriously?
Than what difference, at this point, does it make? - Hillary Clinton
Mr. Shackford, you're still approaching this subject as if it were a matter of withholding communication to students on material they want and have paid for. The reality is that the unelected government (via teacher unions, etc.) is undertaking a propaganda campaign, and a blunt tool like this, just cutting the subject out of school (where it hasn't been a traditional and expected part of curricula anyway), is the only effective way the elected government has to stop this propaganda campaign.
Charter schools may be tax-paid, but they're still secular. Parents could not choose religious instruction if they wanted it. That's a fair way to deal with things, cutting the subject out of the government schools, rather than trying to make school prayer, etc. "fair", "accommodating", or whatever. It was recognized long ago that as long as government conducted any religious instruction, it either was automatically or would very easily become proselytizing. It's similarly easy to cut sexual topics out of the curriculum.
It isn't easy to do at all because "sexual orientation" is a vague term that is used to refer to lots of things besides gay sex. It is often used to refer to any and all issues of romantic attraction, family, and relationships, even when sex is not involved. Cutting that out of school would be super hard. Would it be illegal for kids with two moms or two dads to talk about their family at school? Would it be illegal to mention that gay marriage is a thing? Would it be illegal to mention straight marriage for that matter, since "heterosexual" is a sexual orientation?
haha cry more groomer
Super hard?! Those weren't topics of school instruction for me at all! Our teachers didn't give us dating tips, discuss family problems, etc. In fact it was considered bad manners to bring such matters up. About the only discussion of family might be with younger students asked to discuss occupations and hobbies (as part of learning how to present subjects, same as show & tell), when one might mention a particular relative who was into a certain hobby or occupation.
Group A – we think xyz should be taught in school
Group B – no that’s not good for society, I think not
Group C – what time is the game?
When Group B gets control, why in the world should they listen, defer, or care what Group A thinks? That’s the whole point of control, you finally get your way.
You can be damn sure (because we’ve seen it for decades) that when Group A is in control, they don’t defer to Group B.
I worked part-time from my apartment and earned $30,030. After losing my previous business, I quickly became exhausted. Fortunately, I discovered this jobs online, and as a result, I was able to start earning money from home right away. Anyone can accomplish this elite career and increase their internet income by….
After reading this article………………….>>> http://www.jobsrevenue.com
"Most Public School Instruction on Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity" is just leftist propaganda and has no educational value whatsoever. It should be banned. It's all indoctrination and politics and that has no place in schools being pushed on impressionable schoolchildren. Frankly, a lot of what is taught in schools is garbage that should be discarded.
And any discussion of Kennedy's gay marriage decisions (which should not even occur until high school) should include the objective fact that they are completely unmoored from the text of the Constitution and he just made it all up to fit his personal agenda.
"And any discussion of Kennedy’s gay marriage decisions (which should not even occur until high school) should include the objective fact that they are completely unmoored from the text of the Constitution and he just made it all up to fit his personal agenda."
LOL at what *you* decide are "objective facts".
PS: You're flat out wrong.
@Real American
What about discussion of the Respect for Marriage act, which was passed democratically without having to do any judicial tomfoolery?
I would go even further and vote that public schools shouldn’t teach ANYTHING related to sex or gender – not just orientation or identity – because we obviously don’t have teachers capable of it.
I went to public school in the 70’s and 80’s with limited sex ed beyond penis, vagina, gonorrhea, pregnancy, condom. But even the dumbest kids knew basic biology and reproductive cycles, who was gay and straight, and weren’t confused by Boy George, Martina Navratilova, or The Rocky Horror Picture Show. 40 years of enlightened sexual education and we have high schools that don’t know which toilets the kids should use, colleges that don’t know which athletes go on men’s or women’s teams, law schools that can’t define what a woman is, and medical schools that produce doctors that can’t correctly assign sex at birth.
"I would go even further and vote that public schools shouldn’t teach ANYTHING related to sex or gender – not just orientation or identity – because we obviously don’t have teachers capable of it."
OK fine, you can have your opinion. But what do you say about Florida going after charter schools as well?
He'd probably say that charter schools are public schools, and he would be correct.
If they’re getting government money they sure are.
Any organization that says “I’ll teach your kid math.” and proceeds to provide genderism instruction in math class isn’t a school and shouldn’t be chartered as a school and, down to the level of individual tutors, should, in accordance with the law and without regard for their gender or orientation, be prosecuted for criminally misrepresenting their activities in such a fashion.
This is the crux, isn't it?
This is what happens when even your "school choice" schools are part of public education. You have a zero sum game where the education of your children depends on agreement with all the other parents and voters that constitute "the public".
Unless one feels that anything and everything may be taught in school- including intelligent design, nazi nonsense, flat-eartherism, etc- one must accept that decisions will be made about what will be taught in school. It is unfortunate that our public school system renders this to decisions at the state level, but there we are.
If you are going to make the argument that Transgendered nonsense OUGHT to be taught in school, that is a different story- one that people like Shackford and I guess you are unwilling to come out and make. Instead they hide behind transparently flimsy canards like educational freedom and freedom of speech.
