The fact that they needed to make A LAW saying teachers can't talk about gender identity and sex to k-3 kids says alot about what's been going on in schools to this point.
@@AtlasCrafted You must live under a rock or don't have kids if you think gender ideology isn't being propagandized to young children in schools. This is an anti-grooming bill. Go watch the THOUSANDS of videos on TikTok of real (horrible) teachers explaining in detail how/why they are doing it. They are very proud of it. The Spreckels Union School District is currently being sued for brain-washing/manipulating a young female child into "transitioning" (KONEN v. SPRECKELS UNION SCHOOL DISTRICT). This was all hidden from the parents. There are MANY cases/lawsuits throughout the U.S..
@@metalrulezv4856 Lmfao listen to you Get slapped with reality and all you can say is that I'm a smooth brain and go on with unhinged shit. Your family must love you Lol
@@coffeeking9565 how was teaching sex and sexual orientation to children under 10 years old educational? That sounds an awful lot like grooming not education. Children that age shouldn’t know what sex means let alone what sexual orientation is, I don’t care if it’s straight or gay.
An amendment would have required schools to disclose any student's discussion of orientation or gender identity to their families, with absolutely zero regard for the safety of those kids in families that would absolutely not take kindly to that news. When you have LGBT youth that have literally nowhere else to safely turn to for these issues, they'll resort to drastic measures like suicide attempts. For a bill that's supposedly about protecting kids, it sure seems like it'll lead to a lot of disowned, abused, and dead kids...but apparently doesn't matter if those kids are gay or trans.
@@A_A610 no elementary schoold child is talking or thinking about that stuff unless they r being confronted with it by adults who have no business talking to children about sexuality. U really have issue with people not wanting their children being groomed by teachers
This is such a NO-BRAINER!!!! There should not be ANY discussion with kids below a certain age about anything sexual!! Does not matter if it is LBGQT or straight!!!
@Barron Von Schneider I don't think he meant it that way. It sounded like he means that we're not allowed to acknowledge relationships anymore, gay or straight because that signifies sexuality. So having an event where boys can admit that they like a girl OR boy and send the a heart cookie for example is out of the question. Because if gay acknowledgment is not allowed, neither is straight. It'd be indoctrination of straight people. Also, maybe can't admit the genders or your parents, your crushes, barbie and Ken or barbie and barbie... that kind of thing. Kind of like if you ban the mention or teaching or practicing of a religion, you have to ban them all. I kind of empathize because we had a Trans friend and just saying "she" instead of he confused a kid overhearing us, who talked to mommy, who yelled at the school and we and our parents got called in for calling our a confusing term that made a random lady feel "inappropriate ". This was in Mormon town Utah though. Kind of surprised about Florida
they should ban a lot of fairytales then. Snow White and Sleeping Beauty have direct references to heterosexuality when the prince kisses the princess. if a prince kissing a princess isn't heterosexual, I don't know what it. they'd probably allow that kind of story, but not a story about a kiss between two princes.
Totally agree with this bill. These topics should not be taught at all in school. Especially kindergarten -3rd grade where kids dont even know how to tie their shoes.
Are teachers prohibited from informing students about fellow students who have same sex parents or Trans family members? What if the children ask their teacher 'what is Trans?' or 'why does Tommy have two dads?' Of course under this law the teacher defers to their parents to answer the question. However, when these bigoted parents inform the children of ignorant and false info won't that lead to the other children ridiculing/insulting the child of the LGBT family? Has the bill not considered this or has the bill given lgbt parents consent to sue the state if their child faces bullying? Is bullying a concern to you at all?
@@funkymunkcs3651 Homeschooling shouldn't be necessary for lgbt children, but apparently the bill only outlaws curriculum so I am fine with it, though I am still very suspicious about DeSantis and the Florida Gop's intentions with this bill.
@@rsync9490 you are posting this comment everywhere lol. But I agree with the og commenter, kids do not need go be discussing anything having to do with sexuality... they're kids. I swear the world just gets worse by the minute
Oh damn, I guess the past memories of having a special valentine's day event in first grade of trading notes and candy to your crush is now out of the question...
It shows how the Republican Party manipulates their base over made up culture war issues and how gullible their base to believe the manipulation. If a parent has a concern they can already address those concerns to teachers, principles, and school boards, and they can run for school boards. Instead DeSantis loves Big Government and his ministry of Truth rather than local democracy and the power of people to rule themselves and create local school board decisions.
The bill shows a lack of common sense. If these topics show up in school once in a while, what kind of harm is there? There are very age appropriate ways to talk about gender, just like the existence of babies doesn't need to be hidden from a child because it might "imply" sexuality.
I want schools teaching academics not sexual orientation nor preferences, of course our country have fallen behind in STEM when all the focus is on adult feelings, political & social issues.
if schools dont teach that how will kids learn about it. If my elementary school taught that maybe I would have known, I was gay before getting a "girl friend" (who turned out to just be a good friend because they did not teach us what dating someone actually meant)
@@koalasunited you do know we send our kids to learn academics, right? Things such as standards, morality, spirituality, manners and more is the responsibility of parents. If you think the school system should be raising your children as well that’s a problem for the lazy parent. Try being a parent rather than being lazy and pushing the responsibility off on complete strangers who is there to teach, not babysit and get some professional therapy Smh
Maybe people who care about this should consider whether “school” is the proper environment to be discussing these things. The teenager in the video could’ve just as easily discovered the language to describe how he felt with his parents, a therapist, another family member, etc. Why does school have to be the place to have sex/gender discussion, especially at that age when you don’t tend to develop those emotions until around 11-12?
I understand deferring to parents as a form of instruction for these conversations, but what if the parents are not capable of instructing the child about these topics due to lack of information or contempt for the LGBT community? Won't that lead to bullying of the Trans kids/children of LGBT couples/siblings of Trans kids?
@@rsync9490 that’s why I listed other options in the response. I know people I personally grew up with who knew their parents/family wouldn’t approve, so they sought out the school counselor who then connected them with resources. With the ages the bill includes, I have a hard time opposing it because K-3 shouldn’t be thinking about sex and gender anyway. I do understand some parents are irresponsible as well so there’s some gray area. This just isnt something that belongs in school.
@@rsync9490 This has nothing to do with gay or trans, it’s pretty clear if you care to read it…. No teaching about sex of any kind to children 3rd grade or younger. The only people I can think of having a problem with this bill are child molesters.
@@rsync9490 That's fine. As long as kids are taught that only Mommies and Daddies can create more life on the planet and not Ennis and Jack, no matter how much butt sex they have! 👍
To be clear, it’s not called “don’t say gay”, and it in no way denies anyone the right to say any specific words. It’s a bill to stop teachers from sexually grooming children. That’s it.
Except it isn't. Teachers acknowledging that gay people in fact exist is not grooming, and could potentially be a suable offense under the bill's nonexistent specification of what entails "age inappropriate instruction." The reason people are calling it "don't say gay" is because teachers would simply avoid acknowledging anything about gay people just to be safe from litigation.
@@Snacks256 where did you get that you have to pretend gay ppl don’t exist? My understanding is that now teachers can only teach about what they were hired to do.. math, English, etc. I don’t need another person telling their opinions to my child.
@@Snacks256 That’s the teacher’s choice, but the bill doesn’t say that, and it clearly isn’t intended for that. The bill is clearly intended to prevent the sexual grooming of children, which is something the left is passionately in favor of.
@@koalasunited they call it the anti grooming bill because its targeted only at very young kids (kinder to 3rd grade) and so the argument is that anyone who is against the bill is trying to groom little children by exposing them to things they are too young for like sex and sexual orientations. At least that's my understanding. I'm not too familiar on the subject I'm just learning about it now
Exactly, like what the hell, no more stories about a king and queen because it's gunno make them feel uncomfortable they said. So how the hell did the child get there in the first place?
We’re not. Look up the curriculum in your area - I have no idea why people still complain about “teaching sex to kindergarteners.” They aren’t. This shit was happening back during Obama’s term, too. Schools aren’t teaching kids about sex in K-3. At most, kids would get a safety course about unwanted touching and what constitutes a “bad touch” area. But I guess that’s technically a sexual-related lesson so a groomer parent can sue the school for giving the child perspective on what’s happening at home. A+ job, Florida.
Manufacturers media and liberal lie. Read the bill folks. Says nothing about Gay. The word Gay, is no where in the bill. This is all about keeping schools from pushing sex on little kids. Stick to reading writing and arithmetic and leave sex information to the parents.
The fact that this is being discussed with little children ages kindergarten through third grade. Is itself disgusting and perverse.im so glad for this bill and I hope this happens everywhere
Of course you the news would bring on a transgender who says this could harm him more and paint the topic in a negative light. But you fail to bring on kids from the other perspective that shows how it can and does harm them.
Yes in a longer, deeper investigation into the issue that would be fair and probably helpful for people wanting more views and experiences to consider. I think here in this case though, this particular youth was interviewed because he's an activist who has found an alliance group and has already been in the news, so I don't really fault the news for lacking that in this short report. I think they did a fair job of presenting persons from both sides.
@@Elephant_King_Gj how do you think the comparison was fair in detail? When the news interviews someone, that typically has a bigger impact on perception than just stating some perspective or facts at least from a general population perspective.
@@loc7s I agree with your statement about interviews having a bigger impact as they do for me. My opinion is that what was presented was a fair presentation of both sides in their own words. It didn't just present one side. They interviewed the bill's sponsor and we heard directly from him what the bill was and was not about. I don't think it needed to present an opposing legislator to be fair and if someone against the bill brought that up that they didn't have an opposing legislator, I personally would not agree that it affected fairness in the news report. The report also presented actual text from the bill not just the opinions/claims of it's critics. I thought considering it's less than 3-minutes an informative and balanced presentation of the controversy around the bill.
@@Elephant_King_Gj you and I seem to have come to the same conclusion. But there are more people who would not. The majority tends to be led by their feelings. And they showed some teenage and presented in him in such a way that we should have empathy and pity for his situation. Compared to the bill sponsor who is not that appealing and is not easily heard by most.
This is such click bait. I am a Canadian looking for an actual explanation of the bill to get caught up. You promise that in the title. Im looking for actual legislative breakdowns.
There probably isn't much actual legislation here. The fact is that these lawmakers can't actually open a curriculum and point to an objectionable fact. They probably can't even find evidence of an objectionable string of words. What this bill "does" is create sloppy language to be interpreted later for whatever purpose is at hand. Interest groups will be able to sue schools for an errant use of words, bring the case to a conservative judge. The judge can then point to this law, use judicial review to decide what the law means, and then pass a judgment.
@@MaestroAlvis if a k-3rd grade teacher has to ask themselves "will I violate HB 1557 by saying what I'm about to say?" then they shouldn't say it. There is ZERO reason to talk about "gender identity" or sexual orientation to children.
@@alexjones420 But what if these terms are really broad? The problem is, sexuality is implied in many things in life. A baby, or marriage itself for example. Anything to do with 2 dads or a trans person being a different gender is going to be seen as "too sexual" by the people who endorse and want to use this bill. Kids don't really need any sort of instruction on these things until later, but it wouldn't be harmful to have something LGBT that's surface level and age appropriate somewhere.
