GeorgiAg said:

---

No Spin Ag said:

---

Marcus Brutus said:

---

Don't talk to kids about your ****ing personal life. PERIOD! Dont mention your godless lifestyle or your husband. PERIOD!

Is that specific enough for you, Lib?

Tired of the groomers and their supporters arguing in favor of grooming.

---

Don't talk about God as well?

---

Excellent point. In state schools classroom instruction of God/religion is forbidden. But there was casual or tangential mention of it all the time. It's not that hard. Just don't have it as course curriculum, pass out materials on it, or teach it.

---

that's my entire point. you shouldn't teach your religion (unless you are a religion teacher) but nothing wrong with offhand comments about the church you go to. Same logic as an LGBT teacher making tangential mention of a family member.

" Uhh, many of these kids have a damn good reason for not wanting their parents to know and risk being thrown out of the house for it."

We are talking about children up through 3rd grade. No one is kicking their 8 year old out to the curb.

Don't care what someone does in their home or bedroom. Just don't make it my business. Your rights end at the tip of my nose (and my kids).

larry culpepper said:

---

GeorgiAg said:

---

No Spin Ag said:

---

Marcus Brutus said:

---

Don't talk to kids about your ****ing personal life. PERIOD! Dont mention your godless lifestyle or your husband. PERIOD!

Is that specific enough for you, Lib?

Tired of the groomers and their supporters arguing in favor of grooming.

---

Don't talk about God as well?

---

Excellent point. In state schools classroom instruction of God/religion is forbidden. But there was casual or tangential mention of it all the time. It's not that hard. Just don't have it as course curriculum, pass out materials on it, or teach it.

---

that's my entire point. you shouldn't teach your religion (unless you are a religion teacher) but nothing wrong with offhand comments about the church you go to. Same logic as an LGBT teacher making tangential mention of a family member.

---

The partners in my law firm are pretty religious. One's had a bible study every Wednesday since 1992 that is attended by several dozen men. We have a gay associate. He talks about his weekend with his "friend" or "roomate." Easy peasy.

larry culpepper said:

---

am I? what is actually going on then? Are gay teachers talking to 7 year olds about all the gay sex they have? Tell me more, with some evidence.

---

You first. Show me the K-3 grade kids who are being thrown out of the house.

GeorgiAg said:

---

No Spin Ag said:

---

Marcus Brutus said:

---

Don't talk to kids about your ****ing personal life. PERIOD! Dont mention your godless lifestyle or your husband. PERIOD!

Is that specific enough for you, Lib?

Tired of the groomers and their supporters arguing in favor of grooming.

---

Don't talk about God as well?

---

Excellent point. In state schools classroom instruction of God/religion is forbidden. But there was casual or tangential mention of it all the time. It's not that hard. Just don't have it as course curriculum, pass out materials on it, or teach it.

---

Makes sense.

Why do y'all even bother...

So where do you draw the line of what teachers should and shouldn't tell their parents?

Rex Racer said:

---

larry culpepper said:

---

am I? what is actually going on then? Are gay teachers talking to 7 year olds about all the gay sex they have? Tell me more, with some evidence.

---

You first. Show me the K-3 grade kids who are being thrown out of the house.

---

This proves you haven't read the bill. Larry is talking about school provided counseling and the rule applies K-12.

stuff that is directly school-related or related to behavior in school. also bullying.

larry culpepper said:

---

GeorgiAg said:

---

So I actually read the bill. It just clarifies parental rights on physical mental health issues. This is the paragraph all the hubbub is over:

Quote:

---

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.

---

That's it. The LGTBQ crowd is nuts. Why is this even controversial?
Who the hell would disagree with that and why does it even need to be codified? Here's the full bill if you want to read it.

https://www.miamiherald.com/latest-news/article259859150.ece/BINARY/HB%201557%20education%20bill.pdf#storylink=readmore_inline

---

So here are my issues. It's vaguely written. What is considered "age appropriate?" I still doubt that ACTUAL sex ed is being taught to 2nd graders. So in that sense the bill comes off as well-intentioned. But what is off limits exactly? What if there is a gay teacher? It's not like he's going to give them TMI about his relationship. But more so something like "my husband and I visited Gettysburg last year and took these pictures." Is that "inappropriate" because he simply alluded to being gay married?

or what about a kid in a social studies class asking about same sex marriage? what can the teacher say and not say? So many parents are Karens to the extreme and raise hell over anything they dont like in the classroom, no matter how innocuous.