"one must accept that decisions will be made about what will be taught in school"
Yes, but since it's education the expectation would be that it would be based on factial merit, not extremist political ideology. This is pure politics.
"If you are going to make the argument that Transgendered nonsense OUGHT to be taught in school"
That's not what this law prevents. It threatens teachers with losing their jobs and licenses if they discuss gender and sexual identity in schools, **even if it is completely relevant to the topic at hand**.
Which is why "Don't Say Gay" is spot-on.
And an excellent case study in the dangers, and anti-liberty results, of a gerrymandered supermajority.
Good. Let's go further though, all sex ed goes next.
opponents quickly started calling it a "Don't Say Gay" law.
That is certainly easier than calling the legislation by its proper name and crafting a reasoned and coherent argument on why public school teachers in Florida should be in the business of initiating classroom discussion about sexual orientation or gender identity.
Well, since the text can be accurately summarized as "Don't Say Gay" and the actual name is politicized (and inaccurate), that would probably explain it.
Did you even read the bill? The word "gay" isn't even mentioned. You are not stating the truth.
When is he ever?
"3. 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."
If you think "gay" and "sexual orientation" are mutually exclusive, you're being dishonest.
If you think “gay” and “sexual orientation” are synonymous you’re being dishonest.
All that should be taught is what physical changes you will notice, how to react, and how to prevent pregnancies and transmission of STDs. Why the government should be involved in telling kids how to have a rewarding sex life is beyond me, because that is all the rest of this talk is about and fraught with opinion and bias to be taught by half-wit educators.
"Why the government should be involved in telling kids how to have a rewarding sex life"
They aren't.
"fraught with opinion and bias"
Yup. That sums up cultural conservatism quite neatly.
They aren’t.
You lie again. Look at Libs of Tiktok for examples of this. Schools should not promote a lifestyle that makes sexuality the central feature of peoples' lives, let alone to children.
Yup. That sums up cultural conservatism quite neatly.
Also a lie. Plenty of schools have been teaching CRT, which is exemplary of schools teaching leftist opinion and bias. "Cultural conservatism" has done nothing remotely close to this.
"Look at Libs of Tiktok"
See, there's your problem. You seem to think that the things posted on a partisan site for partisan consumption is the norm for almost 4 million teachers and tens of thousands of school districts throughout the country.
"Plenty of schools have been teaching CRT"
Proving, once again, that you don't know what CRT is. Teaching about racism and slavery isn't CRT. CRT is a very specific, college-level analytical theory that isn't in high school curricula anywhere, let alone K-8 schools.
"“Cultural conservatism” has done nothing remotely close to this."
Cultural conservatism is about using the power of government to ban subjects and books that they don't like. So, yeah, it has done exactly that.
Nelson, just ‘come out’ and tell us you want your fellow travelers working in government schools to groom kids. Have the balls to admit it.
The evidence of organized grooming, protection of pedophiles, and obstruction of investigations is largely found in cultural conservative organizations like the Boy Scouts and the Catholic Church. Certainsly not among the 4 million teachers in the US, who work with, not against, law enforcement when pedophiles are discovered in their midst.
If they thought they needed to suppress it in pre-k only, they would have done so from the onset. They gave themselves an out if it was necessary. They deemed it necessary.
Shocking. Who could have ever predicted such a partisan political act by a governor running for President?
"There is no reason for instruction on sexual orientation or gender identity to be part of K-12 education. Full stop."
I couldn't agree more.
Sure. There aren't any gay people in history, literature, or any other subject sudied in high school, right?
>>providing instruction on sexual orientation and gender identity
the sex-ed lady can tell them to look down the front of their pants and see what they see otherwise absolutely not the business of public educators.
The usual libertarian response to this kind of centralized meddling in public education
Just stop. You're embarassing yourself. "centralized meddling" in public schools? That's what public school is. Good grief.
encourage dissenting parents to seek out charter schools that are friendly to their interests. However, Florida's conservative lawmakers are now trying to amend H.B. 1557 to apply to charter schools.
Charter schools are public schools in that they are funded and controlled by the government. Everything about a charter school is subject to the same level of "centralized meddling" as the non-charter public schools.
"Centralized meddling" lololo I cant get over that one. Amazing.
redefining of public schools as safe spaces for children is tragically ludicrous.
So, I went out and did my research and as I suspected, the LGBTQIA2MAP+ education curricula is a morass of useless, questionable, and downright full-of-complete-bullshit stuff you wouldn't dare conceive of while high on Krokodil and Red Bull.
It's also the perfect petri dish to mix completely age-inappropriate stuff while surrounding it in a package of 'anti-bullying'.
The first thing that strikes me is that in the last 10 years, school "officials" (activists who make their way into the schools hailing from various NGOs-- also funded by government via "grants" on the idea that they will go forth and spread good works in the community) is how much time, effort and attention is being put into what Little Johnny does with his cock and Little Suzie does with her cooch.
Little Johnny likes to suck cock and stick his cock up the ass of other sex-assigned males-- we should accept this choice and not bully him, or use homophobic language to describe these choices. Category: Acceptance, tolerance and anti-bullying.