I don’t care the first part of the the bill mentioned on this video but outing student to their parents is violating individual’s privacy and parents have no right to know this unless the person or child is comfortable to ask or tell them about it.
@@4DeMS so you support Children sexual orientation to be exposed by their teachers to their parents? I hope you don’t have children or I pity their lack of respect/ privacy.
@@santiagogomez171 no. I don't think teachers have any right to know anything or talk to any capacity to a child about things of a sexual nature to any capacity at all.
@@santiagogomez171 so check it out... if the kid is talking to the teacher about their sexual orientation you're already violating the bill. How do you not understand this?
I get why sex shouldn't be taught at that age, but for attraction to the same sex and gender orientation to not be is ridiculous. They're not kids for that long and sooner or later they'll know what it means to be lgbtq and school should always be a safe environment. I get how parents should have a say over what their kids are learning, but they'll know eventually because you can't hide things for forever. This is just sad. Come on it's 2022 so why do we still struggle with the fact that gay people matter and exists and have feelings. And when your like four, your surrounded by light and don't see the dark. Little kids always are told to be themselves and be kind to everyone. But acting like lgbtqia+ kids don't exist is just wrong and I'm so mad that this is even happening. It's better to let them know young so that they can be respectful of people and know what it is so that if they are older and questioning then they'll have some sort of idea of what is going on. Seriously Florida, do better.
That’s odd, Nowhere in the Bill does it say Don’t Say G$y, yet the media uses the term. So much for integrity, I guess. Now I understand why people have such a low opinion of the profession.
Transgender person here; when I first heard about the bill, dubbed the "Don't Say Gay" bill I became suspicious of the misnomer, but at the same time I worried about the same thing the transgender person in the video worried about: not fitting in and feeling less than because you don't understand yourself. After some research, I educated myself and I support the bill because while I don't think many teachers in the state of Florida are teaching LGBTQ curricula in the State of Florida, I don't think young children could understand any of it. I don't have a reason to oppose the bill but the effects are minimal and brownie points for an ideological victory, and I would say the same for primary school LGBTQ-inclusive curricula, although the latter is odd to teach in addition to just ideological brownie points. I don't consider myself a conservative I just think it's weird that anyone is giving sex education or awareness about gender identity to kids who neither have a sexual orientation yet (and won't until the onset of puberty) nor will they completely understand their gender and gender as a part of society until they reach middle school, although yes young children have basic ideas about gender at younger ages. A vast majority of transgender people (like myself) will only come to terms with their gender between the ages of 11-16. TL;DR Kindergarteners don't understand nor at that age do they need to understand gender identity, sexual orientation nor the concept of biological sex or sexual intimacy until the onset of puberty. Should schools provide more in depth sex education? Yes. For those ages? No.
the issue with the bill is -- why have it at all? Its purely a political move by Ron DeSantis to garner support for the next elections since schools don't do this sort of thing in the early school years at all.
Keep it out of Schools? So you are all for kids learning about the birds and the bees on their own, or by inept parents? You understand teen pregnancies are a thing, and they decrease with concise sex ed, right?
@@pythosdegothos6181 One weak comment after another. No gay teen has ever gotten pregnant from another gay teen! 😂 That's why they have Sex ed for those that can!
There should be no mention of any gender identities, or sexual orientations in school at any grade level at all. School has never been about that. Now, gender and sex identity seems to be the main goal. That's all they care about. We need teachers to stick to the basic curricular. Any questions kids have about sex, or identity should be discussed with the parents only ! It certainly not the schools place. I can't believe this has become such a thing!
@@A_A610 Absolutely! What's fair for one side ,is fair for the other. If they had a bill about heterosexual people being taught in school, I would not be for that either. I just want basic knowledge taught , that's always been taught. . That's it!
The language in the bill is extremely vague on purpose to stifle _any_ mentions of LGBT topics (hence the "Don't Say Gay" label its opponents have given it), but by phrasing it to dissuade discussions of orientation in general, they effectively built in a double standard because being straight is still an orientation. Kids books typically talk about families, which often mention moms and dads. Given how vague the language of the bill is, would you advocate banning literally every single book that even mentions parents from being taught to young kids because it's teaching kids about being straight (which is a sexual orientation)?
@@A_A610 The kids books that mention parents aren't advocating heterosexuality. It's not even mentioned at all. That's not what the story is about. What I'm saying is, they are actually teaching about LBGQT in the classroom of kids, and I'm not for that. There is no comparison, although I get your point that a family can be made up of all kinds of people.
"The kids books that mention parents aren't advocating heterosexuality" Nor does every book that merely mentions LGBT people in any capacity, but thanks for proving you indeed have a double standard. Acknowledging gay people exist won't make kids gay, regardless of what the braindead morons behind this bill believe.
i dont see why any students k-6 should be having discussions about sexuality at all. Schools shouldn't influence a student politically or sexually in any way. Especially young and strongly impressionable students.
Sex education is often taught to 5th grade girls to take care of themselves and to understand Menstruation and puberty. And parents can waive that education. When I was in school girls received that education and boys were on their own to look it up in the encyclopedia or playboy magazine. I think local communities could come up with something better than playboy being the authoritative source for boys. OR sexual education could be taught by medical professionals like nurses and pediatricians. But to ignore it completely is rather idiotic.
@@Acanofalconpunch they're not strangers. Teachers are valuable members of your community which youbshould be going out of your way to engage with. Lol, what do you think school is just a place that you drop off your kids and they come back knowing math?
Why should the government tell schools what they can and can't teach. I mean 1. Why are they teaching this in 3rd 2. They should be teaching this in late middle school and high school when kids are in puberty 4. This should be up to the school board and parents to choose what kid learn and not the state. I'm just saying
Well the government represents the people and people dont want sexual abuse of children, so we teach children about sex so that children know how to identify when sex is being forced onto them. Its almost funny how this legislation supports child predation.
These are children. They don’t need to hear that kind of garbage. You really believe children even care? In fact, that topic in school should carry punishment when discussed with children.
Replacing lessons on science etc with lessons about gender identity/sexuality: no. The whole outing thing is what gets me because if its true, thats fucked
If by "outing thing" you mean the claim that the law requires teachers or schools to "out" a student or endanger the student by giving parents information, then THAT CLAIM IS FALSE. If one actually reads the law (I'm happy to provide you the text of the law and the relevant areas, then one can know facts.
@@blackdamarsk633 Several times I given the link and my comment keeps being deleted. Please google "Florida HB 1557". When I do that the top return takes me to the Florida senate page, below the paragraph it says "Bill Text:PDF", open the pdf and in particular note lines 91-96 If you read, I'd be interested in any further thoughts you may have about it.
@@Elephant_King_Gj it's interesting to me that lines 82-88 lay out clearly that a school district may not adopt procedures or support forms that prohibit district personnel from notifying a parent about their students mental or physical health and well being, which is immediately followed by the verbage you quote saying that they can if a prudent person would believe this would put the student in danger. My issue with this language is due to the fact many religious conservatives believe homosexuality is a mental illness. As such, an individual may be compelled to out a student because they believe, falsely, that the sexual orientation of the student is to them a mental illness. Would this not be exactly as the previous commenter described?
@@ilikebubbltea7619 no he’s not. Your just upset because you have a twisted mind. You want kids to be exposed to sexual conversations because your a sick fk
@@ilikebubbltea7619 how though? I don't think children k through 3 should have lessons about sexuality or gender identity. That should be saved for 5th grade.
@@mattahmann They won't learn it in 5th grade either. Or any grade, if some parent decides to sue the school because they think something is "age inappropriate."
introducing students to the LGBTQ community will normalize the community which will make homophobia less common almost stopping the problem enterally this about rights being taken away
Schools are meant to educate kids, not manipulate them. Religions shouldn't be preached in schools, and neither should all this non science gender nonsense
"Children" & "Sex" are 2 words that SHOULD NOT be in the same sentence . Teach them all the "NO 2 HUMANS ARE ALIKE & ATTRACTIVENESS VARIES FROM PERSON TO PERSON", stuff at a mature level . Kids have no extensive knowledge of race , religion , Ect.. BECAUSE THEY'RE CHILDREN ! Let them keep their innocence while they have it .
Yeah, yeah, whatever, what I’m mostly concerned about is the fact that teachers are going to be allowed to tell parents these things. I get that if they think the child is going to be hurt or something, they won’t say anything, but what about kids that just want to keep it to themselves and wanted to confide in someone they trust? What if those parents show no signs of being harmful or hateful, but they end up being anyway?
I agree that there comes a time in the life of a child that they may need to be able to confide in someone outside the home and know that that information is not going to be passed on to the parents, but: 1) This bill is talking about children in kindergarten to 3rd Grade and is only talking about sexually explicit discussions. Unless a child is being emotionally or physically abused, children that age don't naturally think about sexual things. Sure, you may get the occasional 4 year-old saying they have a boy or girl friend, but generally they don't have a clue what that actually means. In other words, they aren't thinking about the relationship in a sexual way. The most likely reason a child is discussing sexual subjects at that age is because an adult is bringing up the conversation, and right now in the school system the main reason these subjects are usually brought up are because of activist teachers, activist administrators, and activist parents. So the risk of a child that is not interested in sexual conversations being exposed to sexual conversations at that age by activist adults is WAY higher than the odds of a child that age actually going through an LGBTQ+ existential crisis that needs to be addressed. Maybe it's even possible that a 6 year-old child already knows he is gay for example, but even if he does chances are he doesn't know or understand what sex is and also isn't getting grief from parents at home for that yet. Those problems tend to start developing in 5th Grade at the earliest. 2) This bill does not prohibit a teacher from confidentially reporting abuse. If a 6 year-old child is concerned about sexually explicit issues, there is a good chance that child has been sexually abused. And yes, the teacher should absolutely report that to the proper authorities and should also do whatever can be done to protect the child from repercussions from the parents for reporting that abuse, but there is nothing in this bill that would prevent any of that from happening. 3) If the child has say experienced sexual abuse at a young age and needs counseling, a teacher is not qualified to do that counseling. The teacher is qualified to report the abuse, but at that point it is time for a qualified professional to step in and help out. And quite frankly, most school counselors are also not qualified to deal with such serious issues. They might be able to recommend a qualified therapist and provide supportive care, but they aren't usually qualified to be the first line of defense on something like that. This bill doesn't say that CPS must report any conversations they are having with children to the parents. It also doesn't say that a qualified therapist that is hired outside of the school system has to report everything the child says in a session to the child's parents. It is simply prohibiting teachers from initiating conversations with students about sexual identity or sexually explicit topics and schools from effectively prescribing care they aren't qualified to prescribe without even letting the child's primary care giver know what is happening.
@@hollybigelow5337 in kindergarten I knew I was romantically into girls and boys. I came to the conclusion on my own. If I had known it was okay, I wouldn’t have been terrified to come out to my conservative parents. It’s not just abuse or exposure.