It's also written to forbid schools from restricting teachers from notifying parents about a student's "well-being" or whatever. Clearly that alluded to LGBT kids. Uhh, many of these kids have a damn good reason for not wanting their parents to know and risk being thrown out of the house for it.

Then the whole private right of action thing. Parents suing schools for any purported violation and getting attorney's fees if they win? Millions of taxpayer dollars will be used to defend these suits.

There are a lot of problems with this law, and anyone who says we're all pedophiles just for pointing this stuff out, is an *******.

---

There is nothing vague about it. Age appropriate is what the state board of education deems appropriate for each grade level. If you are going outside of those guidelines then you are violating the law.

Yes there are gay teachers who are upset out there that they can't share their personal life with their kids. LibsofTikTok has shown this multiple times.

If the school has a legitimate fear about a student's home life you know there is this thing called CPS, right? There is a system in place to help protect children from abuse. It isn't the school's job to play that role.

Kid says they are going to runaway. Not related to school so don't tell the parents? Kid says she wants help getting an abortion, tell the parents?

Based off what you said the answer is no.

larry culpepper said:

---

So here are my issues. It's vaguely written. What is considered "age appropriate?" I still doubt that ACTUAL sex ed is being taught to 2nd graders. So in that sense the bill comes off as well-intentioned. But what is off limits exactly? What if there is a gay teacher? It's not like he's going to give them TMI about his relationship. But more so something like "my husband and I visited Gettysburg last year and took these pictures." Is that "inappropriate" because he simply alluded to being gay married?

The bill clearly says they aren't allowed to provide instruction on sexual orientation or gender identity. It says nothing about not being able to say they have a husband/wife that is the same sex as them. There should be no further discussion than that. Same goes for heterosexuals. If a teacher feels the need to mention their partner to their children and the children ask questions about sexuality, you stop the conversation. It is not appropriate.

If a teacher feels like they are going to have a hard time stopping conversation about their personal lives by telling kids it's off limits then don't bring up your family/home life at all. It was not uncommon for us to know absolutely nothing about the personal lives of our teachers growing up. Or even their first names. Especially at that age.

or what about a kid in a social studies class asking about same sex marriage? what can the teacher say and not say? So many parents are Karens to the extreme and raise hell over anything they dont like in the classroom, no matter how innocuous.

In K-3? You tell them that is not appropriate discussion. They can ask their parents when they get home. End of story.

It's also written to forbid schools from restricting teachers from notifying parents about a student's "well-being" or whatever. Clearly that alluded to LGBT kids. Uhh, many of these kids have a damn good reason for not wanting their parents to know and risk being thrown out of the house for it.

1. If you read the bill it says that it -- "does not prohibit a school district from adopting procedures that permit school personnel to withhold such information from a parent if a reasonably prudent person would believe that disclosure would result in abuse, abandonment, or neglect,"

2. Again, these are grades K-3. These kids are not gay, lesbian, etc. because they are not developed and have no sexual preferences. Any attempt to treat them otherwise is sexualizing children and is disgusting.

Then the whole private right of action thing. Parents suing schools for any purported violation and getting attorney's fees if they win? Millions of taxpayer dollars will be used to defend these suits.

There are a lot of problems with this law, and anyone who says we're all pedophiles just for pointing this stuff out, is an *******.

The main problem with this law is that we have to adult teachers they shouldn't be discussing sex or sexual preferences with 5-8 year old kids. I don't care if you are gay, straight, or any of the other 100 things people want to "identify" as you don't need to discuss it with 5-8 year old kids. Period.

---

Sarge 91 said:

---

GeorgiAg said:

---

No Spin Ag said:

---

Marcus Brutus said:

---

Don't talk to kids about your ****ing personal life. PERIOD! Dont mention your godless lifestyle or your husband. PERIOD!

Is that specific enough for you, Lib?

Tired of the groomers and their supporters arguing in favor of grooming.