The funny thing is, I don't have a lot of issue with the LGB part of the LGBTQIA2MAP+ part of the education spectrum. In fact, this is why there's a British organization called the LGB alliance. It was a group of gay people who realized (rightly) that the Trans movement was fucking crackpots galore, nutso-bonkers-crazy, homophobic and downright dangerous to childhood. But the so-called "trans" part, or the T in the lgbTqia2map+ part is where things go off the rails. And not even so much that it's inappropriate (if you can sneak past the indoctrination parts of it) but the flat-out lies, misrepresentations, falsehoods and plain old bullshit that it peddles.
Things like "sex-assigned-at-birth" cultish bullshit that's peddled as "settled science". I was looking at some curricula and right off the bat found a completely bullshit statistic.
In the definitions part of the LGBTQIA2MA+ education packet, I found this:
I thought to myself, "wait, what? Two percent... two in 100 people? That's some platinum rated horseshit right there."
First of all, they've rounded up from 1.7% to 2%. But what about the 1.7% Also, Platinum rated, five star, grade-A, weapons grade bullshit.
Try something like .018 percent of the fucking population you goddamned fucking hacks.
In the end, the Trans education which is pretty much dominating everything in LGBTQIA2MAP+ discourse these days, is the real dangerous. Dangerous in that it's inappropriate, and dangerous in that nearly everything it claims is flat fucking false, and is nothing more than a bizarre cult that has somehow taken nearly all of Respectable Society.
If you want to get a view of how dangerous this cult is from the inside, here's an interview with a pro-trans activist who was deep, deep, DEEP in the game, worked at a Trans clinic and is even married to a Trans man.
This interview will make your blood run cold, and she describes, in detail, how even she is having to "deprogram" herself from the cultish language that you're forced into using when discussing any issues around Trans.
And for the record, if half of what's going on in these clinics is true, then fuck off, tell me how many mail-in ballots I gotta harvest to get Ron DeSantis elected.
More definitions from the educators packet:
So let’s just fuck right off with ‘OMG, THEY’RE BANNING TEH LGBTQIA2MAP+ CURRICULUM’ DON’T SAY GAY DON’T SAY GAY.
They’re LYING to young children. Lying to them.
You're not attracted to men, Scott, you're attracted to people who 'feel like a man'.
Get out of the cult, Scott. These people are complete homophobes and you know it. Stop shilling for them, stop using their invented vocabulary.
Here is a google drive full of "educational materials" put out by one of those NGOs. As you note it is full of complete bullshit- the type of science that many on the left would mock and ridicule as absurd if an Intelligent Design person would get started.
https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1Zw7nHffu0Edn2wT3hxmh6c3AnpbQtUEA
These people aren't just saying "be respectful of others' differences." No, they are indoctrinating kids with shit like,
“Explicitly instructing students that gender can be expressed in many ways is vital work in breaking down the binary and empowering gender creativity.“ - Clothes are for Everyone"
"Showcase of Natural Genders" actually tries to deny sexual dimorphism by using vague claptrap like “they have girl bodies that look like boy bodies” - There is no science to back this up or even explain what they mean. For example it appears that they are saying that male deer, because they lose antlers each year, spend time looking like females. It says some male red kangaroos have pouches like females- I find none of this in any literature anywhere. This is all absurd, and has nothing to do with gender expression. Sexual dimorphism is a thing. It exists.
I can't put two links in a post without it getting stuck in moderation, but if you want to go to the site that publishes this bs, they are at genderinclassrooms dot com.
Is Shackford the Grand Poobah of the local NAMBLA?
Ask Groomer Jeffy. He completed his leveraged buy out of NAMBLA late last year, and is their new CEO. I hear he financed by selling his strategic reserve of Ben & Jerry’s to the ChiComs.
Gender issues and sexual education belong in all schools because that is the time such issues become pertinent; namely around 13 years old (give or take) when puberty starts to manifest. Ideally children should be exposed to the biology of it and hopefully the psychology of it *before* it happens so they know what to expect. Genderism is a tack on issue, but should be represented as that is the time gender-social constructs (boyfriends/girlfriends, sexual interest in peers, & the "where do I fit in all this and am I normal?" ) questions come in to play. As gender presentation and acceptance is society-facing , it is appropriate for a societal institution to teach what is acceptable in its society (you know, if they want to actually be useful to the students they are supposedly getting ready to integrate into its respective society.)
What I reserve for parental discretion is the morality of such things. Though even then, I think schools in general should teach that ppl have differing morals; and you should keep yours to yourself and "everybody else" should do likewise. Don't step on anyone's toes, and don't let them step on yours.
when puberty starts to manifest.
That's why we have drugs to put an end to all that nonsense.
As gender presentation and acceptance is society-facing , it is appropriate for a societal institution to teach what is acceptable in its society (you know, if they want to actually be useful to the students they are supposedly getting ready to integrate into its respective society.)
Wonders how this goes off the rails in ten years when you're no longer on the *checks notes* right side of history.
No. Not an academic subject. No need to teach it in public school.