@@Peridot420 Honestly, with all due respect I don’t think it’s possible for anyone to truly know something like that in kindergarten because for every person in kindergarten who believes that they are that way and grows up to actually be that way there are also plenty of people who thought they were that way that end up growing out of it. In fact, I read somewhere that they have actually measured this, and the number is roughly 80% for the number of kids that think they are that way as young children who end up growing out of it. So of course, there are going to be the 20% that believe it as young children and also grow up to still be that way, but statistically it is more likely to be a phase for most children who feel that way. Also, unless children have been sexually abused it is very rare for kids to have a clue what “romantically interested” even means, which is a good thing because they are too young and innocent to be exposed to such adult topics. Sure, there are plenty of kids who play like they know, but there are also plenty of kids who play like they are superheroes or horsies or many other things. Second, let’s pretend that everything I just said is wrong and that 100% of children understand sexuality in kindergarten. Are you really saying that those children won’t be equally fine if they receive counseling in fifth grade to learn how to come out to their parents? Is kindergarteners coming out to their parents as LGBT really a thing that needs to happen? Are kindergartners also being asked to come out as straight to their parents? Also, as I previously mentioned, there might be an occasional situation where this is a thing, but when you come up with policies you always have to look at those who are helped and those who are hurt and see if those who are hurt are more hurt than those who are helped. I truly believe the laws that allow adults in elementary school to talk about highly sexualized topics will have many negative impacts. One of those negative impacts is it will make it way easier for sexual predators to cover up when they choose to molest young children. I’m not saying every teacher, counselor, etc. in the system is a sexual predator looking to abuse the system, but I am saying sexual predators are disproportionately drawn to jobs in elementary schools, and they will use any tool at their disposal to not get caught. One of the only ways to catch a child molester is to explain to a child that it is never okay for an adult to have a sexual conversation with them, and it is especially inappropriate for them to ask the child to keep that conversation secret. If we allow the school system to normalize keeping those conversations secret from parents we embolden sexual predators. Let’s say for every child that this helps come out to conservative parents as LGTB+ it also allows three children to be sexually abused without the predator being caught. And it may be just one predator with hundreds or even thousands of victims. Considering that this kind of counseling can easily be offered more effectively to Junior High and High School students to help them come out to conservative parents, I don’t personally feel like helping a handful of children feel more comfortable coming out to their parents as LGTBQ+ is worth potentially letting a sexual predator have more tools to get away with abusing who knows how many students without getting caught. I also have some news. I guarantee the reason it is difficult for many people to come out as LGTBQ+ to their conservative parents is because their conservative parents usually disapprove of that lifestyle, usually for religious reasons. I don’t care how much teaching these students get in kindergarten on this issue, it’s not going to change the conservative parents’ viewpoint on this issue. The mind often likes to review the past and say things like, “If only X had happened this might have been easier.” But the truth is hindsight really isn’t 20/20. The only way to really know if it would have helped would be to run both scenarios side by side. Risking allowing sexual predators to abuse the system and making harder for them to get caught because it MIGHT help a child later come out to their conservative parents is an awfully big price to pay for something that easily also might not help at all.
@@walterhoward5512 So if it ain't happening why are you against the bill being passed? The only conclusion I can draw is that you support teachers talking about sexual content to k-3rd gradera, which is pretty pedophilic.
The problem with the bill is the wording. The wording is not specific enough to clarify what exactly constitutes "encouraging discussion of sexual orientation or gender identity." Furthermore, this bill is going to affect teachers' ability to include basic fairytales in the classroom. You can't have the story of Sleeping Beauty in the classroom because it includes mention of the prince kissing the princess to wake her up, and that's a direct reference to heterosexuality, which is a sexual orientation. And what is going to happen when a classroom of 7-year-olds does a project on their family tree, and some kid has same-sex parents? What if that kid's classmate has never heard of same-sex parents, and wants to ask about what it's like to have two parents of the same sex, and let's say this is happening during show-and-tell? The teacher is going to have to stop the activity, and the kid with same-sex parents isn't going to understand why he isn't allowed to talk about his family. If I send my kids to public school, I am going to sue the school district for teaching or mentioning anything related to heterosexuality, so no teaching of traditional fairytales, no mention of families, nothing. There are going to be a whole bunch of topics that are off the table for mentioning heterosexuality. I completely agree that children should NOT be learning about gender identity or sexuality (of any kind, gay, bi, straight, etc.) but where exactly should the line be drawn? The bill does not specify exactly the types of situations in which such talk is to be prohibited. The wording is too vague.
@@MartianInDisguise not at all what the bill says. If a kid with same sex parents talks about his family that’s ok, nobody is against that, you made that up. Teacher just aren’t going to have lessons on sexuality. Keep in mind these kids are 8 and younger it’s not the time to teach them these things
@@tyrodmen2046 what happens if another kid raises their hand and asks if the kid with same-sex parents has gay parents, or something which seems stupid/rhetorical to adults, but which to a kid who has never met a family with same-sex parents, might not understand? I didn't make something up; I was posing a hypothetical situation that could actually happen in real life. Nobody in Ireland thought it was necessary to make abortion legal until Savita Halappanavar died. rare situations can occur and should be prepared for accordingly.
@@tyrodmen2046 I fully agree that children in elementary school should not be learning about sex or orientation though, of any kind (gay, straight, bi, etc.) but the wording of the law is too vague. the wording of the law that led to Savita Halappanavar's death was also vague because it didn't specify the precise details of her situation, which nobody had anticipated.
So one kid’s problem should make all people obey rules covering his situation ! Keep the personal problems private! Don’t shove your problems onto other people ! Who cares that this kid thinks he is a girl !! No little kid thinks about such crap!
Glad to see authorities digging in their heels against this movement to embrace gender change. People are sometimes confused about who they are. Seeking an answer with surgery or hormones is extremely damaging to the patient.
Except gender affirming care is correlated with a sharp decline in the rates of depression and suicide attempts among LGBT youth (as much as 73%). Pretty sure suicide is the most damaging of those...
The fact that some people go through with transition despite it not being the right decision doesn't negate the people who actually do go through and benefit from it.
@@A_A610 no but it gives you the right to throw them away like they dont count, or like they werent convinced at a young age by trans trenders who pretend there arent challenges that come with transitioning. Having these concepts taught to kids at such a young age intrudes upon their right to make their own decisions about who they are as a person. far as im concerned sex ed of any kind period belongs in jr high and onward
"no but it gives you the right to throw them away like they dont count" As you're doing with actual trans people? "Having these concepts taught to kids at such a young age intrudes upon their right to make their own decisions" Learning about being gay or trans doesn't make people gay or trans, nor does it imply you should be gay or trans if you're not; conversely, not talking about gay or trans issues doesn't mean fewer kids will be gay or trans. This absolutely idiotic mindset is literally the reason they're trying to pass this tripe.
@@g.g.hochstetler2286 "So teachers aren’t allowed to teach sexual identity to 5 year olds. Are parents really divided on this?" Yes you did. Its in your comment. Whats so morally wrong with identity that children shouldn't be exposed to it?
I really am not sure where I am on this bill because I can really see both sides. Though perhaps I’m misunderstanding things so if I am please let me know. On the one hand, obviously this bill pertains to kindergartners through 3rd graders so I get maintaining the innocence of them in terms of certain topics and discussions because there really isn’t any place for that. That being said, the reality is that all kinds of families exist and if there is going to be literature on opposite sex relationships, this should include single parent households, as well as same-sex ones as this can be done without actually sexualizing the issues and keeping things more definitive. Additionally, kids talk. So let’s say a kid goes “My mom and dad love to go out to eat on Sundays!” And another kid goes “My two dads (or moms) love to do that too!” Then another kid goes “two dads? What do you mean?” Ok, In this case, assuming this bill goes through, is a teacher not at least able to go, “Well Susie, John here does have two dads as his parents” and go on to explain that is what is categorized as a “homosexual “ relationship?? Is the teacher not allowed to do this? Or if asked by this student what having two dads means is the teacher supposed to just say “That is something you’ll want to ask your parents about. I can’t answer that for you sorry.” For me this not only stigmatizes the concept of homosexuality as it is Real, it also stigmatizes the kid who has the two same-sex parents as well. I mean even if you wanted to dictate exactly how a teacher says something, kids are inquisitive and are going to question things. Again, this is purely a question that pertains to a completely plausible conversation that could happen in a K-3 classroom. For me it’s not so much about the student who may or may not be gay, straight whatever, but if they have family that is gay, are they not allowed to share and discuss their family either?? That doesn’t seem right. Im not saying the bill says this, I’m seriously just trying to understand its perimeters. I don’t think a teacher should be swaying students on anything and part of the issue is the teachers out there that do do that is I think the whole point of trying to implement a bill like this because they don’t know how to remain objective. As a former teacher of 8 years at the middle school level I got asked all the time who I voted for for example and not once did I answer. But I cannot say the same for a lot of my colleagues and even though I agreed with some of them politically I still didn’t think it was ok to mention these things because I would never want a student whose family disagreed with my stances to feel under valued in my class.
I completely understand where your coming from and agree. So this bill doesn't ban normal classroom discussion. It bans "instruction" regarding the matter. That being said, the bill is extremely vague about what constitutes instruction. Secondly, the purpose of this bill is extremely sketchy. Why not put a blanket ban on sexual topics? Why is it focused on LGBT issues? We heard that this bill had previous provisions that made it's language specifically target LGBT people and banned even classroom discussions. I'm glad they were cut, but it's concerning how unnecessarily ambiguous it is
This bill does NOT prohibit one on one, or small group discussions about such things. It only prohibits Classroom discussion. Here is something people are missing....this would prevent some really bigoted teacher from addressing the whole class about the "sins of homosexuality" too. This is about discussions on a classroom level about ALL sex, not just gay sex. I do wish people would stop putting in what is not there, it hurts your argument so bad.
@@pythosdegothos6181 But that doesnt stop sunday school nor churches from doing so. My real issue is that , in florida, you know most parents arent gonna teach their kids lgbt stuff on their own. Culturally, conservatives have so many tools available to them to spread their lessons, mainly churches. I cant really think of any resources a child has to learn about lgbt ideas.
@Barron Von Schneider But parents WONT talk to their kids about this topic. You talk about indoctrination as if thats not what religion and homophobia does all the time. The only difference is that you have a bias that pertains to your beliefs. But god forbid someone else has a different opinion.
The bill limits the curriculum not the discussion... and it limits on all sexual orientations... in other words teachers cant teach about straight sexual identity or gender roles either. the argument against the bill is nonsense.
“all sexual orientations”? When children learn to read, they often read books in which the characters have friendships, relationships and families. Think about the classics, the fairytales. By default, we see heterosexual relationships all over the place starting with Cinderella, Beauty and the Beast, Snow White to Pride and Prejudice, The Scarlet Letter and The Great Gatsby K-12. Isn’t that “learning about gender roles and sexuality”? By your logic, those texts should be removed from schools too.
Societal norms have gone down the crapper. The Bible and Constitution may have to be re-written to accommodate the desires of each sub-grouping. Now that the LGBTQ have fulfilled their agenda; who is next; Beastiality, North American Man Boy Love Association(NAMBLA) or Polygamist; certainly these sub-group have their rights as well to live out the American dream, please Mr/Mz Politician tell us.
This is what America has come to really idc what side your on WAKE UP PEOPLE THIS ISNT AMERICA ANYMORE us the people need to stand toghter if we want are country back...
