Welcome to Thunderdome

GORDON wrote: ↑Tue Mar 29, 2022 10:18 am Perhaps a child can be aware they have two fathers, or two mothers, or a mother and a father.... and not have to be aware of how the genitals are fitting together?

I think this is how I interpret the law, and thus, don't have a big issue with it.

If a student is brought into class by their two mommies and another student says, "You have two mommies"? The teacher can just say, "Yes, not all families are the same. Some people have two mommies, some two daddies, some just a mommy or a daddy, some live with their grandparents, and so on. Not every family has a mommy and daddy."

End of discussion. That's all the little kids need. They don't need to hear about how babies are made or how the mommies use a strap on because scissoring is just for porn or anything else.

Sex education certainly doesn't need to be taught to K-3 and never has been. That's why I think the law is dumb, but also think the opposition is dumb.

GORDON wrote: ↑Tue Mar 29, 2022 10:18 am Perhaps a child can be aware they have two fathers, or two mothers, or a mother and a father.... and not have to be aware of how the genitals are fitting together?

Not according to this policy.

Leisher wrote: ↑Tue Mar 29, 2022 10:35 am he teacher can just say, "Yes, not all families are the same. Some people have two mommies, some two daddies, some just a mommy or a daddy, some live with their grandparents, and so on. Not every family has a mommy and daddy."

Not according to the law.

TheCatt wrote: ↑Tue Mar 29, 2022 10:39 am

Leisher wrote: ↑Tue Mar 29, 2022 10:35 am he teacher can just say, "Yes, not all families are the same. Some people have two mommies, some two daddies, some just a mommy or a daddy, some live with their grandparents, and so on. Not every family has a mommy and daddy."

Not according to the law.

Again, the way I interpret it, you are wrong. Despite the propaganda of "Don't Say Gay", the key word in the law is "instruction". Instruction means prepared teaching. It has to be in the lesson plan. Making a simple comment without too much detail to appease a young child's curiosity is not "instruction".

Yes, I realize not everyone will see it that way.

And again, this is why I don't like the law. It's far too vague. I get wanting to prevent grooming and indoctrination because there are a LOT of batshit insane teachers out there who are openly anti-R, anti-hetero, anti-free speech, anti-white, anti-black, and so on and have no problem trying to get their students to believe the same. Seriously, if you're ok with teachers preaching (not discussing, that's a different thing) their own agenda and politics to students, you absolutely are part of the problem. However, if you're going to pass a law like this, the language needs to be TIGHT.

At a Senate hearing on Feb. 8, Republican Sen. Travis Hutson gave the example of a math problem that includes the details that “Sally has two moms or Johnny has two dads.” ​​Republican State Sen. Dennis Baxley, who sponsors the bill in the Senate, said that is “exactly” what the bill aims to prevent.

So Sally also cannot have a mom and a dad.

Also sounds like they cannot do "family pictures" or anything else. I vaguely remember doing a family tree as a kid, and my kids doing the same. Per Sen Baxley, that is no longer allowed.

TheCatt wrote: ↑Tue Mar 29, 2022 11:16 am At a Senate hearing on Feb. 8, Republican Sen. Travis Hutson gave the example of a math problem that includes the details that “Sally has two moms or Johnny has two dads.” ​​Republican State Sen. Dennis Baxley, who sponsors the bill in the Senate, said that is “exactly” what the bill aims to prevent.

I'm not sure if you meant this as a counter to what I was saying? Because it doesn't. The words I bolded clearly indicate that would be within instruction.

Leisher wrote: ↑Tue Mar 29, 2022 11:44 am

TheCatt wrote: ↑Tue Mar 29, 2022 11:16 am At a Senate hearing on Feb. 8, Republican Sen. Travis Hutson gave the example of a math problem that includes the details that “Sally has two moms or Johnny has two dads.” ​​Republican State Sen. Dennis Baxley, who sponsors the bill in the Senate, said that is “exactly” what the bill aims to prevent.

I'm not sure if you meant this as a counter to what I was saying? Because it doesn't. The words I bolded clearly indicate that would be within instruction.

There's also something about "discussion" in there as well, good luck with that.

Which is why I said it's too vague and why I'm against the bill.

What point are you debating me on?

Leisher wrote: ↑Tue Mar 29, 2022 12:54 pm Which is why I said it's too vague and why I'm against the bill.

What point are you debating me on?

I don't know. You seemed to think it was OK.

Sorry, probably my fault.

I started off genuinely asking why this bill was getting so much hate, and wondering if it was simply like how the NRA has to fight every possible legislation. I ripped the MSM for running with a derogatory name for the bill, although I saw a CNN article about it today and they specifically pointed out it was not the actual name, so give credit where it's due.

Anyway, I was curious about the language because the concept of not grooming or indoctrinating children with specific beliefs is something I can support. I wouldn't send my kids to a school run by the KKK or Nazis, but I also wouldn't send them to one run by Antifa or the Black Panthers. However, as you pointed out after the K-3 thing, the language gets too vague. That's where I oppose this bill. You can't write a bill that says, for example, "People aren't allowed to say mean things" and then not expect chaos when it's time to enforce it.

I also strongly hung onto the word "instruction" because I support that and understand they're trying to draw a line saying, "Just don't teach our kids your beliefs". Fine. I think any parent can get on board with that, and if anyone disagrees, see my line about the KKK and Antifa above then picture sending your kid to the one you mostly strongly disagree with. However, I also strongly encourage discussion in a classroom.

Point being, if the teacher has a frank and open discussion, without interjecting personal biases, that comes up naturally thanks to Sally's moms dropping her off, GREAT! However, if the teacher's lesson plan for the day is "Why gay people are a plague (or superior, whichever side you're on)", that's not great.

Just saw this on the Twitters, so maybe they heard me:

Leisher wrote: ↑Wed Mar 30, 2022 10:52 am Just saw this on the Twitters, so maybe they heard me:

That seems like an improvement.

I was hitting the MSM this morning, because I heard Ukraine hit a tank farm in russia. Hit CNN, nothing. But then I saw this on FoxNews, and it caught my eye:

A thing about Disney taking political stands about things, and is getting threatened to lose their special government status in Florida:

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/disney ... ward-lurch

But what was interesting was this:

Despite critics branding it a "Don't Say Gay" bill, H.B. 1557 does not ban the word "gay" in school settings. Neither does it ban casual discussions of topics relating to sexual orientation and gender identity in the classroom. It does not require schools to notify parents if their child identifies as gay or transgender.

Besides on here, this is the first place I've seen it reported that the critics of that bill are exaggerating/lying about it.

GORDON wrote: ↑Fri Apr 01, 2022 6:29 am Besides on here, this is the first place I've seen it reported that the critics of that bill are exaggerating/lying about it.

I'm not for this particular bill because it shouldn't be necessary, although the corrected language discussed above does make it a lot better. The amount of people I see on Twitter bashing this bill for things that the bill doesn't say is extremely frustrating.

It proves that misinformation is absolutely winning within this country and I don't think either party gives two fucks about that. The more misinformed their base is, the better for them I guess.

People want to add Pedophile and Bestiality to the letters to make it also accepted...

People should just shut up.

I agree, but if pedos and animal fuckers were trying to associate themselves with my group, I'd be pretty vocal about stopping them.

It's Pride Month, so corps will be pandering to them in June:



Most companies that change their logo for a themed month do this..

Pride month ends in 45 minutes

They're still confused as to why their sales were tanking when all of their writers were woke AF.