@Liberty_Belle
What's this? Logic and common sense in a Reason comment section? On the comment section of an article about LGBT issues? How incredibly refreshing!
Read the replies below (and above). An ideology that makes sexuality a central feature in the lives of children has no place in public schools.
But that isn't what the law says, nor is it what schools were doing.
There was no logic in any of your or Belle’s post.
As gender presentation and acceptance is society-facing, it is appropriate for a societal institution to teach what is acceptable in its society
That is neither the purpose of education or even the purpose of institutions in general. Nor should it be their responsibility, as that removes parents say in how their kids grow up.
Right, the purpose of education isn't to teach kids about the world. It's to prevent them from learning parts of the world that their parents don't like.
This would explain why the culturally conservative states dominate the bottom of the education rankings every year.
Fuck off groomer.
"Gender issues and sexual education belong in all schools because that is the time such issues become pertinent;"
It is bizarre to me that someone with "liberty" in their name starts any post explaining what *should* be taught in school. But set that aside, you haven't explained why this specific subject should be taught. Drug use is pertinent at this age- should the school be teaching kids how to roll a joint? Kids are probably getting ready for careers- should we teach them shooting, and drill them in marching so that they can get ready for a productive military career? Heck, many kids are asking questions about religion at this point in their lives. Maybe we should do some bible study for homework as well.
" As gender presentation and acceptance is society-facing , it is appropriate for a societal institution to teach what is acceptable in its society...I reserve for parental discretion is the morality of such things"
This is of course mutually exclusive. "Acceptable" in society is often heavily dependent on morals. So then you cannot have it both ways- if you reserve it to the parents to teach things like "Women should wear head-scarves in public", then you can't say it is the schools place to teach whether or not that is actually appropriate.
And in fact, the reason why people are in an uproar about this is that many people in society do NOT believe it is appropriate for a girl who acts like a tom-boy to call herself a boy and consider getting her breasts removed. This trans stuff is deeply controversial, so the idea that a school should be teaching one way or the other on appropriateness is silly.
But you know this. The only reason you are ok with schools teaching "appropriate" societal presentation is that they are teaching what YOU think is appropriate. If these schools were teaching that girls should wear headscarves and boys should wear magic underwear, you'd be freaking out.
> If these schools were teaching that girls should wear headscarves and boys should wear magic underwear, you’d be freaking out.
What do you have against Sikhs?
Or Mormons?
“Drug use is pertinent at this age- should the school be teaching kids how to roll a joint?”
No, but teaching them that drugs exist and what they do to people when ingested should be. This is the biggest logical disconnect in the cultural conservative position.
No one is talking about teaching kids about sexual activity. It’s about being able to talk about gay and trans people when it is relevant to the subject matter being discussed without worrying that you will have your teaching license yanked and lose your job.
"Kids are probably getting ready for careers- should we teach them shooting, and drill them in marching so that they can get ready for a productive military career?"
Considering that is probably a tiny minority of careers students are considering, that should probably remain in Junior ROTC rather than general education.
"Heck, many kids are asking questions about religion at this point in their lives. Maybe we should do some bible study for homework as well."
Comparative religion, which would highlight the similarities and differences between various world religions, as well as highlighting the elements that are historical and those that are mythical, would be a good thing. But I don't think a typical teacher (especially one who was a devout follower of one of them) could present it in a neutral way. Buble study? No, that should never be part of public education.
"“Acceptable” in society is often heavily dependent on morals."
Not at all. It is acceptable for people to defend the Catholic Church's organized pediphile ring, but It is morally reprehensible. It is acceptable for people to protest abortion, but it is morally wrong. It is acceptable for people to drink light beer, but it is morally terrible. It is acceptable for the Illinois Nazis to get a parade permit, but it is morally reprehensible to be an Illinois Nazi (or any variety of white supremacist).
Acceptable and moral, in a free society, are two totally different things. Acceptable is a legal, liberty-centric, societal concept and moral is an individual, personal, often religious concept.
"many people in society do NOT believe it is appropriate for a girl who acts like a tom-boy to call herself a boy"
In a society that values liberty, those people's opinion is irrelevant to what they choose for themselves. And if those people insist on ignoring their request to refer to them as "he", then those people have to accept the consequences of their social inappropriate behavior. Free speech doesn't mean no consequences if yiu act like a bully and a dick.
"This trans stuff is deeply controversial"
Sure, if you think that your opinion should be forced on strangers through government force, regardless of what their own medical professionals advise. Otherwise, it isn't controversial at all. I guess it depends on whether you think the government should override your decisions about your own medical treatment or not.
"If these schools were teaching that girls should wear headscarves and boys should wear magic underwear, you’d be freaking out."
You can't be stupid enough to believe that schools are teaching kids to be trans or gay, can you?
Nah. Keep most of that shit out of the schools. Clearly the people who work in the government schools can’t be trusted. They’re trying to normalize abnormal things and groom these kids into it. Children in schools aren’t test subjects for Marxist social and sexual experimentation.