Sexual anything should be like religion in the schools, forbidden. Both of these topics are for the home. Having an adult that is not a child's parents explain to a 5 to 9 year old about sex, especially homosexuality should be a sex crime, and they should be on the sex offenders list!!
What do you mean “Sexual anything”? If we shouldn’t explain homosexuality to 5-9 year-olds, then we also shouldn’t discuss heterosexuality either, right?
@@shawnb679 OK, so since any story with a mom and a dad, or a fairy tale like Sleeping Beauty that is all about heterosexual romance, they should be banned too. Is that what you mean by “correct”?
Yeah if I understood how terrible life would be and how fucked financially I would be when I was a kid that would’ve been helpful to maybe they should’ve taught me advance financial’s in kindergarten because I would’ve been better off
Shouldn't the so called authority be more concern not to take people's$-blaming innocent and thinking God has to have mercy on them.according to God such evil act puts them on way to h-e-ll.and gay has nothing to do with young kids-tech them respect/n why\compassion-not lazy_care not stupinity_aim for the best not for the pit.👹-I hope you get the point(.
Tiny children do not need to know about sexual orientation, Jesus Christ, we are only talking up to third grade! If the parent wants to teach their babies and infants and young children about sexual orientation, that’s up to them to do that at home, not in school! The bill is not called, “don’t say gay”, no where in the bill does it say that, try reading the bill!
The problem with the bill is the wording. The wording is not specific enough to clarify what exactly constitutes "encouraging discussion of sexual orientation or gender identity." Furthermore, this bill is going to affect teachers' ability to include basic fairytales in the classroom. You can't have the story of Sleeping Beauty in the classroom because it includes mention of the prince kissing the princess to wake her up, and that's a direct reference to heterosexuality, which is a sexual orientation. And what is going to happen when a classroom of 7-year-olds does a project on their family tree, and some kid has same-sex parents? What if that kid's classmate has never heard of same-sex parents, and wants to ask about what it's like to have two parents of the same sex, and let's say this is happening during show-and-tell? The teacher is going to have to stop the activity, and the kid with same-sex parents isn't going to understand why he isn't allowed to talk about his family. If I send my kids to public school, I am going to sue the school district for teaching or mentioning anything related to heterosexuality, so no teaching of traditional fairytales, no mention of families, nothing. There are going to be a whole bunch of topics that are off the table for mentioning heterosexuality.
I don’t think you understand what the bill is stating. Teachers won’t be able to instruct topics on sexuality. A fairytale is a fairytale not a lesson on sexuality 😂. Use ur brain and stop thinking with emotions
@@tyrodmen2046 I'm not thinking with emotions. The prince kissing the princess in Sleeping Beauty is an expression of sexuality (the beginning of sexuality). I don't want my young kids learning about kissing between straights or gays.
They specifically said (in the video that you *commented on*) that it doesn't ban discussion, it bans content from entering lesson plans. If someone wants to discuss in the classroom why another student has two dads, it's still completely allowed. Fairy Tales is a good point. People don't consider Snow White to be about sexuality whatsoever because it's straight. Flip the coin and give it two princes instead of a prince and a princess. Now everyone is outraged that we're exposing children to sexuality. Now do all stories need to avoid the topic of love until 4th grade? Seems like the writers of the bill don't even consider heterosexuality as a sexuality.
@@algorythm4354 I'm glad that the bill is (supposedly) targeted toward preventing the topics of sexuality and sexual orientation from entering lesson plans. However, I am still concerned that the wording is too vague to avoid getting a teacher in trouble for letting students have a discussion about a topic that could possibly be related to sexual orientation and sexuality (e.g., a student having two same-sex parents). I appreciate that you recognize that many stories contain direct references to heterosexuality. Like you, I don't think the writers of the bill took that into account.
@@tyrodmen2046 being bullied, feeling excluded, subject to hatemongering causes young lgbt kids to commit suicide. there is a direct correlation, google it.
@@Elephant_King_Gj the effect will be more bullie more hate. the more you accomodate xenophobia the more marginalizd minorities pay the price. cause and effect. it might not be your goal but it will be the effect.
@@tyrodmen2046 Children tend to bully other children over differences from the perceived norm. In a society where homosexuality is hidden from children, it can be perceived as totally abnormal. Not only would this be a source of bullying, but it can make gay children think they’re alone with their experiences and begin hating themselves.
Teachers should not label children, it can affect their sense of self and how they are treated, and limit their potential. teach respect and kindness and non-violence. Putting labels is not helping. I am glad this bill passed, because I think it would have hurt the LGBTQ community. - which should stop labeling itself.
@@thabluntroller9637 They are children ages 5 to 12, they don't talk about their sexual orientation, they talk about games, playmates and making friends. Introducing sexual orientation is exposing them to information that is not age appropriate. At this age they can be taught to just be kind to each other and to appreciate that everyone is different. Talking about sexual orientation is child abuse.
@@Roxy62ct Your comment is so ignorant holy shit. Anyone with a child development degree would heavily disagree with you. Children pick up on that stuff from a very early age, especially the age group you listed. Its abuse to NOT teach them about sexuality. Are you going to withhold important info about puberty too? Girls younger than 12 can develop breasts and get their period, and its abusive not to tell them why.
@@Roxy62ct Kids absolutely do talk about sexual orientation. From playing with barbie and ken, to calling each other “boyfriend” and “girlfriend” on the playground, they’re not totally oblivious to relationships and marriage. It’s not a bad thing for them to know that pairings other than heterosexual parings are a natural occurrence.
So in short, yes, it does ban discussion of kids with two moms and it does mandate teachers must force gay kids out of the closet, which is child abuse
You clearly didn’t watch the video lol it bans instruction on any sexual topics, and speaking with parents isn’t abuse. These are 5-8 year olds, the parents should know these things lol you think an 8 year old can handle the pressure of feeling gay without the help of a responsible adult?
@@Deuterium52 well that itself isn’t abuse if the parent is against their child gay it could lead to unsafe situations at home… if a kid feels more comfortable talking to a teacher they should be able to
they are in 3rd grade wtf is this world come to let them learn and be kids
The fact that they needed to make A LAW saying teachers can't talk about gender identity and sex to k-3 kids says alot about what's been going on in schools to this point.
Its literally not happening though, its entirely media. Its NOT happening in schools at all.
@@AtlasCrafted You must live under a rock or don't have kids if you think gender ideology isn't being propagandized to young children in schools. This is an anti-grooming bill. Go watch the THOUSANDS of videos on TikTok of real (horrible) teachers explaining in detail how/why they are doing it. They are very proud of it. The Spreckels Union School District is currently being sued for brain-washing/manipulating a young female child into "transitioning" (KONEN v. SPRECKELS UNION SCHOOL DISTRICT). This was all hidden from the parents. There are MANY cases/lawsuits throughout the U.S..
@@amt5911 Lmfao yes those tiktok videos are in class lessons
Jesus christ stop watching Ben Shapiro reacts videos Lol
@@AtlasCrafted your a smooth brain 🧠🥴🥴🥴leftism is a mental illness
@@metalrulezv4856 Lmfao listen to you
Get slapped with reality and all you can say is that I'm a smooth brain and go on with unhinged shit.
Your family must love you Lol
Focusing on actual education instead of woke indoctrination?? MADNESS!!!
Clearly you don’t have kids and know how how the first years of school are….
How is letting kids know it's okay to be gay indoctrination. Seems like a psa if anything
@@coffeeking9565 how was teaching sex and sexual orientation to children under 10 years old educational? That sounds an awful lot like grooming not education. Children that age shouldn’t know what sex means let alone what sexual orientation is, I don’t care if it’s straight or gay.
It’s not the responsibility of schools to teach about sexuality in any regard to kids k-3. I don’t know what’s so hard to understand about that
Nor should it be the responsibility of schools to out gay kids to their families.
@@A_A610 how is it outing it’s not even da teachers place for a child’s sexuality those two things don’t go hand and hand
An amendment would have required schools to disclose any student's discussion of orientation or gender identity to their families, with absolutely zero regard for the safety of those kids in families that would absolutely not take kindly to that news. When you have LGBT youth that have literally nowhere else to safely turn to for these issues, they'll resort to drastic measures like suicide attempts.
For a bill that's supposedly about protecting kids, it sure seems like it'll lead to a lot of disowned, abused, and dead kids...but apparently doesn't matter if those kids are gay or trans.
@@A_A610 no elementary schoold child is talking or thinking about that stuff unless they r being confronted with it by adults who have no business talking to children about sexuality. U really have issue with people not wanting their children being groomed by teachers
@@A_A610 I agree, but why do you say that? What's the relevance of that to the law being discussed?
This is such a NO-BRAINER!!!! There should not be ANY discussion with kids below a certain age about anything sexual!! Does not matter if it is LBGQT or straight!!!
Oh damn, I guess the memories of having a special valentine's day event in first grade is now out of the question...
@Barron Von Schneider I don't think he meant it that way. It sounded like he means that we're not allowed to acknowledge relationships anymore, gay or straight because that signifies sexuality. So having an event where boys can admit that they like a girl OR boy and send the a heart cookie for example is out of the question. Because if gay acknowledgment is not allowed, neither is straight. It'd be indoctrination of straight people. Also, maybe can't admit the genders or your parents, your crushes, barbie and Ken or barbie and barbie... that kind of thing. Kind of like if you ban the mention or teaching or practicing of a religion, you have to ban them all. I kind of empathize because we had a Trans friend and just saying "she" instead of he confused a kid overhearing us, who talked to mommy, who yelled at the school and we and our parents got called in for calling our a confusing term that made a random lady feel "inappropriate ". This was in Mormon town Utah though. Kind of surprised about Florida
@@a_tasty_treat5547 ??? I think you are confused , there is a difference between exchanging Valentine cards and sexual discussions.
they should ban a lot of fairytales then. Snow White and Sleeping Beauty have direct references to heterosexuality when the prince kisses the princess. if a prince kissing a princess isn't heterosexual, I don't know what it. they'd probably allow that kind of story, but not a story about a kiss between two princes.
@@Leonardo-de5il so would you be okay with a classroom of second graders reading the storybook "And Tango Makes Three"?
Totally agree with this bill. These topics should not be taught at all in school. Especially kindergarten -3rd grade where kids dont even know how to tie their shoes.
Are teachers prohibited from informing students about fellow students who have same sex parents or Trans family members? What if the children ask their teacher 'what is Trans?' or 'why does Tommy have two dads?' Of course under this law the teacher defers to their parents to answer the question. However, when these bigoted parents inform the children of ignorant and false info won't that lead to the other children ridiculing/insulting the child of the LGBT family? Has the bill not considered this or has the bill given lgbt parents consent to sue the state if their child faces bullying? Is bullying a concern to you at all?
@@rsync9490 ever heard of homeschooling?
@@funkymunkcs3651 Homeschooling shouldn't be necessary for lgbt children, but apparently the bill only outlaws curriculum so I am fine with it, though I am still very suspicious about DeSantis and the Florida Gop's intentions with this bill.
@@rsync9490 you are posting this comment everywhere lol. But I agree with the og commenter, kids do not need go be discussing anything having to do with sexuality... they're kids. I swear the world just gets worse by the minute
Oh damn, I guess the past memories of having a special valentine's day event in first grade of trading notes and candy to your crush is now out of the question...