---

Don't talk about God as well?

---

Excellent point. In state schools classroom instruction of God/religion is forbidden. But there was casual or tangential mention of it all the time. It's not that hard. Just don't have it as course curriculum, pass out materials on it, or teach it.

---

Maybe that's true in Georgia, but not in Texas.

https://www.tasb.org/services/legal-services/tasb-school-law-esource/community/religion-in-the-public-schools/documents/teaching-about-religion-in-public-schools.pdf

---

That policy makes sense. Hard to talk about the Inquisition without mentioning religion. The establishment of religion is forbidden.

Let Arnold demonstrate how it's done:





Easy. Change the subject and move on.

They've lied about it from the beginning because they again want to play victim. There is nothing in there about "don't say gay" and Disney perpetuated that lie by saying it was the don't say gay bill.

And their gullible base believes it.

UniqueIGN said:

---

Rex Racer said:

---

larry culpepper said:

---

am I? what is actually going on then? Are gay teachers talking to 7 year olds about all the gay sex they have? Tell me more, with some evidence.

---

You first. Show me the K-3 grade kids who are being thrown out of the house.

---

This proves you haven't read the bill. Larry is talking about school provided counseling and the rule applies K-12.

---

Then why is he talking about 7 year olds?

It doesn't say a teacher can't mention a family member or same sex spouse. They just couldn't explain that the reason their spouse was the same sex as them is because they're gay. The same applies to teachers who aren't gay.

I agree kids that age shouldnt be taught about sex/gender identity. So let's just get that out of the way. But keep in mind the "age appropriate" language applies to ANY grade. And that's where the vagueness comes into play, and I anticipate it causing problems.

larry culpepper said:

---

I agree kids that age shouldnt be taught about sex/gender identity. So let's just get that out of the way. But keep in mind the "age appropriate" language applies to ANY grade. And that's where the vagueness comes into play, and I anticipate it causing problems.

---

Keep pretending like the issue you have is the "vagueness." Any reasonable person knows exactly what the bill means. Any gray area is manufactured by obtuse libs that want to pretend that all sexual ideologies are equal so there must be an equal right to discuss them all in a school setting.

Age appropriate is very easy to interpret. And if it's not, just don't talk about it at all. Pretty simple.

Kvetch said:

---

larry culpepper said:

---

I agree kids that age shouldnt be taught about sex/gender identity. So let's just get that out of the way. But keep in mind the "age appropriate" language applies to ANY grade. And that's where the vagueness comes into play, and I anticipate it causing problems.

---

Keep pretending like the issue you have is the "vagueness." Any reasonable person knows exactly what the bill means. Any gray area is manufactured by obtuse libs that want to pretend that all sexual ideologies are equal so there must be an equal right to discuss them all in a school setting.

Age appropriate is very easy to interpret. And if it's not, just don't talk about it at all. Pretty simple.

---

Agree. A senior class can talk about homosexuality and more sensitive issues, for sure. Hell, there were gay kids at my H.S. in the 80s.

sure, that's fair. and then one high school student's parent has an issue with that and sues the school district for discussing the 2015 Obergefell decision in a civics class, arguing that any discussion of this topic before college isnt appropriate. then they spend a bunch of money defending it.

now do you see where my issues with the law come from? this new trend of creating private rights of action is not a good thing.

annie88 said:

---

They've lied about it from the beginning because they again want to play victim. There is nothing in there about "don't say gay" and Disney perpetuated that lie by saying it was the don't say gay bill.

And they're gullible base believes it.

---

Saul Alinsky Rules for Radicals:

"Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it."

Target: Ron DeSantis
Polarize it: Call the bill "Don't say gay"
Personalize it: Call DeSantis a homophobe and transphobe
Freeze it: This part didn't really work as the bill passed but they're hoping it will freeze Ron out of running for higher office.

larry culpepper said:

---

sure, that's fair. and then one high school student's parent has an issue with that and sues the school district for discussing the 2015 Obergefell decision in a civics class, arguing that any discussion of this topic before college isnt appropriate. then they spend a bunch of money defending it.

now do you see where my issues with the law come from? this new trend of creating private rights of action is not a good thing.