Of course the real so,jut is is to destroy the source of the problem in addition to fighting the symptoms. If the democrat party is gone, along with it’s organizational and financial infrastructure, this all goes away.
ridicule is the only weapon which can be used against unintelligible propositions. ideas must be distinct before reason can act upon them --Thomas Jefferson, racist, Nazi, white supremacist, and anti-trans activist.
"Ridicule is the only weapon" is a pretty white, privileged, cis-democratic notion.
Tu es Charlie Hebdo.
Some people doing some things works.
It's pure cope to pretend otherwise.
It occurs to me that he could be using some 18th Century conception of "ridicule" that involves feathers, molten tar, tying people to wooden poles or rails, and beating them with sticks. Or maybe even goading them into a duel and demonstrating that you'd cut their head off without suffering a scratch if they persist, Abe Lincoln-style. Still, "only weapon" seems like you're tying an arm, or several behind your back, unnecessarily.
Public schools are controlled by the state.
Private schools should be able to do whatever they want.
Uh, even at a private school, you can't tell the parents/customers that you're teaching their kids math and just teach them cock-sucking lessons instead.
And if little Susie comes home from private school saying her math teacher taught her how many dicks get sucked in a blow job, they can pull her out of school. That’s how it should be handled: free speech, let the market decide.
But if progressives bitch and whine about their beloved government funded education being government regulated? They should love regulation. They can go suck a Gender Queer ladydick, as graphically illustrated in that wonderful graphic novella.
It a teacher is talking about sucking cocks with little kids, the teacher needs to be physically dealt with by either the authorities or concerned parents.
That's how it should be handled.
You realize that you're pretty much saying that the pedophile in a white van isn't doing anything wrong as long as he actually gives the kids candy, right?
No. The government has a the onus to prevent fraud and violence and ensure people have the ability to secure their possessions. Putting on a dress and saying you're not from Mars or Venus doesn't absolve them of the obligation to enforce laws against theft or rape. And I strongly encourage you to reconsider the full ramifications of your assertion that it does, because you're pretty much begging to be put up against the wall and shot by government goons, SJW vigilantes, or even just anyone whom you thought you had a unspoken "I don't shoot you. You don't shoot me." agreement with.
That’s the democrat goal. Ultimately to openly condition kids to be abused by pedophiles. The d elects have already begun to rehabilitate pedophilia. Referring to them as ‘minor attracted persons’
So question: Reason has been reporting on this topic for quite a while. In the comments a lot of people were going on about how it wasn't really a "Don't say gay" bill and how Reason's reporters were gaslighting people and being dishonest. All of those commenters have now been proven to be wrong. Are you going to leave comments in this article apologizing and admitting how wrong you were?
In retrospect, it was pretty obvious that you were all seriously naïve and/or deluded. Social movements do not stop with one victory, they keep pressing as long as they have the advantage. If a law is worded with any vagueness at all the government and activists will take advantage of it to expand their power. You all seem to understand this when it comes to COVID NPIs and "common sense gun laws." It's only on gay rights issues where you suddenly trust government bureaucrats and crazy activists to show restraint. Why might that be?
haha cry more groomer
Even the new bill doesn't have dont say gay. How were commenters proven wrong?
This is like saying Hitler kept talking about cleansing the population over and over so it proves dissenters were wrong.
What idiocy.
Of course. Sexual identity isn't related to "gay" at all. Why would anyone think that?
For those who are deluded, that is sarcasm, jot a true statement.
It still only pertains to instruction, not discussion. I've been bringing this up periodically in the comments, but Scott keeps referencing an early draft of the bill, not the one that was actually passed. His first article on this on 2/10/2022 was correct at the time, but as of 2/17/2022 it was reworded. Mentioning that you happen to be gay would not violate the law, and his post on 2/10 is not an accurate link for "law" the way he used it in this post.
Scott's interpretation of the response about a supreme court decision is deliberate misrepresentation, which has been a hallmark of his writing on this subject since the beginning.
Do you really think teachers are willing to risk their license and employment in the hope that the wingnuts who love this law won't come after them if they discuss sexual or gender identity?
If you do, you're either naive, a fool, or lying to yourself. They're banning books about the Holocaust because the author wrote a different book that included gay characters. They aren't rational.
Back when the debate was whether or not to have sex ed in public schools, those advocating it did so on the grounds that it would teach kids not to get pregnant or catch VD (aka STDs now). It was couched as a safety issue, which softened opposition to it. As usual, the left can be summed up with a quote from Animal House: "You fucked up. You trusted us."
Government school sex ed curriculum should not include drag queens any more than drivers ed should include drag racing.
If gender is a social construct, then why should a single teacher presume to be the authority to teach it to any child? Much less a controversial concept of gender that society doesn’t necessarily buy into?
Society buys it. You don't. There's a difference.
I have a question for all of those people who keep saying "This is just to stop gay sex from being discussed in school." Are you really that stupidly naïve? Or do you just enjoy getting a rise out of people by being overly literal-minded?