The pushback shows the lack of common sense in the democrat party.
What is wrong with teaching identity?
@@mercury3352 you like other adults teaching your kids about emotions? Lol why can’t you just talk to your kids like a normal parent
It shows how the Republican Party manipulates their base over made up culture war issues and how gullible their base to believe the manipulation. If a parent has a concern they can already address those concerns to teachers, principles, and school boards, and they can run for school boards. Instead DeSantis loves Big Government and his ministry of Truth rather than local democracy and the power of people to rule themselves and create local school board decisions.
The bill shows a lack of common sense. If these topics show up in school once in a while, what kind of harm is there? There are very age appropriate ways to talk about gender, just like the existence of babies doesn't need to be hidden from a child because it might "imply" sexuality.
Sounds like Florida has their mind in the right place
I want schools teaching academics not sexual orientation nor preferences, of course our country have fallen behind in STEM when all the focus is on adult feelings, political & social issues.
if schools dont teach that how will kids learn about it. If my elementary school taught that maybe I would have known, I was gay before getting a "girl friend" (who turned out to just be a good friend because they did not teach us what dating someone actually meant)
@@koalasunited you do know we send our kids to learn academics, right? Things such as standards, morality, spirituality, manners and more is the responsibility of parents. If you think the school system should be raising your children as well that’s a problem for the lazy parent. Try being a parent rather than being lazy and pushing the responsibility off on complete strangers who is there to teach, not babysit and get some professional therapy Smh
@@koalasunited Oh no. You had to be friends with a girl. How awful.
@@Leonardo-de5il So therefore you're their daddy now.
@@Leonardo-de5il Well, pay their child support you deadbeat
K through 3rd grade don't need to here about gay anything
They need to hear about literacy.
@@palmsofdestin1 They don't. Kid's that age do not need to worry about any of that at all.
Maybe people who care about this should consider whether “school” is the proper environment to be discussing these things. The teenager in the video could’ve just as easily discovered the language to describe how he felt with his parents, a therapist, another family member, etc. Why does school have to be the place to have sex/gender discussion, especially at that age when you don’t tend to develop those emotions until around 11-12?
I understand deferring to parents as a form of instruction for these conversations, but what if the parents are not capable of instructing the child about these topics due to lack of information or contempt for the LGBT community? Won't that lead to bullying of the Trans kids/children of LGBT couples/siblings of Trans kids?
@@rsync9490 that’s why I listed other options in the response. I know people I personally grew up with who knew their parents/family wouldn’t approve, so they sought out the school counselor who then connected them with resources.
With the ages the bill includes, I have a hard time opposing it because K-3 shouldn’t be thinking about sex and gender anyway. I do understand some parents are irresponsible as well so there’s some gray area. This just isnt something that belongs in school.
@@Leonardo-de5il which part?
@@rsync9490 This has nothing to do with gay or trans, it’s pretty clear if you care to read it…. No teaching about sex of any kind to children 3rd grade or younger. The only people I can think of having a problem with this bill are child molesters.
@@rsync9490 That's fine. As long as kids are taught that only Mommies and Daddies can create more life on the planet and not Ennis and Jack, no matter how much butt sex they have! 👍
To be clear, it’s not called “don’t say gay”, and it in no way denies anyone the right to say any specific words. It’s a bill to stop teachers from sexually grooming children. That’s it.
in effect it does not even do that as it still allows one on one, or small group discussions.
YOu may have gotten you point across had you not ended up using the new buzzword of the right. "grooming".
Except it isn't. Teachers acknowledging that gay people in fact exist is not grooming, and could potentially be a suable offense under the bill's nonexistent specification of what entails "age inappropriate instruction." The reason people are calling it "don't say gay" is because teachers would simply avoid acknowledging anything about gay people just to be safe from litigation.
@@Snacks256 where did you get that you have to pretend gay ppl don’t exist? My understanding is that now teachers can only teach about what they were hired to do.. math, English, etc. I don’t need another person telling their opinions to my child.
@@Snacks256
That’s the teacher’s choice, but the bill doesn’t say that, and it clearly isn’t intended for that. The bill is clearly intended to prevent the sexual grooming of children, which is something the left is passionately in favor of.
It’s the anti-grooming bill.
the fvck did you just say. hopefully i misinterpreted that and you didn't mean that gay people are all groomers.
@@koalasunited they call it the anti grooming bill because its targeted only at very young kids (kinder to 3rd grade) and so the argument is that anyone who is against the bill is trying to groom little children by exposing them to things they are too young for like sex and sexual orientations. At least that's my understanding. I'm not too familiar on the subject I'm just learning about it now
The dumbest take... And also wrong
If private discussions are allowed, then I don't see how it's anti-grooming whatsoever. This bill does nothing, but get social conservative votes.
nobody wants to groom children nobody said that
What? no more drag queen storybook hour for the kindergarteners? There will be serious repercussions over this.
Exactly, like what the hell, no more stories about a king and queen because it's gunno make them feel uncomfortable they said. So how the hell did the child get there in the first place?
Disingenuous and unfunny.
I don't think drag queen storybook hour would be banned...
Why are we teaching kids under the age of ten about sex AT ALL?
We’re not. Look up the curriculum in your area - I have no idea why people still complain about “teaching sex to kindergarteners.” They aren’t. This shit was happening back during Obama’s term, too. Schools aren’t teaching kids about sex in K-3.
At most, kids would get a safety course about unwanted touching and what constitutes a “bad touch” area. But I guess that’s technically a sexual-related lesson so a groomer parent can sue the school for giving the child perspective on what’s happening at home.
A+ job, Florida.
Certainly something we should be asking child clinical psychologists.
@@Moosenogger cant stop progress series. Shows teachers actually do. Actually its not a hard search on RUclips that proves you wrong.
The bill seemed absurd until hearing the ages.
Manufacturers media and liberal lie. Read the bill folks. Says nothing about Gay. The word Gay, is no where in the bill.
This is all about keeping schools from pushing sex on little kids. Stick to reading writing and arithmetic and leave sex information to the parents.
Kids need to learn their ABCs before LGBTs.
Hes right class needs to be about basic skills
Talking about sex and respecting your own body is a basic skill.
@@MaestroAlvis not for kids that young and innocent. Like anything, there’s a time and a place.
@@scottstufflebam518 And what about attraction or identity isn't innocent?
You OBVIOUSLY don’t have children, do you….
@@scottstufflebam518 Nah, they shit everwhere. That doesnt answer the question though
The fact that this is being discussed with little children ages kindergarten through third grade. Is itself disgusting and perverse.im so glad for this bill and I hope this happens everywhere
He should have felt safe with his parents not talking to his teachers about it.
I think that says more about the parents then the teachers don’t you think?
The word gay isn’t even in the bill.
Of course you the news would bring on a transgender who says this could harm him more and paint the topic in a negative light. But you fail to bring on kids from the other perspective that shows how it can and does harm them.
Yes in a longer, deeper investigation into the issue that would be fair and probably helpful for people wanting more views and experiences to consider.
I think here in this case though, this particular youth was interviewed because he's an activist who has found an alliance group and has already been in the news, so I don't really fault the news for lacking that in this short report. I think they did a fair job of presenting persons from both sides.
@@Elephant_King_Gj how do you think the comparison was fair in detail? When the news interviews someone, that typically has a bigger impact on perception than just stating some perspective or facts at least from a general population perspective.
@@loc7s I agree with your statement about interviews having a bigger impact as they do for me. My opinion is that what was presented was a fair presentation of both sides in their own words. It didn't just present one side. They interviewed the bill's sponsor and we heard directly from him what the bill was and was not about. I don't think it needed to present an opposing legislator to be fair and if someone against the bill brought that up that they didn't have an opposing legislator, I personally would not agree that it affected fairness in the news report. The report also presented actual text from the bill not just the opinions/claims of it's critics. I thought considering it's less than 3-minutes an informative and balanced presentation of the controversy around the bill.
@@Elephant_King_Gj you and I seem to have come to the same conclusion. But there are more people who would not. The majority tends to be led by their feelings. And they showed some teenage and presented in him in such a way that we should have empathy and pity for his situation. Compared to the bill sponsor who is not that appealing and is not easily heard by most.
Correct
Florida is killing it!! Good job
*JUST ANOTHER DIVIDE & CONQUER STRATEGY*
This is such click bait. I am a Canadian looking for an actual explanation of the bill to get caught up. You promise that in the title. Im looking for actual legislative breakdowns.
There probably isn't much actual legislation here. The fact is that these lawmakers can't actually open a curriculum and point to an objectionable fact. They probably can't even find evidence of an objectionable string of words. What this bill "does" is create sloppy language to be interpreted later for whatever purpose is at hand.
Interest groups will be able to sue schools for an errant use of words, bring the case to a conservative judge. The judge can then point to this law, use judicial review to decide what the law means, and then pass a judgment.
@@MaestroAlvis if a k-3rd grade teacher has to ask themselves "will I violate HB 1557 by saying what I'm about to say?" then they shouldn't say it. There is ZERO reason to talk about "gender identity" or sexual orientation to children.
@@alexjones420 But what if these terms are really broad? The problem is, sexuality is implied in many things in life. A baby, or marriage itself for example. Anything to do with 2 dads or a trans person being a different gender is going to be seen as "too sexual" by the people who endorse and want to use this bill. Kids don't really need any sort of instruction on these things until later, but it wouldn't be harmful to have something LGBT that's surface level and age appropriate somewhere.
It is called Parental Rights in Education Bill.
It is false to call it Don’t Say Gay.
I guess we're banning Disney movies now
I don’t care the first part of the the bill mentioned on this video but outing student to their parents is violating individual’s privacy and parents have no right to know this unless the person or child is comfortable to ask or tell them about it.
You should not be allowed kids
@@4DeMS so you support Children sexual orientation to be exposed by their teachers to their parents? I hope you don’t have children or I pity their lack of respect/ privacy.
@@santiagogomez171 no. I don't think teachers have any right to know anything or talk to any capacity to a child about things of a sexual nature to any capacity at all.
@@4DeMS so why are you disagreeing with me?
@@santiagogomez171 so check it out...
if the kid is talking to the teacher about their sexual orientation you're already violating the bill.
How do you not understand this?
I get why sex shouldn't be taught at that age, but for attraction to the same sex and gender orientation to not be is ridiculous. They're not kids for that long and sooner or later they'll know what it means to be lgbtq and school should always be a safe environment. I get how parents should have a say over what their kids are learning, but they'll know eventually because you can't hide things for forever. This is just sad. Come on it's 2022 so why do we still struggle with the fact that gay people matter and exists and have feelings. And when your like four, your surrounded by light and don't see the dark. Little kids always are told to be themselves and be kind to everyone. But acting like lgbtqia+ kids don't exist is just wrong and I'm so mad that this is even happening. It's better to let them know young so that they can be respectful of people and know what it is so that if they are older and questioning then they'll have some sort of idea of what is going on. Seriously Florida, do better.
That’s odd, Nowhere in the Bill does it say Don’t Say G$y, yet the media uses the term. So much for integrity, I guess. Now I understand why people have such a low opinion of the profession.