---

And they'll lose because discussing the facts of a case is not teaching sexual ideology. Not to mention, civics isn't taught til high school so the age appropriate factor still applies.

You're just clinging to any reason why parents shouldn't have a say in their childrens education. Schools are not a free marketplace of ideas, and parents have every right to tell perv teachers that they can't teach their school children about their personal sexual ideologies.

Guessing there will be less money spent defending this than dealing with some stupid special education laws. Guessing you never spoke out against that.

Satellite of Love said:

---

larry culpepper said:

---

GeorgiAg said:

---

So I actually read the bill. It just clarifies parental rights on physical mental health issues. This is the paragraph all the hubbub is over:

Quote:

---

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.

---

That's it. The LGTBQ crowd is nuts. Why is this even controversial?
Who the hell would disagree with that and why does it even need to be codified? Here's the full bill if you want to read it.

https://www.miamiherald.com/latest-news/article259859150.ece/BINARY/HB%201557%20education%20bill.pdf#storylink=readmore_inline

---

So here are my issues. It's vaguely written. What is considered "age appropriate?" I still doubt that ACTUAL sex ed is being taught to 2nd graders. So in that sense the bill comes off as well-intentioned. But what is off limits exactly? What if there is a gay teacher? It's not like he's going to give them TMI about his relationship. But more so something like "my husband and I visited Gettysburg last year and took these pictures." Is that "inappropriate" because he simply alluded to being gay married?

or what about a kid in a social studies class asking about same sex marriage? what can the teacher say and not say? So many parents are Karens to the extreme and raise hell over anything they dont like in the classroom, no matter how innocuous.

It's also written to forbid schools from restricting teachers from notifying parents about a student's "well-being" or whatever. Clearly that alluded to LGBT kids. Uhh, many of these kids have a damn good reason for not wanting their parents to know and risk being thrown out of the house for it.

Then the whole private right of action thing. Parents suing schools for any purported violation and getting attorney's fees if they win? Millions of taxpayer dollars will be used to defend these suits.

There are a lot of problems with this law, and anyone who says we're all pedophiles just for pointing this stuff out, is an *******.

---

There is nothing vague about it. Age appropriate is what the state board of education deems appropriate for each grade level. If you are going outside of those guidelines then you are violating the law.

Yes there are gay teachers who are upset out there that they can't share their personal life with their kids. LibsofTikTok has shown this multiple times.

If the school has a legitimate fear about a student's home life you know there is this thing called CPS, right? There is a system in place to help protect children from abuse. It isn't the school's job to play that role.

---

There is everything vague about the bill. Look at a typical bill, generally there are definitions so nothing is misconstrued. Here there are absolutely no definitions in the bill on what counts as "age appropriate." It says nowhere in the bill that the state board of education defines what is age appropriate which would be the case if what you are saying is true.

Furthermore, CPS barely helps kids. Regarding things like school counselors, their whole job is to help kids. Including on personal matters. Notifying parents about counseling will limit the amount of kids who go to counseling which hurts the kids who especially need it.

So I asked Larry so I will ask you, where do you draw the line on notifying parents?

Quote:

---

There is everything vague about the bill. Look at a typical bill, generally there are definitions so nothing is misconstrued. Here there are absolutely no definitions in the bill on what counts as "age appropriate." It says nowhere in the bill that the state board of education defines what is age appropriate which would be the case if what you are saying is true.

---

Kvetch said:

---

larry culpepper said:

---

sure, that's fair. and then one high school student's parent has an issue with that and sues the school district for discussing the 2015 Obergefell decision in a civics class, arguing that any discussion of this topic before college isnt appropriate. then they spend a bunch of money defending it.

now do you see where my issues with the law come from? this new trend of creating private rights of action is not a good thing.

---

And they'll lose because discussing the facts of a case is not teaching sexual ideology. Not to mention, civics isn't taught til high school so the age appropriate factor still applies.

---

and they SHOULD lose. I just dont like how this opens the door to a bunch of stupid lawsuits.

Quote:

---

You're just clinging to any reason why parents shouldn't have a say in their childrens education. Schools are not a free marketplace of ideas, and parents have every right to tell perv teachers that they can't teach their school children about their personal sexual ideologies.