Everyone knows that "sexual orientation" is an extremely broad term that covers any and all issues related to romance, attraction, relationships, and sex. There are some activists who are trying to push the term "romantic orientation" to get rid of this ambiguity, but it hasn't caught on yet. As a result, banning discussion of sexual orientation covers a ludicrous amount of ground. Having kids read any story with a romantic element for a literature class, even if it is totally chaste, would be banned. Even if it isn't a same-sex romance, heterosexuality is a sexual orientation, and sexual orientation can't be discussed. Are teachers allowed to talk to students about their parents or families? To mention the concept of families or marriage at all?
The only reason this law seems reasonable is a combination of bigotry and lying. We have liars who are claiming they're just trying to keep sexual discussion out of school. And we have bigots who consider heterosexuality to be the "default", so they don't realize that banning discussion of sexual orientation basically bans everything, since heterosexuality is a sexual orientation.
The only reason this law seems reasonable is a combination of bigotry and lying.
incredible. my god you people are unbelievable.
They're not people.
And not even really human.
How are you different than any religious zealot?
I suppose evolution is a bigot, then, because heterosexuality is the default for the same reason that having a functioning reproductive system is the default (and less directly, taking in food, water, and oxygen). That's not a moral judgement, just a basic fact. If you don't have offspring, your genes don't get passed on. It doesn't matter if that's because you didn't want to engage in sex that could result in reproduction, or you were infertile, or couldn't find a mate, or were killed before you had a chance. Same result.
This law is a reasonable and restrained response to the actions of activist democrat teachers who have a documented history, often by their own admission, of grooming young schoolchildren. If your fellow travelers could leave the kids alone, none of this would be necessary.
I would prefer to not have these sorts of laws, and just simply expunge democrats and what passes for their thinking from America. But not enough Americans have the stomach for what must happen yet.
“What happened to the claim that this was just about protecting young children?”
Well, when it was aimed at 5 TO 9 YEAR OLD KIDS, you said (lying through your teeth) that “DESANTIS IS A FASCIST WHO WONT LET ANYONE HAVE CONVERSATIONS ABOUT SEX!” despite that being a very clear lie.
So maybe you got what you asked for? I dont much care, you lied and gaslit before, so you deserve everything you get.
Frankly, no state official has any place indoctrinating kids with the stuff in a free society. Christians cant teach their religion to kids in a state school, I dont think your tranny sex delinquent friends should be able to advertise theirs either being that it is substantially more concerning.
Get fucked, scotty
What happened to the claim that this was just about protecting young children?
Still right there next to the claims that it doesn’t actually say the word ‘gay’ (or homosexual), still specifically allows it as topically relevant to sex-specific lessons in health and biology classes, and still says that parental consent should be required either way.
Or did you not actually read the bill itself or any of the rebuttals/criticisms and are just meandering around your own child-molesting-without-parental-consent la-la land?
We need to stop with the parental consent. Because many parents are idiots.
If you don't want your kids learning that sometimes Johnny kisses Jimmy and that's okay, pull them out of school and learn them gooder at home.
We need to stop people like you having any say over what gets taught at school. You are the idiot.
Parents have the ultimate right to teach their kids. If you don't want parents exercising control over how your public education funds are spent, you should move or publicly advocate the ending of public funding of education.
But if you want to continue to support their exercising of parental rights through public funding, that doesn't suddenly strip them of their rights. And thus they have every right to control what their children will learn, and they have every right to petition their teacher, school and state to teach or not teach things in the monopoly that you helped setup.
Your consent has no power over any other parent's consent . Just because you don't want you kid to be taught a subject, doesn't mean you get to dictate to the school and other parents what can and cannot be taught. You are educating your kids by proxy of a state entity; if you don't like that ... keep your kids at home and homeschool them on your own dime by yourself. Nobody is forcing you to use public schools, you can take the time and effort to do it yourself.
Now read this back to yourself.
I have several times, however, I'm not the one trying to change everybody else's view to my own. Should the time come that I disagree with what's being taught, I will take my business elsewhere instead of throwing a hissy-fit until everyone does what I want.
“What happened to the claim that this was just about protecting young children?”
It’s in your headline, Scott…
“Florida Bans Most Public School Instruction on Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity”
You can surely wait until college before teaching them how to suck their first cock, or telling them that they're actually a girl and should cut off their nuts.
"Fist cock"
Typo? Or something i have never heard of?
If i cant learn this in public school how would i ever know?
The mind boggles...
Groomer delenda est.
For someone that's so opposed to sex, you sure are obsessed with it.
There isn't anything obsessive with opposing an ideology that makes one's sexuality a central part of his/her life.
Man, I miss the old days. When I was a schoolkid (80s), grooming meant showing up with your hair washed and combed, your fingernails cleaned and trimmed, and wearing reasonably clean clothes. If someone said that somebody was “a groomer,” they’d likely either get a confused stare or a question about that person feeding and brushing down horses.
Meanwhile the only school-sanctioned instruction touching on sex of any kind was a health class. They didn’t go into any real level of detail, not even about heterosexual sex, and it was also combined with first aid training.
Amazingly, me and most everyone else somehow managed to make it to adulthood and eventually figure out all that we needed to about sex, gender, and related topics. I think the vast majority also learned to read and even write to some basic extent, and possibly even do arithmetic. You know, those subjects that public schools used to at least pretend were priorities.