It lost its authenticity back in the 90’s
@@ALJ9000 Very astute observation, that’s around the time calculated as well. 🤔👍
Transgender person here; when I first heard about the bill, dubbed the "Don't Say Gay" bill I became suspicious of the misnomer, but at the same time I worried about the same thing the transgender person in the video worried about: not fitting in and feeling less than because you don't understand yourself.
After some research, I educated myself and I support the bill because while I don't think many teachers in the state of Florida are teaching LGBTQ curricula in the State of Florida, I don't think young children could understand any of it. I don't have a reason to oppose the bill but the effects are minimal and brownie points for an ideological victory, and I would say the same for primary school LGBTQ-inclusive curricula, although the latter is odd to teach in addition to just ideological brownie points.
I don't consider myself a conservative I just think it's weird that anyone is giving sex education or awareness about gender identity to kids who neither have a sexual orientation yet (and won't until the onset of puberty) nor will they completely understand their gender and gender as a part of society until they reach middle school, although yes young children have basic ideas about gender at younger ages. A vast majority of transgender people (like myself) will only come to terms with their gender between the ages of 11-16.
TL;DR Kindergarteners don't understand nor at that age do they need to understand gender identity, sexual orientation nor the concept of biological sex or sexual intimacy until the onset of puberty. Should schools provide more in depth sex education? Yes. For those ages? No.
Facts 👍🏾
You are full of sh t.. you are not transgender... troll
@@ccarta192 stfu no one loves you
@@logandesousa7352 Ooooooooh that’s rough play 🤭😆
the issue with the bill is -- why have it at all? Its purely a political move by Ron DeSantis to garner support for the next elections since schools don't do this sort of thing in the early school years at all.
Learning about what Ennis does to Jack, will never get them a job! Keep it out of schools
As long we dont have to hear about straight people either
Who the helle is ennis and jack 🤔
Keep it out of Schools? So you are all for kids learning about the birds and the bees on their own, or by inept parents? You understand teen pregnancies are a thing, and they decrease with concise sex ed, right?
@@pythosdegothos6181 One weak comment after another. No gay teen has ever gotten pregnant from another gay teen! 😂 That's why they have Sex ed for those that can!
@@mercury3352 Are you in Grade school Hannah? Then yeah probably not! 🙄
There should be no mention of any gender identities, or sexual orientations in school at any grade level at all. School has never been about that. Now, gender and sex identity seems to be the main goal. That's all they care about. We need teachers to stick to the basic curricular. Any questions kids have about sex, or identity should be discussed with the parents only ! It certainly not the schools place. I can't believe this has become such a thing!
So any mention of straight couples, or of moms and dads is off the table too then, right? Heterosexuality is still an orientation.
@@A_A610 Absolutely! What's fair for one side ,is fair for the other. If they had a bill about heterosexual people being taught in school, I would not be for that either. I just want basic knowledge taught , that's always been taught. . That's it!
The language in the bill is extremely vague on purpose to stifle _any_ mentions of LGBT topics (hence the "Don't Say Gay" label its opponents have given it), but by phrasing it to dissuade discussions of orientation in general, they effectively built in a double standard because being straight is still an orientation.
Kids books typically talk about families, which often mention moms and dads. Given how vague the language of the bill is, would you advocate banning literally every single book that even mentions parents from being taught to young kids because it's teaching kids about being straight (which is a sexual orientation)?
@@A_A610 The kids books that mention parents aren't advocating heterosexuality. It's not even mentioned at all. That's not what the story is about. What I'm saying is, they are actually teaching about LBGQT in the classroom of kids, and I'm not for that. There is no comparison, although I get your point that a family can be made up of all kinds of people.
"The kids books that mention parents aren't advocating heterosexuality"
Nor does every book that merely mentions LGBT people in any capacity, but thanks for proving you indeed have a double standard. Acknowledging gay people exist won't make kids gay, regardless of what the braindead morons behind this bill believe.
Please tell me I’m misunderstanding. That this bill is ONLY saying don’t talk about these issues in k-3? What about if your in the 4th grade and up?
i dont see why any students k-6 should be having discussions about sexuality at all. Schools shouldn't influence a student politically or sexually in any way. Especially young and strongly impressionable students.
what about heteronormativity defined by dominant sexual scripts that influence kids daily from TV shows down to earth? Isn't that power distribution?
Sex education is often taught to 5th grade girls to take care of themselves and to understand Menstruation and puberty. And parents can waive that education. When I was in school girls received that education and boys were on their own to look it up in the encyclopedia or playboy magazine. I think local communities could come up with something better than playboy being the authoritative source for boys.
OR sexual education could be taught by medical professionals like nurses and pediatricians. But to ignore it completely is rather idiotic.
@@matthewkopp2391 in my school sex ed was taught in 5th or 6th grade. I think thats pretty standard now.
Kids don't even have a sexual orientation by 3rd grade. The entire argument is stupid.
Thank you. But having to make a law to stop teaching gender identity to kids in 3rd grade show how far this has gone in the wrong direction
Save our children from pedophiles.
How can we do that if we make it harder to talk about sex?
@@MaestroAlvis thats the talk saved for the parents. Not strangers, that would be weird.
@@Acanofalconpunch they're not strangers. Teachers are valuable members of your community which youbshould be going out of your way to engage with.
Lol, what do you think school is just a place that you drop off your kids and they come back knowing math?
people do realise sexual orientation isnt like actual sex right ?
But eventually it will be
Yeah. Still doesn't make it something that should be taught to k-3rd graders.
Is he a 17 year old 3rd grader?
Why should the government tell schools what they can and can't teach. I mean
1. Why are they teaching this in 3rd
2. They should be teaching this in late middle school and high school when kids are in puberty
4. This should be up to the school board and parents to choose what kid learn and not the state. I'm just saying
Well the government represents the people and people dont want sexual abuse of children, so we teach children about sex so that children know how to identify when sex is being forced onto them.
Its almost funny how this legislation supports child predation.
Are you really that dense? The public school system is a state institution.
Parents widely support this bill.
You skipped 3.
Thanks for the “Verify” segment. That’s what I was looking for
When I was that young, I was more worried about the monsters under my bed and going SSJ by eating gummy bears.
lmao
These are children. They don’t need to hear that kind of garbage. You really believe children even care? In fact, that topic in school should carry punishment when discussed with children.
How do you think you are in position to “fact check” this when you don’t even know the name of the law?
HB 1557
1:10?
You didn't watch the video.
Replacing lessons on science etc with lessons about gender identity/sexuality: no.
The whole outing thing is what gets me because if its true, thats fucked
If by "outing thing" you mean the claim that the law requires teachers or schools to "out" a student or endanger the student by giving parents information, then THAT CLAIM IS FALSE. If one actually reads the law (I'm happy to provide you the text of the law and the relevant areas, then one can know facts.
@@Elephant_King_Gj please provide it, I’m genuinely interested in knowing
@@blackdamarsk633 Several times I given the link and my comment keeps being deleted. Please google "Florida HB 1557". When I do that the top return takes me to the Florida senate page, below the paragraph it says "Bill Text:PDF", open the pdf and in particular note lines 91-96
If you read, I'd be interested in any further thoughts you may have about it.
In health they teach you all about straight s3x and never gay s3x, because people would go crazy if they did teach that.
@@Elephant_King_Gj it's interesting to me that lines 82-88 lay out clearly that a school district may not adopt procedures or support forms that prohibit district personnel from notifying a parent about their students mental or physical health and well being, which is immediately followed by the verbage you quote saying that they can if a prudent person would believe this would put the student in danger.
My issue with this language is due to the fact many religious conservatives believe homosexuality is a mental illness. As such, an individual may be compelled to out a student because they believe, falsely, that the sexual orientation of the student is to them a mental illness.
Would this not be exactly as the previous commenter described?
This bill cost the democrat my vote. They’re groomers
Love all the good things Governor DeSantis is doing for Florida!
hes hurting all lgbtq and making an unsafe environment
@@ilikebubbltea7619 no he’s not. Your just upset because you have a twisted mind. You want kids to be exposed to sexual conversations because your a sick fk
@@ilikebubbltea7619 how though? I don't think children k through 3 should have lessons about sexuality or gender identity. That should be saved for 5th grade.
@@mattahmann They won't learn it in 5th grade either. Or any grade, if some parent decides to sue the school because they think something is "age inappropriate."
introducing students to the LGBTQ community will normalize the community which will make homophobia less common almost stopping the problem enterally this about rights being taken away
Yes!! Thank god
Parents should be the one’s teaching them not the school
👏🤍 Smart Florida!!! ☀️🌴💚
Y’all should go on Reddit and see the geniuses acting like this is the end of the world.
I love going there on issues like this. Watch the snowflakes melt.
Reddit melts down over every MSM narrative
Wow.....great job Florida!
The “ dont talk to kids sexually in secret bill” makes more sense
I think I’m going to move to Florida
A year after things are better and there are no problem with "transgender" students
Schools are meant to educate kids, not manipulate them. Religions shouldn't be preached in schools, and neither should all this non science gender nonsense
What's the bill's actual name?
Hb 1557
@Barron Von Schneider the left wants to legalize pedophilia billia
I don’t see the issue with this. Kids shouldn’t be forced to learn sexual orientations with kids. They should be focused on being kids.
Fact. It doesn't say don't say gay.
I'm pretty sure he didn't know what his sexuality was in the first grade.
Students like Andrew should have better parents
"Should" as in youd be willing to legeslate this point?
"Children" & "Sex" are 2 words that SHOULD NOT be in the same sentence . Teach them all the "NO 2 HUMANS ARE ALIKE & ATTRACTIVENESS VARIES FROM PERSON TO PERSON", stuff at a mature level .
Kids have no extensive knowledge of race , religion , Ect.. BECAUSE THEY'RE CHILDREN !
Let them keep their innocence while they have it .
Yeah, yeah, whatever, what I’m mostly concerned about is the fact that teachers are going to be allowed to tell parents these things. I get that if they think the child is going to be hurt or something, they won’t say anything, but what about kids that just want to keep it to themselves and wanted to confide in someone they trust? What if those parents show no signs of being harmful or hateful, but they end up being anyway?
I agree that there comes a time in the life of a child that they may need to be able to confide in someone outside the home and know that that information is not going to be passed on to the parents, but: 1) This bill is talking about children in kindergarten to 3rd Grade and is only talking about sexually explicit discussions. Unless a child is being emotionally or physically abused, children that age don't naturally think about sexual things. Sure, you may get the occasional 4 year-old saying they have a boy or girl friend, but generally they don't have a clue what that actually means. In other words, they aren't thinking about the relationship in a sexual way. The most likely reason a child is discussing sexual subjects at that age is because an adult is bringing up the conversation, and right now in the school system the main reason these subjects are usually brought up are because of activist teachers, activist administrators, and activist parents. So the risk of a child that is not interested in sexual conversations being exposed to sexual conversations at that age by activist adults is WAY higher than the odds of a child that age actually going through an LGBTQ+ existential crisis that needs to be addressed. Maybe it's even possible that a 6 year-old child already knows he is gay for example, but even if he does chances are he doesn't know or understand what sex is and also isn't getting grief from parents at home for that yet. Those problems tend to start developing in 5th Grade at the earliest. 2) This bill does not prohibit a teacher from confidentially reporting abuse. If a 6 year-old child is concerned about sexually explicit issues, there is a good chance that child has been sexually abused. And yes, the teacher should absolutely report that to the proper authorities and should also do whatever can be done to protect the child from repercussions from the parents for reporting that abuse, but there is nothing in this bill that would prevent any of that from happening. 3) If the child has say experienced sexual abuse at a young age and needs counseling, a teacher is not qualified to do that counseling. The teacher is qualified to report the abuse, but at that point it is time for a qualified professional to step in and help out. And quite frankly, most school counselors are also not qualified to deal with such serious issues. They might be able to recommend a qualified therapist and provide supportive care, but they aren't usually qualified to be the first line of defense on something like that. This bill doesn't say that CPS must report any conversations they are having with children to the parents. It also doesn't say that a qualified therapist that is hired outside of the school system has to report everything the child says in a session to the child's parents. It is simply prohibiting teachers from initiating conversations with students about sexual identity or sexually explicit topics and schools from effectively prescribing care they aren't qualified to prescribe without even letting the child's primary care giver know what is happening.