---

oh come on man. there's always so much anger and emotion in your responses to my posts. and it's not necessary.

I'm 100% against perv teachers and think they should be fired and prosecuted if necessary. There. My issues with the bill are completely separate from teachers being creeps.

Quote:

---

There is everything vague about the bill. Look at a typical bill, generally there are definitions so nothing is misconstrued. Here there are absolutely no definitions in the bill on what counts as "age appropriate." It says nowhere in the bill that the state board of education defines what is age appropriate which would be the case if what you are saying is true.

---

It literally says "in accordance with state standards."

Who or what do you think defines state standards?!

Quote:

---

Furthermore, CPS barely helps kids. Regarding things like school counselors, their whole job is to help kids. Including on personal matters. Notifying parents about counseling will limit the amount of kids who go to counseling which hurts the kids who especially need it.

---

Schools should not be lying to parents. And that includes lying by omission. Parents, not the school, are responsible for the well-being of their children.

Sarge 91 said:

---

larry culpepper said:

---

GeorgiAg said:

---

So I actually read the bill. It just clarifies parental rights on physical mental health issues. This is the paragraph all the hubbub is over:

Quote:

---

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.

---

That's it. The LGTBQ crowd is nuts. Why is this even controversial?
Who the hell would disagree with that and why does it even need to be codified? Here's the full bill if you want to read it.

https://www.miamiherald.com/latest-news/article259859150.ece/BINARY/HB%201557%20education%20bill.pdf#storylink=readmore_inline

---

So here are my issues. It's vaguely written. What is considered "age appropriate?" I still doubt that ACTUAL sex ed is being taught to 2nd graders. So in that sense the bill comes off as well-intentioned. But what is off limits exactly? What if there is a gay teacher? It's not like he's going to give them TMI about his relationship. But more so something like "my husband and I visited Gettysburg last year and took these pictures." Is that "inappropriate" because he simply alluded to being gay married?

or what about a kid in a social studies class asking about same sex marriage? what can the teacher say and not say? So many parents are Karens to the extreme and raise hell over anything they dont like in the classroom, no matter how innocuous.

It's also written to forbid schools from restricting teachers from notifying parents about a student's "well-being" or whatever. Clearly that alluded to LGBT kids. Uhh, many of these kids have a damn good reason for not wanting their parents to know and risk being thrown out of the house for it.

Then the whole private right of action thing. Parents suing schools for any purported violation and getting attorney's fees if they win? Millions of taxpayer dollars will be used to defend these suits.

There are a lot of problems with this law, and anyone who says we're all pedophiles just for pointing this stuff out, is an *******.

---

Respectfully, you are being naive.

---

This might be the first time I've seen a lefty call out a lefty. Kudos.

Not sure if anyone on here realizes this, but liberals are really big liars.

Keegan99 said:

---

Quote:

---

There is everything vague about the bill. Look at a typical bill, generally there are definitions so nothing is misconstrued. Here there are absolutely no definitions in the bill on what counts as "age appropriate." It says nowhere in the bill that the state board of education defines what is age appropriate which would be the case if what you are saying is true.

---

It literally says "in accordance with state standards."

Who or what do you think defines state standards?!

Quote:

---

Furthermore, CPS barely helps kids. Regarding things like school counselors, their whole job is to help kids. Including on personal matters. Notifying parents about counseling will limit the amount of kids who go to counseling which hurts the kids who especially need it.

---

Schools should not be lying to parents. And that includes lying by omission. Parents, not the school, are responsible for the well-being of their children.

---

It says "or age appropriate or developmentally appropriate for students in accordance to state standards." The state board doesnt decide what is age appropriate in these lines, it decides what is "developmentally appropriate."

So do you think it's okay less kids will be using counseling now out of worry for retaliation from their parents? Because that's exactly what this is. It's taking away a very much needed avenue for a lot of kids.

When the childs life is in immediate danger.

Quote:

---

It says "or age appropriate or developmentally appropriate for students in accordance to state standards." The state board doesnt decide what is age appropriate in these lines, it decides what is "developmentally appropriate."

---

So you think the use of "state standards" is entirely superfluous text?