But dont you see? Public schools are doing so damned well teaching essential, useful, and non controversial topics why shouldnt they expand into the topics that no normal parents want taught?
I worked part-time from my apartment and earned $30,030. After losing my previous business, I quickly became exhausted. Fortunately, I discovered this jobs online, and as a result, I was able to start earning money from home right away. Anyone can accomplish this elite career and increase their internet income by….
After reading this article………………….>>> http://www.jobsrevenue.com
Schools are doing such a great job teaching the basics, what could go wrong teaching this subject?
https://twitter.com/MrAndyNgo/status/1648853926467325952?t=jr5ikjv088o8vxSYN3rxRg&s=19
At a screening of @MattWalshBlog’s “What is a Woman” at the @uiowa, #Antifa & far-left extremists tried causing attendees to fall down the stairs by dumping marbles all over the ground.
#Antifa announced a direct action to target attendees of @MattWalshBlog’s speaking event at @uiowa.
[Link]
There was an explosion at an event today.
Seems like your average college student wanting to attend the lecture wouldn't have a problem with it and that this is more of a trap specifically designed to hurt people with chromosomal and developmental abnormalities.
I can't understand why Ron Bailey, ENB, Tuccille, Sullum, Britschgi, Boehm, KMW, Welch, Gillespie, Soave, etc. (to say nothing of the rest of Cato or Volokh) bother to be or even tolerate being associated with Shackford or the organizations that give him platform.
It would be like Jo Jorgensen or Gary Johnson just accepting that, if they're going to get the LP's nod to run for office, they have to have James Weeks as their running mate and he gets to dance nearly naked in public at least every other week. Even at the highest Koch-sucking level, I can't imagine having a trillion dollars, Scott collecting his paycheck and dragging down all the other messages Reason/Cato/Volokh advocates, and just thinking "That was money well spent!"
The Florida Board of Education voted today to approve proposed regulations that will prohibit teachers from providing instruction on sexual orientation and gender identity in most classes in any grade of its public schools
Excellent.
What happened to the claim that this was just about protecting young children?
It's going great. Somehow schools survived for decades without having instruction in "sexual orientation and gender identity" aka "grooming."
It’s going great.
Everywhere. China never accepted it. Russia actively oppressed it. The ME and huge swaths of Africa never even listened to it, Europe is pretty actively back pedaling away from it and uttering vexations at the Americans who advocated it.
As I indicated above, it really does look like it's just a hill that Shackford et al. are trying to murder libertarianism on.
Shackford should just come out of the closet and get it over with.
The Marxist closet, that is.
But hey, why would he? Not like he's lonely in there.
If you have Commie-Education......
Expect the Kings and Queens to instruct it....
It's not hard at all to understand; just wash away all the propaganda.
A couple of points:
1) It's a little disconcerting when your main source is the Miami Herald, hardly a beacon of journalism.
2) The law, and the school board's "ruling", "in my opinion", is written, is to draw a line between "instruction", which is debating and discussing a topic of sexuality, versus pushing a point of view or agenda.
Check the record and you will see parents demanding an answer to '...I thought you were a common sense libertarian. Why did you stop at 3rd grade? ...' You'd think a libertarian site would be overjoyed that government is listening to the people, expanding and protecting the rights of parents, instead of dictating to them.
Why are discussions about gender identity in schools in the first place? You want to teach your kids there are 197 different genders? No one is stopping you. DeSantis is only saying you can’t teach this to my kids against my will. To me, transgenderism is a religious cult without a supreme being. Teaching it is no different from teaching catechism. Neither should be in public schools.
It is not in the public interest to provide a platform to any lifestyle or life choice that does not benefit the state. It would not benefit the state to teach about non-traditional lifestyles any more than it would benefit the state to teach how to use drugs. Neither promotes a stable populace to be employed, pay taxes and procreate. At the end of the day, that is all government should care about. They should stay out of everything else.
The most interesting reveal here is that Shackford describes grooming as "instruction" proving once again that activists can't be trusted to distinguish between legitimate and illegitimate activity. This is exactly why we need to prevent these people from exercising their own judgement in classrooms.
Progressives have run riot in public schools for a generation. Conservatives say you cannot groom kids. Progressives lose their minds. Why a libertarian would be upset is beyond me.
I've yet to see a convincing argument that this has anything to do with grooming kids, not that anyone actually cares about a rational debate. Instead it's become a proxy culture war fight with irrational exaggerated claims being used by most figureheads in the argument trying to emotionally sway people to their side so they have greater influence to push additional agenda items they're not willing to state up front. So pretty much like everything in politics these days.
That's probably because you're so invested in this "grooming" bullshit that nothing could possibly convince you otherwise.
Jules said it was Marcellus' dirty laundry.
wonder if Brett peeked.
It was a device. A plot device.
I'm seriously disappointed by the number of ass-raping state agents getting disemboweled and force-fed shotgun blasts in our McGuffin-plot-device nexus.
Great article, Mike. I appreciate your work, I'm now creating over $35,200 dollars each month simply by doing a simple job online! I do know You currently making a lot of greenbacks online from $28,200 dollars, its simple online operating jobs.