@@hollybigelow5337 in kindergarten I knew I was romantically into girls and boys. I came to the conclusion on my own. If I had known it was okay, I wouldn’t have been terrified to come out to my conservative parents. It’s not just abuse or exposure.
@@Peridot420 Honestly, with all due respect I don’t think it’s possible for anyone to truly know something like that in kindergarten because for every person in kindergarten who believes that they are that way and grows up to actually be that way there are also plenty of people who thought they were that way that end up growing out of it. In fact, I read somewhere that they have actually measured this, and the number is roughly 80% for the number of kids that think they are that way as young children who end up growing out of it. So of course, there are going to be the 20% that believe it as young children and also grow up to still be that way, but statistically it is more likely to be a phase for most children who feel that way. Also, unless children have been sexually abused it is very rare for kids to have a clue what “romantically interested” even means, which is a good thing because they are too young and innocent to be exposed to such adult topics. Sure, there are plenty of kids who play like they know, but there are also plenty of kids who play like they are superheroes or horsies or many other things.
Second, let’s pretend that everything I just said is wrong and that 100% of children understand sexuality in kindergarten. Are you really saying that those children won’t be equally fine if they receive counseling in fifth grade to learn how to come out to their parents? Is kindergarteners coming out to their parents as LGBT really a thing that needs to happen? Are kindergartners also being asked to come out as straight to their parents?
Also, as I previously mentioned, there might be an occasional situation where this is a thing, but when you come up with policies you always have to look at those who are helped and those who are hurt and see if those who are hurt are more hurt than those who are helped. I truly believe the laws that allow adults in elementary school to talk about highly sexualized topics will have many negative impacts. One of those negative impacts is it will make it way easier for sexual predators to cover up when they choose to molest young children. I’m not saying every teacher, counselor, etc. in the system is a sexual predator looking to abuse the system, but I am saying sexual predators are disproportionately drawn to jobs in elementary schools, and they will use any tool at their disposal to not get caught. One of the only ways to catch a child molester is to explain to a child that it is never okay for an adult to have a sexual conversation with them, and it is especially inappropriate for them to ask the child to keep that conversation secret. If we allow the school system to normalize keeping those conversations secret from parents we embolden sexual predators. Let’s say for every child that this helps come out to conservative parents as LGTB+ it also allows three children to be sexually abused without the predator being caught. And it may be just one predator with hundreds or even thousands of victims. Considering that this kind of counseling can easily be offered more effectively to Junior High and High School students to help them come out to conservative parents, I don’t personally feel like helping a handful of children feel more comfortable coming out to their parents as LGTBQ+ is worth potentially letting a sexual predator have more tools to get away with abusing who knows how many students without getting caught.
I also have some news. I guarantee the reason it is difficult for many people to come out as LGTBQ+ to their conservative parents is because their conservative parents usually disapprove of that lifestyle, usually for religious reasons. I don’t care how much teaching these students get in kindergarten on this issue, it’s not going to change the conservative parents’ viewpoint on this issue. The mind often likes to review the past and say things like, “If only X had happened this might have been easier.” But the truth is hindsight really isn’t 20/20. The only way to really know if it would have helped would be to run both scenarios side by side. Risking allowing sexual predators to abuse the system and making harder for them to get caught because it MIGHT help a child later come out to their conservative parents is an awfully big price to pay for something that easily also might not help at all.
You must not have kids I bet
It’s just something for liberals to use as a hyper focused topic
This bill seems pointless. It is probably an attempt to move the Overton window just enough to get the real shit they want passed.
How is it pountless?
@@jdubo1998 What is this supposed to prevent exactly? Some "grooming" that isn't happening in real life? It's stupid.
@@walterhoward5512 So if it ain't happening why are you against the bill being passed?
The only conclusion I can draw is that you support teachers talking about sexual content to k-3rd gradera, which is pretty pedophilic.
Florida... how typical
Thought they be more smart
Another reason I love Florida. Protect little kids from pervert Leftist nutjobs talking about sexuality.
Talking to children about this type of material is not education it's grooming.
The problem with the bill is the wording. The wording is not specific enough to clarify what exactly constitutes "encouraging discussion of sexual orientation or gender identity." Furthermore, this bill is going to affect teachers' ability to include basic fairytales in the classroom. You can't have the story of Sleeping Beauty in the classroom because it includes mention of the prince kissing the princess to wake her up, and that's a direct reference to heterosexuality, which is a sexual orientation. And what is going to happen when a classroom of 7-year-olds does a project on their family tree, and some kid has same-sex parents? What if that kid's classmate has never heard of same-sex parents, and wants to ask about what it's like to have two parents of the same sex, and let's say this is happening during show-and-tell? The teacher is going to have to stop the activity, and the kid with same-sex parents isn't going to understand why he isn't allowed to talk about his family. If I send my kids to public school, I am going to sue the school district for teaching or mentioning anything related to heterosexuality, so no teaching of traditional fairytales, no mention of families, nothing. There are going to be a whole bunch of topics that are off the table for mentioning heterosexuality. I completely agree that children should NOT be learning about gender identity or sexuality (of any kind, gay, bi, straight, etc.) but where exactly should the line be drawn? The bill does not specify exactly the types of situations in which such talk is to be prohibited. The wording is too vague.
Exactly
@@MartianInDisguise not at all what the bill says. If a kid with same sex parents talks about his family that’s ok, nobody is against that, you made that up. Teacher just aren’t going to have lessons on sexuality. Keep in mind these kids are 8 and younger it’s not the time to teach them these things
@@tyrodmen2046 what happens if another kid raises their hand and asks if the kid with same-sex parents has gay parents, or something which seems stupid/rhetorical to adults, but which to a kid who has never met a family with same-sex parents, might not understand? I didn't make something up; I was posing a hypothetical situation that could actually happen in real life. Nobody in Ireland thought it was necessary to make abortion legal until Savita Halappanavar died. rare situations can occur and should be prepared for accordingly.
@@tyrodmen2046 I fully agree that children in elementary school should not be learning about sex or orientation though, of any kind (gay, straight, bi, etc.) but the wording of the law is too vague. the wording of the law that led to Savita Halappanavar's death was also vague because it didn't specify the precise details of her situation, which nobody had anticipated.
So one kid’s problem should make all people obey rules covering his situation ! Keep the personal problems private! Don’t shove your problems onto other people ! Who cares that this kid thinks he is a girl !! No little kid thinks about such crap!
Every child goes through puberty. There is nothing privare about it.
This bill bans the teaching of all sexual orientation straight gay whatever. You might as well just call the don’t say straight bill
@@Leonardo-de5il Gay is taboo what decade are you living in the 50s? Catch up
which would still be dumb its just that most kids are already exposed to straight couples so they already know they exist
@@eagles5205 they have no idea what “straight” means.ffs. Stop trying to groom children
That kid looks like Edward Scizzorhands.
I hope y’all realize the internet will also answer questions kiddos get.
Glad to see authorities digging in their heels against this movement to embrace gender change. People are sometimes confused about who they are. Seeking an answer with surgery or hormones is extremely damaging to the patient.
Except gender affirming care is correlated with a sharp decline in the rates of depression and suicide attempts among LGBT youth (as much as 73%). Pretty sure suicide is the most damaging of those...
@@A_A610 if we're gonna just ignore all those who dont embrace their transition and become suicidal as a result then yeah i guess your right
The fact that some people go through with transition despite it not being the right decision doesn't negate the people who actually do go through and benefit from it.
@@A_A610 no but it gives you the right to throw them away like they dont count, or like they werent convinced at a young age by trans trenders who pretend there arent challenges that come with transitioning. Having these concepts taught to kids at such a young age intrudes upon their right to make their own decisions about who they are as a person. far as im concerned sex ed of any kind period belongs in jr high and onward
"no but it gives you the right to throw them away like they dont count"
As you're doing with actual trans people?
"Having these concepts taught to kids at such a young age intrudes upon their right to make their own decisions"
Learning about being gay or trans doesn't make people gay or trans, nor does it imply you should be gay or trans if you're not; conversely, not talking about gay or trans issues doesn't mean fewer kids will be gay or trans. This absolutely idiotic mindset is literally the reason they're trying to pass this tripe.
So teachers aren’t allowed to teach sexual identity to 5 year olds. Are parents really divided on this?
What's wrong with identity?
@@mercury3352
Nothing is wrong with “identity”. I didn’t say anything about “identity”.
@@g.g.hochstetler2286 "So teachers aren’t allowed to teach sexual identity to 5 year olds. Are parents really divided on this?" Yes you did. Its in your comment. Whats so morally wrong with identity that children shouldn't be exposed to it?
@@mercury3352
You’re being dishonest on purpose. I didn’t mention “identity”.
Is "sexual idenitity" not identity?
I really am not sure where I am on this bill because I can really see both sides. Though perhaps I’m misunderstanding things so if I am please let me know.
On the one hand, obviously this bill pertains to kindergartners through 3rd graders so I get maintaining the innocence of them in terms of certain topics and discussions because there really isn’t any place for that. That being said, the reality is that all kinds of families exist and if there is going to be literature on opposite sex relationships, this should include single parent households, as well as same-sex ones as this can be done without actually sexualizing the issues and keeping things more definitive.
Additionally, kids talk. So let’s say a kid goes “My mom and dad love to go out to eat on Sundays!” And another kid goes “My two dads (or moms) love to do that too!” Then another kid goes “two dads? What do you mean?”
Ok, In this case, assuming this bill goes through, is a teacher not at least able to go, “Well Susie, John here does have two dads as his parents” and go on to explain that is what is categorized as a “homosexual “ relationship?? Is the teacher not allowed to do this? Or if asked by this student what having two dads means is the teacher supposed to just say “That is something you’ll want to ask your parents about. I can’t answer that for you sorry.”
For me this not only stigmatizes the concept of homosexuality as it is Real, it also stigmatizes the kid who has the two same-sex parents as well. I mean even if you wanted to dictate exactly how a teacher says something, kids are inquisitive and are going to question things.
