Florida student warned about saying 'gay' in speech finds workaround

kind of like the inaccurate term "don't say gay"

 

Yes it is stifling education. Because of the vague wording of the bill puts teachers and schools at risk for answering basic questions about the world students live in. Its a law that didn't need to be.

As to firearms, that *is* on the agenda, my 6 yo had his first lockdown drill on Monday.

EDIT: Thanks for the heads up on Rule 4.

 

You keep avoiding and being dishonest. Its all you know.

 

I never said that. You cannot address what I actually said, so you change it and argue with yourself. Reminds me of that cat video where she hisses at her own reflection.

Gay people tell me that they always knew they were gay, so they were born that way. White people were born white. If someone has a sense of pride in what they are born with, do you feel that a graduation ceremony should be a forum for such demonstrations of pride?

If the answer is "yes", then you either have another inconstant position or you support white pride demonstrations at graduation ceremonies.

 

While education has to progress to address a changing world, 'age appropriate' hasn't changed. We had what was termed' mystery movies' regarding bodily functions: menstruation for girls, erections for boys. Separately, of course. Parental permission was required, and we saw them around age 10. That's called 'age appropriate'. Additional questions and the kids were directed to their parents.

That is the biggest change in education through the years, the removal of the parental guidance and abdication to teachers. And when the teachers are told the parents want that control back, the education system balks.

 

Sorry, no. You disregard the content of that post to spew more LW garbage about "saying gay".

 

Gay people show they are proud to be gay, because for centuries it has been viewed as something to be ashamed of. White people have NEVER been shamed for being white. Lately white supremacists like Tucker Carlson have very recently fabricated some "conspiracy" that says that they are. But that is obvious white supremacist propaganda.

The fact that I even had to explain this to you tells me that my original interpretation was likely accurate.

 

life must not be bad in Florida if the biggest problem is finding work around a to a WORD

sheesh!

 

That seems like a pretty good way to do it, the mystery novels. My biggest concern goes back to how things are handled and why this needs to be a law in the first place. If its evenly applied to heteronormative behaviors and those outside of that description than I think a lot of my concern would be assuaged, but I still think the law is a posturing waste of ink.

 

Oops, you didn't do your research again. You deflected a simple question with a false statement. The question that caused your fragile position to crumble was:

If someone has a sense of pride in what they are born with, do you feel that a graduation ceremony should be a forum for such demonstrations of pride?

 

The basic premise is that the school cannot address issues without the parent being notified. Why that needs to be addressed, is usually because someone not the parent, took it upon themselves to provide guidance to a student that the parent would/could object to. It's not just about LGBT+ issues, it could be pregnancy, STD, physical ailments, psychological issues, etc. The only way around this, I would think, is if the direct threat emanates from the parent (abuse). Here, read it for yourself.

_h1557er.docx (flsenate.gov)

 

But denying them the right to free speech is OK ?

 

Actually, all Carlson did was point out an long standing tenet of the Democratic party "Demographics is Destiny" Since the Obama administration they've been talking about the fading white majority and the surge in black and hispanic voters.

The fact that you know far less than you think you do - even with your alleged voluminous research - is becoming more and more obvious.

 

I find it fascinating that in conservatives minds not being ashamed of being yourself is a more difficult discussion than active shooter drills where someone is wanting to kill them.


Gotta give the alt-right wing pro-forced birth crowd one thing, that have their priorities right. I guess when you believe in religious fairy tales it is easy to convince yourself of anything no matter how corrupt, perverse and immoral.

 

That's what I said: the white supremacist "Replacement Conspiracy Theory"

Who else would give a CRAP about "the fading white majority" other those who believe that "white" is superior, other than... white supremacists! It's the very definition of the term "white supremacist"

 

Wrong. What part of "standing tenet" confuses you?

Seriously? It's not a difficult item. With fewer and fewer white votes and growing numbers of blacks and hispanics - who tend to favor Dems, this is not a difficult concept. LBJ is reputed to have said upon passage of Great Society legislation "with this we'll control the <n-word> for a hundred years.

 

If it is fitting then cite the part where it says "Gay" and prohibts the use of the work in a school or anywhere else....................

And again who gets to make up the nickname for a bill and who did no this one?

And I asked you to go back to the thread where you have an open question awaiting, why the dodging I even gave you the link to it.

 

THAT theory says a Jewish cabal is behind it.............quote Carlson talking about a Jewish cabal behind it.

But let's hear what the Dems have to say about it



https://grabien.com/file.php?id=1538865

 

Nickname: a familiar name given to a person or thing instead of or as well as the real name.

Affordable Care Act = Obamacare
Florida Bill = Don't say Gay Bill

The topic of the thread is a school principal who told students that word "Gay" is forbidden. The bill did that, because that is how people understand it, and its requirements. Schools are not risking the use of the word out of fear of getting dragged to court and having their careers destroys. It was a censorship bill from the start.

This is what the intentionally vague wording in bill was designed to do. Get used to it.

We The People did it.

YOU GO BACK!!!!

Some people.........

 

If it is fitting FOR THE BILL then cite the part where THE BILL says "Gay" and prohibits the use of the work in a school or anywhere else....................

And you dodging and dancing on the border noted again.

 

Unreal.

Have a nice day and better luck at comprehension next time.

 

'fading white majority' has nothing to do with 'white supremacy'.

Does the reduction in a particular species (animal context, such as polar bears), and the concern for it surviving mean they believe the species is 'superior'? No, it doesn't. Just because you attempt to conflate the two subjects as you often do, doesn't mean the two terms mean the same thing.

While some may support the Georgia Guidestones, the general idea is there has been a larger 'White' (misnomer) populations since such a thing was on someone's observation radar. Minorities are called that for a reason, they are smaller in population numbers then 'Whites'. The designation has nothing to do with 'supremacy' as you attempt to depict it. It has to do with population numbers, not some skewed idea of painting a negative connotation on it.

 

So what you're saying is that politicians use demographics to craft their message ?

COLOR ME SHOCKED !!!!!

You don't think republicans are crafting their message to the white majority today ?

 

They only favor Dems because Republicans couldn't care less about their problems. And you prove this here. If Republicans governed ALSO for them, and not just for white folk, they would certainly draw in more black and Hispanic vote. Dems, on the other hand, govern for EVERYBODY. Except, of course, for white supremacists...

 

Obsessing about a "fading white majority" IS white supremacy.

Oh God! You actually believe that blacks and Hispanics are a different "species"?

Hopeless!