.
.
Just open the link———————————————–>>> http://Www.JobsRevenue.Com
I get paid over $400 per hour working from home with 2 kids at home. I never thought I'd be able to do it but my best friend earns over 13455 a month doing this and she convinced me to try. The potential with this is endless. Heres what I've been doing...........
.
.
For more detail visit the given link..........>>> https://Www.Coins71.Com
I cannot help people who willfully ignore all of the videos that have been posted online that show what these kids have been exposed to along with the teachers themselves confessing their reason's for doing it. Everyone who wants to understand what has been happening in public schools and why it is necessary to put a stop to it has ample information available to them.
The. You’re willfully ignorant and obtuse. There’s all kinds of video evidence and news accounts (real news, not form the democrat run propaganda networks). It’s very real and increasingly pervasive.
Why else would kindergarten teachers be complaining about not being able to discuss homosexuality with 5 year old children?
Probably because you're a cock sucking pedophile who supports the regime.
You've probably seen thousands of convincing arguments, but as the conflict with evangelizing about your favorite paraphilias and fetishes to children, you've chosen to ignore them.
They're normalizing wacky shit that at the very least is the purview of their parents, if that is what they think their kids need to know. That's grooming 101.
You have to understand that "grooming" has joined words such as fascism and socialism that have been stripped of any actual meaning. They aren't meant to communicate, they're just the verbal equivalent of a stick to beat people over the head. This is a fairly old tactic that has been fully adopted by both the left and right, but it's especially depressing to see it embraced by people who actually claim to be libertarians. (I say "claim", because I'm not convinced they'd recognize actual libertarian philosophy if it walked up and bit them on the ass.) Once words stop meaning things, communication becomes impossible. We're not talking or debating, just making noises at each other.
To the gay-haters, any merest mention of gay or trans people is "grooming". They continue to deny that the agenda is to forcibly stuff queer people back into the closet, even as each new step makes that clearer. They've lost the fight and they know it, but they're determined to fling as much shit as possible on their way down.
Yes, "all lf the videos" and "the teachers themselves confessing". What exactly do you think these "all the vodeos" show? What are these teachers confessing?
"why it is necessary to put a stop to it"
We all know why you want to put a stop to it. You hate it, therefore you want to ban it. There is no rational reason. It's just anger and hate.
There's a reason why the worst K-12 educations in America are in the Southeastern states. When education policy is directed by cultural conservatives, ignorant kids are the result.
Florida will provide spirited competition with Alabama, Mississippi, and Arkansas over the next decade for champion in the "Perennial Creator of Ignorant Kids" category.
Well, if The Gateway Pundit and Alex Jones say so, it must be true.
Ignorance seems to be your stock in trade, along with questionable news sources.
Reminder. To leftists videos are fake even when posted by the leftists admitting things.
I’ve seen these videos first hand. You can easily find them on Libs of TikTok. Probably along with whatever sick shit you’ve posted online.
And really, an ignorant subnormal Marxist shill like you shouldn’t be trying to call anyone ignorant. Face it, you’re stupid, and weak. That’s why you’re a leftist. Now fuck off. It’s not like what passes for your thoughts have any value.
The worst? Take a look at Chicago. And I would tell you to look at what these teachers are saying, but we all know that you aren’t interested and don’t give a shit about what happens to any kids. You are 100% in the tank for whatever mutilation and perversion these sick fucks want to inflict on children.
Based on pro pedophile democrats like him, why does anyone hesitate at the idea that the democrats have to go?
And what things, specifically, are they admitting to? Or, even better, where would I find the "admission"?
He is a bitter old Klinger.
Sure, I'll check out it your "evidence". Where do I find it?
Libs of TikTok? Seriously? Why don't you tell me that the KKK publishes honest things about black people and Jews?
"Marxist shill"
You obviously don't know what "Marxist" means if you think that I, as a full-throated advocate of capitalism, am a Marxist.
I've seen plenty of arguments, here if nowhere else. They aren't even rational, let alone convincing. If you have to count on untrue, inaccurate, and polemical accusations while ignoring clear facts that dispute your positions, you are clearly unwilling to accept things that don't conform to your prior beliefs.
You know she just reposts their videos with commentary right?
He knows. That's why he has to slander her by invoking a comparison to the Klan.
Up above he demands evidence. When pointed to evidence he summarily dismisses it. I believe he is one of the more obnoxious "I'm not a Marxist" lawyers who constantly regurgitate Marxist rhetoric over at Volokh.
I know her schtick. It's not the unedited, in-context reporting you pretend it is. She has an agenda and her content plays to the biases of her audience.
Ok groomer
Using "groomer" is proof that you aren't a serious or reasonable person.
The best part is cultural conservatives think it resonates with the middle of the electorate. Like abortion bans. You'll be crying about stolen elections again in 2024 if you don't get some perspective and understand how radical calling people "groomers" is.
It's American history, not Confederate history. The Confederacy was a four year crime by Southern Americans against the rest of America. It doesn't get to claim a separate history because it got a half a million Americans killed.