Again, this is purely a question that pertains to a completely plausible conversation that could happen in a K-3 classroom. For me it’s not so much about the student who may or may not be gay, straight whatever, but if they have family that is gay, are they not allowed to share and discuss their family either?? That doesn’t seem right. Im not saying the bill says this, I’m seriously just trying to understand its perimeters. I don’t think a teacher should be swaying students on anything and part of the issue is the teachers out there that do do that is I think the whole point of trying to implement a bill like this because they don’t know how to remain objective. As a former teacher of 8 years at the middle school level I got asked all the time who I voted for for example and not once did I answer. But I cannot say the same for a lot of my colleagues and even though I agreed with some of them politically I still didn’t think it was ok to mention these things because I would never want a student whose family disagreed with my stances to feel under valued in my class.
I completely understand where your coming from and agree.
So this bill doesn't ban normal classroom discussion. It bans "instruction" regarding the matter. That being said, the bill is extremely vague about what constitutes instruction.
Secondly, the purpose of this bill is extremely sketchy. Why not put a blanket ban on sexual topics? Why is it focused on LGBT issues?
We heard that this bill had previous provisions that made it's language specifically target LGBT people and banned even classroom discussions. I'm glad they were cut, but it's concerning how unnecessarily ambiguous it is
This bill does NOT prohibit one on one, or small group discussions about such things. It only prohibits Classroom discussion. Here is something people are missing....this would prevent some really bigoted teacher from addressing the whole class about the "sins of homosexuality" too. This is about discussions on a classroom level about ALL sex, not just gay sex. I do wish people would stop putting in what is not there, it hurts your argument so bad.
@@pythosdegothos6181 But that doesnt stop sunday school nor churches from doing so. My real issue is that , in florida, you know most parents arent gonna teach their kids lgbt stuff on their own. Culturally, conservatives have so many tools available to them to spread their lessons, mainly churches. I cant really think of any resources a child has to learn about lgbt ideas.
@@coffeeking9565 I can agree to that had to learn the hard way through other kids and the Internet it was ok to be LGBT
@Barron Von Schneider But parents WONT talk to their kids about this topic. You talk about indoctrination as if thats not what religion and homophobia does all the time. The only difference is that you have a bias that pertains to your beliefs. But god forbid someone else has a different opinion.
The youtube censors really don't like people posting about this bill
>*looks up what the bill contain because I can't read*
>*click on this video*
>*interviews a random furry who didn't read the bill*
The bill limits the curriculum not the discussion... and it limits on all sexual orientations... in other words teachers cant teach about straight sexual identity or gender roles either. the argument against the bill is nonsense.
“all sexual orientations”? When children learn to read, they often read books in which the characters have friendships, relationships and families. Think about the classics, the fairytales. By default, we see heterosexual relationships all over the place starting with Cinderella, Beauty and the Beast, Snow White to Pride and Prejudice, The Scarlet Letter and The Great Gatsby K-12. Isn’t that “learning about gender roles and sexuality”? By your logic, those texts should be removed from schools too.
Societal norms have gone down the crapper. The Bible and Constitution may have to be re-written to accommodate the desires of each sub-grouping. Now that the LGBTQ have fulfilled their agenda; who is next; Beastiality, North American Man Boy Love Association(NAMBLA) or Polygamist; certainly these sub-group have their rights as well to live out the American dream, please Mr/Mz Politician tell us.
This is what America has come to really idc what side your on WAKE UP PEOPLE THIS ISNT AMERICA ANYMORE us the people need to stand toghter if we want are country back...
It's never okay too tell their parents wth
Now it is, lmao.
The pushback and the bill are stupid. The grandest waste of time :)
I know. It does practically nothing.
I Support Don't Say Gay bill in Florida I hope it passes 🙏
"We must secure the existence of our people and a future for straight children." - Anonymous
@@juanagosto3428 their future is pretty secure by definition.
Sexual anything should be like religion in the schools, forbidden. Both of these topics are for the home. Having an adult that is not a child's parents explain to a 5 to 9 year old about sex, especially homosexuality should be a sex crime, and they should be on the sex offenders list!!
What do you mean “Sexual anything”? If we shouldn’t explain homosexuality to 5-9 year-olds, then we also shouldn’t discuss heterosexuality either, right?
@@bookgirlny8511 Correct
@@shawnb679 OK, so since any story with a mom and a dad, or a fairy tale like Sleeping Beauty that is all about heterosexual romance, they should be banned too. Is that what you mean by “correct”?
sooooo why name it "don't say gay"?
To sew discord
@Barron Von Schneider You're preaching to the choir!
NO SUCH THING!
Yeah if I understood how terrible life would be and how fucked financially I would be when I was a kid that would’ve been helpful to maybe they should’ve taught me advance financial’s in kindergarten because I would’ve been better off
this is for up to 7 year olds. NO ONE at that age is taught about advanced finances for crying out loud.
Wtf that kid is 17
Shouldn't the so called authority be more concern not to take people's$-blaming innocent and thinking God has to have mercy on them.according to God such evil act puts them on way to h-e-ll.and gay has nothing to do with young kids-tech them respect/n why\compassion-not lazy_care not stupinity_aim for the best not for the pit.👹-I hope you get the point(.
Tiny children do not need to know about sexual orientation, Jesus Christ, we are only talking up to third grade! If the parent wants to teach their babies and infants and young children about sexual orientation, that’s up to them to do that at home, not in school! The bill is not called, “don’t say gay”, no where in the bill does it say that, try reading the bill!
I dont have kids, but if I did I would not want them in a school that teaches and promotes homosexuality in any way, shape, or form.
The problem with the bill is the wording. The wording is not specific enough to clarify what exactly constitutes "encouraging discussion of sexual orientation or gender identity." Furthermore, this bill is going to affect teachers' ability to include basic fairytales in the classroom. You can't have the story of Sleeping Beauty in the classroom because it includes mention of the prince kissing the princess to wake her up, and that's a direct reference to heterosexuality, which is a sexual orientation. And what is going to happen when a classroom of 7-year-olds does a project on their family tree, and some kid has same-sex parents? What if that kid's classmate has never heard of same-sex parents, and wants to ask about what it's like to have two parents of the same sex, and let's say this is happening during show-and-tell? The teacher is going to have to stop the activity, and the kid with same-sex parents isn't going to understand why he isn't allowed to talk about his family. If I send my kids to public school, I am going to sue the school district for teaching or mentioning anything related to heterosexuality, so no teaching of traditional fairytales, no mention of families, nothing. There are going to be a whole bunch of topics that are off the table for mentioning heterosexuality.
I don’t think you understand what the bill is stating. Teachers won’t be able to instruct topics on sexuality. A fairytale is a fairytale not a lesson on sexuality 😂. Use ur brain and stop thinking with emotions
@@tyrodmen2046 I'm not thinking with emotions. The prince kissing the princess in Sleeping Beauty is an expression of sexuality (the beginning of sexuality). I don't want my young kids learning about kissing between straights or gays.
They specifically said (in the video that you *commented on*) that it doesn't ban discussion, it bans content from entering lesson plans. If someone wants to discuss in the classroom why another student has two dads, it's still completely allowed. Fairy Tales is a good point. People don't consider Snow White to be about sexuality whatsoever because it's straight. Flip the coin and give it two princes instead of a prince and a princess. Now everyone is outraged that we're exposing children to sexuality. Now do all stories need to avoid the topic of love until 4th grade? Seems like the writers of the bill don't even consider heterosexuality as a sexuality.
@@algorythm4354 I'm glad that the bill is (supposedly) targeted toward preventing the topics of sexuality and sexual orientation from entering lesson plans. However, I am still concerned that the wording is too vague to avoid getting a teacher in trouble for letting students have a discussion about a topic that could possibly be related to sexual orientation and sexuality (e.g., a student having two same-sex parents). I appreciate that you recognize that many stories contain direct references to heterosexuality. Like you, I don't think the writers of the bill took that into account.
@@MartianInDisguise My father was a martian and I am greatly offended by your youtube name. Reported for harassment!!!
Where do I sign
Aren't you gay?
They are coming from you too, first the gays, them the hispanics…
Thank you for putting only the facts.
i can't understand you want more suicides more bullies more hate.
How will this lead to more hate??
@@tyrodmen2046 being bullied, feeling excluded, subject to hatemongering causes young lgbt kids to commit suicide. there is a direct correlation, google it.
@@basremmers4746 Your reply didn't answer the question from ty rodman. I don't see anyone here writing that they want more suicide, bullies or hate.
@@Elephant_King_Gj the effect will be more bullie more hate. the more you accomodate xenophobia the more marginalizd minorities pay the price. cause and effect. it might not be your goal but it will be the effect.
@@tyrodmen2046 Children tend to bully other children over differences from the perceived norm. In a society where homosexuality is hidden from children, it can be perceived as totally abnormal. Not only would this be a source of bullying, but it can make gay children think they’re alone with their experiences and begin hating themselves.
Teachers should not label children, it can affect their sense of self and how they are treated, and limit their potential. teach respect and kindness and non-violence. Putting labels is not helping. I am glad this bill passed, because I think it would have hurt the LGBTQ community. - which should stop labeling itself.
Here's a label - you're a moron.
Maybe listen to the LGBTQ community sometime instead of telling them what's better for them
Sounds more like people trying to repress and shame their sexual orientation
@@thabluntroller9637 They are children ages 5 to 12, they don't talk about their sexual orientation, they talk about games, playmates and making friends. Introducing sexual orientation is exposing them to information that is not age appropriate. At this age they can be taught to just be kind to each other and to appreciate that everyone is different. Talking about sexual orientation is child abuse.
@@Roxy62ct Your comment is so ignorant holy shit. Anyone with a child development degree would heavily disagree with you. Children pick up on that stuff from a very early age, especially the age group you listed. Its abuse to NOT teach them about sexuality. Are you going to withhold important info about puberty too? Girls younger than 12 can develop breasts and get their period, and its abusive not to tell them why.
@@Roxy62ct Kids absolutely do talk about sexual orientation. From playing with barbie and ken, to calling each other “boyfriend” and “girlfriend” on the playground, they’re not totally oblivious to relationships and marriage. It’s not a bad thing for them to know that pairings other than heterosexual parings are a natural occurrence.
No issues on this bill except the outing bit, schools aren’t exactly outing teens for dating or doing anything when straight lol
There’s no harm acknowledging the existence of lgbt+ to children as it is not an inherently sexual
Keep ALL LGBTQ topic out of school, period! So sick of what that community has evolved into.
So in short, yes, it does ban discussion of kids with two moms and it does mandate teachers must force gay kids out of the closet, which is child abuse
You clearly didn’t watch the video lol it bans instruction on any sexual topics, and speaking with parents isn’t abuse. These are 5-8 year olds, the parents should know these things lol you think an 8 year old can handle the pressure of feeling gay without the help of a responsible adult?
You need to get your ears checked
@@Deuterium52 well that itself isn’t abuse if the parent is against their child gay it could lead to unsafe situations at home… if a kid feels more comfortable talking to a teacher they should be able to
@@alexandriawhite646 but that’s not what’s at stake here. It’s the curriculum being taught to the class as a whole.
Didn't realise you couldn't talk about having 2 moms in a non-sexual way. If that isn't the case, then it isn't against the bill.
Rename it the anti grooming bill
19,000 views
168 likes
hmmmm....